Tragedy and Respectability

At the time of William and Mary's 1862 marriage, James was five and little Arthur was just over a year old.  Most likely at this point, James attended what was called a "dame" school, a school typically taught by women (thus the title) who had no professional teacher training.  "Dame" schools sound like a combination of day care and basic skills instruction.  Costing only about 3-9 pence a week, with flexible hours, these schools were reportedly very good at teaching the three "R's" while giving parents a safe space for children while they worked.

Victorian Dame School 

At little over a year, Arthur was too young for such an establishment which usually began taking children between the ages of two-three.  If William and Mary didn't already know the risks facing small children, it became clear that same month when Arthur was admitted to the Worcester infirmary with contusions.  Unfortunately far worse lay ahead.  On October 26, 1863 Arthur came down with scarlet fever and five days later he died.   Scarlet fever caused an "enormous number of deaths" in England between 1847-1880, two-thirds of which like Arthur were children under the age of five.

Arthur Winder's Death Certificate 

Cyclical epidemics of this disease hit urban areas during the period and were supposedly more likely to occur during abnormally dry periods.  Another factor increasing risk was if the mother was malnourished during pregnancy which left the child more susceptible to the next epidemic.  We don't know how Mary lived during her pregnancy, but it's not hard to imagine a poor diet due to a lack of money, which wasn't helped by the fare in the workhouse.  Fortunately scarlet fever was no where near as lethal with children over five so while James may have had a milder case, he (and we) was spared.  Victorian fiction is full of deathbed scenes of children demonstrating how common an experience it was.  Although they lived in a different time with very different values, there's no reason to doubt William and Mary experienced a lot of pain and heartache as they buried their young child.

At the time of Arthur's death in 1863, the Winders were living on Friar Street, not far from William's job at Royal Worcester Porcelain.  For the next four years they had, at the very least, William's pension ( 7 shillings per week), his wages as a laborer (say 14 shillings a week) plus whatever Mary may have earned.  Even if Mary wasn't working outside the home, total income was in the one pound a week range, and was probably sufficient for the basic needs of the family.  Things improved financially in 1867 when James joined his father at Royal Worcester, training to become a moulder.   Children, like women, earned less than men, but whatever James brought home had to help and would continue to do so for the next decade.  James entrance into the workforce in 1867 coincided with the best economic period of the century (1865-1875) for working people as real wages (effective buying power of income) increased by a minimum of 25% and, in most cases, 35%.

Winder Family on 1871 Census - William Winder is 11th row up from the bottom with Mary and James R directly under him.

The next Winder appearance on the public record is the 1871 census.  By this time, the family had moved to Northfield Street in the Claines section of Worcester.  William continues as a laborer while James was now a mould maker.  Surprisingly no occupation is listed for Mary.  The explanation appears to be that the Winders had decided to try a new way of making money and perhaps raising their social status.  According to the 1873 edition of Littlebury's Directory and Gazetter of Worcester, William Winder was now a green-grocer, operating at the intersection of Northfield Street and Sansome Walk.  A green grocer was basically a dealer in fruit and vegetables, buying from farmers and re-selling to the general public.  While the business was in William's name, it appears Mary ran the business as on the 1881 census, she is listed as a shop keeper.

Winder Family on the 1881 Census - William is on the 13th line up from the bottom with Mary and James again below him.

By becoming shop keepers, the Winders were part of a mid-Victorian trend that saw a steady increase in the number of people going into trade.  Obviously making money was the major motivation, but the Winders were also probably joining those seeking to become more "respectable."  Being or becoming respectable was a major priority for Victorians of all classes and the greatest social division of the time was between the respectable and the not respectable, not as we might think between rich and poor.  Respectability was attractive across British society because there was no limit on the number of people who could achieve that status, nor, did it necessarily require a great deal of money.

