Blog post written by Sorcha Walsh
The Old Poor Law, as an early form of social welfare, aimed to provide for those members of society who were unable to do so themselves. Common reasons for requiring relief included old age, infirmity, and the lack of work. However, another common reason for the provision of relief was single motherhood. In fact, this particular situation had its own set of rules and regulations, which predated the Old Poor Law considerably.
The Settlement Act of 1662 aimed to restrict migration, however, it also had the effect of introducing the notion of legal settlement. The parish of legal settlement was considered to be responsible for its parishioners. Given that the settlement of a child was usually that of the father, the role of settlement in relief for single mothers was one of great contention. A consequence of this was the creation of a great number of rules and regulations surrounding the paternity of an illegitimate child (Hitchcock & Black, 1999). These rules and regulations varied considerably, with those from London being best attested. In London, it was necessary to complete a “Bastardy Examination”: old practice where a woman known to be carrying a bastard child was to go before two Justices of the Peace and swear under oath to the identity of the father. He could then be apprehended by the law and forced to enter into a child support agreement with the parish which lasted a variable period of time, usually until the child was old enough to be apprenticed. In case of refusal, the man could be imprisoned (Evans, 2005:7). If no money was obtained from the father, the parish officers would either have her and the infant removed to their parish of settlement, or the parish would provide for the mother and child.
In the LALP corpus, there are several examples of relatives of single mothers or the mothers themselves writing about child support. On July 24th 1823, Ralph Entwhistle wrote to the overseer of Tottington, giving a report on a sick young mother named Mary Shemherd and child who he had taken into his care, in exchange for money from the parish. Entwhistle notes that “the Girl has conducted herself at my House in a quiet innofensive manner”, and even goes so far as to praise the fact that she has shown herself to be industrious “considering her hinderances”. However, he notes that she has experienced a “severe stroKe of affliction”, which was burdensome to the Entwhistle family, having the care of both her and her child, who was also sick at the time.
Another example is the case of William Turner, father to Elizabeth. There are two letters from William in the corpus, the first written on April 28th 1834. In this letter, he provides an extensive description of a man named Thomas Settle, who he expects to visit the fair in Stockport – the Turner’s parish of settlement – a few days later. William Turner requests that the recipient of the letter obtain a warrant, so that they might “Come over & take him – so that there may be some allowanse in time of Need –”. The urgency of the letter is underlined by the fact that he expects his daughter to “Get her Bed” soon. Another letter, written in a different hand on the 15th of July in the same year and concerning the same affair is also in the corpus. The question of settlement returns once again, with William Turner stating that “that it will not b lawfull for it to be done any where else but in Stockport”. What exactly “it” is is unclear, but one can imagine that it is the apprehension of the father. This becomes all the more urgent when one considers the end of the letter, where William states: “my Daughter is recovering very badly as you my se by the letter inclosed”. Unfortunately, these are the only letters on the Turners which are found in the corpus, so the conclusion of the affair remains a mystery.
This financial support was the consequence of a rather more diverse set of attitudes towards illegitimate children than might be imagined. While single motherhood remained undoubtedly shameful, there was also a very real desire from multiple spheres of society to help those in these situations, such as “the New General Lying-in Hospital, Store Street, was set up in 1767 to help unwed women who were ‘overwhelmed with Shame and remorse, and destitute of every other Means of Subsistence’” (Williams 2018:55). While this was undoubtedly a means by which the hospital could reform the morally corrupt women in question, it had the effect of providing them with support. Given that lower social strata remain critically understudied, due only in part to the lack of surviving evidence, one cannot presume that the ideals professed by the upper social classes were universally adopted by the labouring poor. In fact, Williams writes that multiple authors have argued that “plebian women” had their own social rules, which did not preclude premarital sex. There could indeed have been a distinct code of conduct between women, and social support would have been available for prostitutes and sex workers of various kinds, unmarried mothers, and others (59). Furthermore, an account written by Frances Place (a master tailor of the time) indicates that attitudes towards unmarried motherhood changed during his lifetime, with tradesmen not seeming to care if their daughters had illegitimate children during the 1780s, but that the same behaviour had become highly scandalous by the 1820s (59).
This is demonstrated by one of the LALP letters from Cornwall, where a woman named Avis Reynalds writes to the father of her child “to know the Reson why you dont Come to see mee”. In this letter she also asks for financial support, but seems to mostly be concerned with the emotional consequences of the man’s absence, as she writes: “my dear I am Longin to see you”. Once again, we have two letters from Avis. The second one is from a year later, and clearly shows the effects of Avis’ social environment on her wellbeing:
“I was brought to bed of
a Daughter about whitch the gentelmen
of the town is very angry with my
Cosen and mee let mee and I beg
that you may Come to mee on the
receiving this leter that my Cosen nor
mee may not bee no more putupon”.
She continues:
“in all things my Distreſs is not the
moust but the reflectoans of the
town is more then what wee Can
bear and again I begs that you may
not think litel of it”.
If the cousin in question is another woman, the theory according to which women’s views on premarital sex were different from men’s is certainly supported by this letter. Interestingly, Avis Reynalds does not invoke her feelings of shame at all, but rather sadness, in line with Barret-Ducrocq’s perspective (in Williams 2018:59), according to which single motherhood was certainly cause for distress, often for financial and emotional reasons, but not necessarily shame.
While single mothers were provided for, although scantily, under the Old Poor Law, this did not necessarily make this time period a good time to raise an illegitimate child. Even though the social mores of the time were not as austere as one might imagine, they were also by no means favourable, and also in considerable flux during the relatively short period encompassed by our corpus. Indeed, the stories of women such as Mary Shemherd, Elizabeth Turner, and Avis Reynalds demonstrate how often young women were left at the mercy of a system which required the cooperation of the very men who had abandoned them.
References:
Evans, T. (2005). ‘Unfortunate Objects’. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230509856
Griffin, E. (2013). Sex, illegitimacy and social change in industrializing Britain. Social History, 38(2), 139–161.
Hitchcock, T., & Black, J. (Eds.). (1999a). Chelsea Settlement and Bastardy Examinations, 1733-1766. In Chelsea Settlement and Bastardy Examinations, 1733-1766. London Record Society. https://www.londonlives.org/static/EP.jsp
Hitchcock, T., & Black, J. (Eds.). (1999b). Introduction. In Chelsea Settlement and Bastardy Examinations, 1733-1766. London Record Society. https://www.londonlives.org/static/EP.jsp
Were single mothers better off in the 19th Century? (2012, March 6). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17159966
Williams, S. (2018). Unmarried Motherhood in the Metropolis, 1700–1850. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73320-3