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.
No comments:
Post a Comment