Victorian Shopkeeper

For a family with the Winder's financial wherewithal, the characteristics of respectability would have included a whitened door step, a neatly organized house, clean clothes for the family, an "air of social aspiration" and a home in a street where the atmosphere was "sober, thrifty, clean-spoken and private" Most of those things did not require a lot of money.  Prior to their marriage, William and Mary had lived an unconventional life style, but  it seems their marriage was the first step on a journey to respectability.

A New Life in a New City

Regardless of whether it was before 1860, sometime in 1861 or not until their 1862 marriage, at some point the Winders moved to Worcester.  The city was a reasonable destination for this somewhat non-traditional Victorian family.  With an 1861 population of just under 33,000, Worcester was further removed from rural Astley and Arley Kings than the 12-13 miles distance between them might suggest.  Here at least there should be better job opportunities than the underpaid, overworked world of the agricultural laborer.

View of Worcester - the church spire at the left is that of St. Andrew's Church

An ancient market town, Worcester was founded on the high ground of the only good crossing along that part of the Severn River.  The Severn is a tidal river and before the coming of the railroad, Worcester was a "busy inland port" with a 100 sailing ships at a time on the river.  As a leading medieval city, supposedly the fifth most important on medieval England, Worcester had its own Cathedral which was begun in the 11th century.   From an historical perspective the Cathedral is noteworthy as the burial sites of King John (of Robin Hood fame) and Prince Arthur the eldest son of Henry VII.  Arthur's early death opened the way for his younger brother to become King Henry VIII.

Rev. John Bartlett who officiated at William and Mary's 1862 wedding 

At the time of their marriage, both William and Mary listed their residence as Hounds Lane in St. Andrew's parish.  Hounds Lane apparently no longer exists, nor does St. Andrew's Church as only the spire and tower survive.  By the 1840's the area around the church had become "one of the most squalid and degraded parts of the city" with many homes being converted into lodging houses.  Redevelopment efforts introduced "model dwellings" which supposedly looked like "grim barracks," but were actually a big improvement over what had been there before.  No information survives as to the address where the Winders lived, but eight months later they had moved to Friar Street.

Friar Street - 19th century view 

At the time of his marriage, William listed his occupation as army pensioner, suggesting he wasn't employed.  By November William was a laborer in a china factory, most likely Royal Worcester Porcelain which may explain the move to Friar Street which was closer to the Royal Worcester works.  Unlike Hounds Lane, Friar Street still exists and has been described as one of "the most interesting of the medieval streets left in England," with more timber framed buildings than the rest of the city.  It appears that during the 19th century some of these fine buildings were divided into tenements which is most likely where the Winders lived.

Friar Street - modern view

As they began a more traditional life in the 1860's, William and Mary's primary challenge was supporting themselves which could not be taken for granted.  Fortunately for them, conditions in England in first half of the decade were more stable than during William's last extended attempt to earn a living in civilian life.  Unlike the "radical 30's" and the "hungry 40's," the period 1860-65 was calmer with a more stable economic environment.  Stability in the general economy always helps, but the Winders had a more specific from of a financial stability, William's military pension.

Description of William Winder as of his 1861 army discharge 

By joining the army and especially by going to India, William had taken a big risk since less than half of the soldiers who went to India ever returned.  By beating those odds, William's risk taking paid off in an important way.  For the last 30 years of his life, William was guaranteed a pension of 7 shillings per week.  Although that's less than the weekly wages of the lowest paid Victorian worker, it was vitally important because it was guaranteed, no matter what happened, as long as William was alive, that safety net was always there.

Official Record of William Winder's military pension

Every age and society has principles that aren't just beliefs, but certainties.  Certainties aren't usually articulated, but they are how a society looks at and evaluates what is going on around them.  A core certainty for Victorians was the importance of a  free market economy and that it was in everyone's best interest for the laws of supply and demand to operate without any kind of interference, government or otherwise.  No matter what happened to people (and their families) who couldn't earn a living, things should just be allowed to take their course.

Royal Worcester Porcelain works 

For the typical unskilled British working class family this meant a life strong struggle to survive.  A recently married couple without children could probably get by until the first child came along.  As pregnancy and child care care kept the mother out of the workforce, things became more difficult financially.  Once children reached working age, however, (probably no older than 10 in the 1860's) and started earning some money, they contributed to the family's financial situation and there was a period of relative prosperity.  However as children went out on their own, family income levels dropped and husbands and wives worked as long as they were able.  There was no retirement to look forward to and the best someone could hope for was a child who was willing to take them in.  Otherwise the alternative was the workhouse as happened to Mary's father, Samuel.

This somewhat bleak picture was the reality for those who could find work.  Others weren't so fortunate and with no resources beyond limited local charity and the workhouse, economic insecurity was a constant fear which "haunted thousands of families."  Supposedly there was a "great army" of families trying to live on 1 pound a week. One study estimated that 10% of the population couldn't earn enough for subsistence and another 20% scraped by with no margin for error.  The Winders were fortunate, therefore to have that safety net of 7 shillings a week (a safety net earned at great risk and hardship).  Working as a laborer for 12-14 shillings a week plus anything Mary earned cleaning put them at that 1 pound a week level (20 shillings to the pound).  More importantly as long as William lived there was always some money coming in the door.

"Are there no workhouses?"

At some point in 1860 Mary Ricketts realized she was pregnant.  While we don't know where she was living, how she was supporting herself, or the identity of the father, my best guess is she was living in Worcester and William Winder was the father.  Since Mary appears in the public record in 1862 and 1863 working as a laundress and charwoman, it's not unreasonable to believe she was doing one or both of those jobs in 1860.  Regardless of the father's identity, Mary was facing another difficult situation.  William was about to rejoin his regiment in Ireland so he would not be available when the baby was born, while if the father was someone else, he couldn't or didn't help.  As the due date approached, Mary was unable to work and, therefore, unable to pay for food and housing for herself, three year old James and, eventually, the new new baby.

Ebeneezer Scrooge from A Christmas Carol

Returning to wherever she was living in 1857 apparently wasn't an option so Mary really had only one choice, a choice many Victorians claimed they would rather die than avail themselves of, the workhouse. Those in need of public assistance were the responsibility of the parish of their birth with the costs (rates) paid for by parish residents.  Treatment of the poor had taken a harsh turn with passage of the New Poor Law in 1834 which tried to reduce the costs by offering relief only the desperate would utilize.  This took the form of institutional living in facilities called workhouses where applicants gave up almost everything for a subsistence living.  Rural parishes too small to have their own workhouse were grouped together into Unions which maintained workhouses overseen by a board of guardians with each parish typically electing one guardian.

Worcester Chronicle article of December 9, 1846 commenting on the Martley Workhouse guardians' ill-advised decision not to hire a teacher for the children

Since Mary's birth parish was either Astley or Arley Kings, regardless of where she was living in 1860, she ended up in the Martley Union Workhouse, the regional facility for both parishes.  The quality of life, or lack thereof, varied greatly from workhouse to workhouse, but given the overall philosophy, it could never have been a pleasant experience.  In some cases, sadistic, cruel or just indifferent workhouse masters, matrons and staff created or allowed conditions worse than prisons.  Fortunately nothing has been found in the contemporary newspaper coverage to suggest this was the case at Martley.

The New Poor Law

However a December 9, 1846 article in the Worcester Chronicle gives an idea of the guardians' attitude towards the inmates.  A proposal was made to hire a teacher so the children in the workhouse could learn reading, writing and math.  Incredibly only three guardians (out of a maximum of 31) approved with the rest considering it a "needless innovation." Even in the relatively harsher world of 1846, this drew a lengthy commentary comparing the guardians to Jack Cade in Shakespeare's play, Henry VI, Part III who condemns two men to death because they know how to write.  Fortunately the Poor Law authorities in London put their collective feet down and by the following May the guardians were advertising for a teacher.

Worcester Journal Ad of May 20, 1847 after the guardians saw the error of their ways

One day, most likely in December of 1860, Mary arrived at the Martley workhouse along with James who was about to spend his fourth birthday within its walls.  Initially they would have been taken to the relieving room where they would stay until their request for admission (including a medical exam) was evaluated.  Conditions in the relieving room were intentionally harsh as was the attitude of the relieving (admitting) officer and this was especially true in cases like Mary's as supposedly the worst condemnation  was reserved for the mother's of illegitimate children, even more so for a woman about have her second such child.  The situation probably wasn't helped by a combination of knowledge and suspicion by the officials that Mary had local family who could have helped her.

Typical workhouse layout illustrating segregation of men, women and children into separate buildings

Much of this is speculation, but the reality is Mary and James were admitted which is when things got worse for James.  One of the ways workhouse life was made unattractive was the separation of families with children over two taken away from their parents to live in a separate ward.  First, however, Mary and James exchanged their clothes for the drab, coarse, ill fitting, worn and humiliating workhouse uniform.  No matter how harsh James' life had been so far, it couldn't have prepared him for being taken away from his mother to live with 48 other children under the age of 17.  The 1861 census for the Martley Workhouse indicates that children made up almost half of the 111 workhouse occupants, many of them older than James so he was thrust into an environment where older children, could, and did, make life difficult for the younger ones.

Workhouse Inmates 

Although workhouse admittance meant James wasn't going to starve, he certainly didn't thrive on a child's workhouse diet.  One account described breakfast of four ounces of "sop bread" (scraps of bread mixed with milk and water, probably heavy on the water) followed by four ounces of bread and butter for both dinner and supper.  Charles Dickens story of Oliver Twist asking for more gruel was no exaggeration.  At least Martley Workhouse did have a teacher at this point (James is listed as a scholar on the census).  A few years later the Martley Workhouse teacher said she taught the children from 9 to 12 and 2 to 4, but how much almost 50 children learned from one teacher, who probably had little or no professional training is questionable.  It's no wonder that autobiographical statements of workhouse children are full of stories of "loneliness, pointlessness and violence."  We have no way of knowing what kind of emotional scars the experience left on James, but it's safe to say to say he never forgot it.

Workhouse Children - 1896

One brief bright spot for James may have been Sunday afternoons when children were allowed to spend time with their parents.  After January, James would also have had a chance to see his new brother, Arthur Henry Ricketts.  Victorians typically named their children after their parents, especially popular was naming a son after the mother's father.  Twice Mary chose not to do this which probably tells us all we need to know about her relationship with her father, Samuel.  Perhaps one redeeming feature of Mary's workhouse experience was adequate medical care during childbirth.  The workhouse had an attending medical officer and the care during the delivery was probably better than she could have afforded on the outside.  How well Mary ate before and after her delivery is another question.  The workhouse diet was not noted for its quantity or quality and reportedly no exceptions were made for mothers during recovery from childbirth.  And, as we shall see, there is evidence indicating Mary had suffered from an inadequate diet during her pregnancy.

Oliver Twist asks for more gruel

How long Mary and her two boys remained in the workhouse is unknown.  All we know for certain is that she was there from Arthur's birth (January 11, 1861) through census day (April 7,1861).  Inmates could discharge themselves on as little as three hours notice and it's unlikely Mary stayed longer than necessary.  The Martley Workhouse had 111 inmates on census day, well below the capacity of 150.  As noted 49 were children under 17 while two-thirds of the adult males were over 60 indicating they could not work and had no place else to go.  The female population was somewhat younger, most likely a number of them were mothers of the 49 children.  Mary probably regained her strength unaided by food and drink described as "dull and mean."  Inmates were expected to work, but because she was caring for a newborn, Mary's  workload was probably minimal.  While the food and living accommodations were poor, many accounts indicate the worst part of the workhouse experience was the "almost unrelenting boredom."

The best guess is that as soon as Mary was able to work and could arrange for housing and some kind of help with the children, she left.  If William was Arthur's father, we can set the outside date for the workhouse residence around his discharge in September of 1861.  We can only imagine Mary and even James' feeling of relief as they and little Arthur left the workhouse by the same door they had entered.  Once again, Mary had found a way to survive and keep her family together.

"A Dangerous, Painful and Generally Unpleasant Time"

Regardless of the circumstances of Mary Rickett's pregnancies, including how much choice she had in the matter, as her descendants, it's important to understand the risks and challenges she faced.  First was simply surviving both the pregnancy and childbirth.  This was a society with no understanding of germ theory and bacterial infections, nor was there any kind of prenatal care, and if there was, Mary would have had a hard time paying for it.  Furthermore Victorian propriety or prudery regarding childbirth meant women had little or no preparation and only learned through experience.   Most births occurred in homes full of unsanitary conditions where medical care was less available especially in a rural setting like Arley Kings or Astley.

Idealized pictures like this masked the realities of Victorian childbirth

One woman in the more "modern" 1890's, remembered "twenty-four hours of intense suffering with an ignorant attendant" whose only contribution was to offer assurances the pain would get worse.  Finally "a kindly neighbor" sent the new mother's apparently equally useless husband for the doctor.  By that point she was so exhausted she couldn't help herself and her baby "was brought into the world with instruments" and without "an anesthetic."  No wonder a modern historian described Victorian childbirth as "a dangerous, painful and generally unpleasant time."

Both Mary and James R. obviously survived the experience, but their problems were far from over.  The next question for Mary was how to support herself and her infant son.  As noted previously we have no idea where Mary was living at the time other than she gave birth in Astley.  Everything is, therefore, conjecture, but it's possible she was living with her Uncle William and Aunt Ann Ricketts (Samuel's brother and sister neither of whom ever married) who lived in Astley at the time.  Or she could have been living with someone else in Astley, helping in the household or doing other odd jobs to provide food and shelter for herself and her infant son.  Another possibility is the workhouse, although in that case the birth would have taken place within the institution.

1851 Census showing siblings Ann (eight up from bottom) and William (seven up) Ricketts

If, on the other hand, William was, in fact, James' father, his time away from his regiment in the late 1850's could have been spent helping provide for his "family."  Between the two of them, they might have been able to manage child care and earn enough money (in addition to William's army pay) for food and shelter.  Mary's ability to find work would also have been hampered by the moral issues around her position as a single mother or "fallen women" in the parlance of the day.  According to one historian, Victorians believed any woman "who indulged in sexual gratification for its own sake rather than for procreation degraded her womanhood."  This may not have mattered as much among the rural poor, but it would have mattered a great deal in finding employment in respectable society and, as we shall see, respectability was one of the Victorian's highest social values.

Although the above is an American Civil War era photo it gives a sense of the physical labor involved in doing laundry

Shortly after the birth of her second child in 1861, Mary's occupation was listed as laundress and at the time of her marriage, a little over a year later, she said she worked as a char or cleaning woman.   Like agricultural laborers, these were among the lowest paid jobs, but occupations where respectability was probably of far less importance. At the time, laundry was very strenuous labor, involving soaking clothing in large tubs, followed by scrubbing on a washboard, boiling in copper tubs, rinsing and hanging to dry with a repeat performance for "colored" items. Both jobs could have offered some flexibility in working hours since the work could have been done outside of regular business hours.  In such a position, Mary could have earned some money and arranged for some kind of child care at an affordable cost.

Victorian charwoman 

In the final analysis as with childbirth, Mary somehow provided for her son and herself, perhaps with William's help and/or the assistance of others.  When she became pregnant with James, Mary faced multiple obstacles and adversity, how much of it was of her own making, we will probably never know.  What is far more important, however, is that faced with adversity, she more than rose to the occasion and met those challenges.  In doing so Mary demonstrated a toughness that would be in even greater demand in 1860 when she realized, she was pregnant for the second time.