The Victorian Child - A Family Story (Part 2)

It's half term so I’ve finally got a chance to catch up on my posts which have been a little neglected of late. Have been immensely enjoying teaching the period 1759-1928 with my Upper Sixth Class. We’re already in the midst of our second in breadth topic – the changing lives of children and so, I feel I should press on and finish my posts on this, so I can get on with some of my other research interests (including WW1 football and the Irish in India). So much to type up and so little time….

1861 Census

I can’t say that the 1861 census shows me a radically different picture to earlier ones. One thing is clear is that working and educational legislation regarding children was piecemeal and attitudes changing slowly.

In this census there are a few teenage workers in the family. Ranging in age from 14 to 17 with a mean age of 15, it is clear that they are in work slightly older than their cousins and siblings from the previous census. Many are doing similar jobs to their parents, e.g. John Flavell, 16 miner and Mary Matthews, 16 FWK; though a few have branched out including her sister Lydia Matthews, 14, assistant in a warehouse and Caroline Brooks, 17 Dressmaker.

Other children don’t have jobs listed, but it is hard to imagine 17 year old Thomas Candy, doing anything other than helping his father the Cattle Dealer in his rounds. Or teenage girls like Jane (16) and Susannah (14), Jacques; Elizabeth Fellows (15); and Elizabeth Heighton (14) not assisting their mothers with work in the home and on the family farm. Such domestic lives were not jobs as such, it was simply expected of them.

There were number of the children are in education – 24 that I’ve found, with an average age of 10, though notably there are ten over that age, with one as old as 16 (and a girl at that – Margaret Kinnear, 16, who later became a taxman’s wife). It doesn’t seem surprising that more children were in school by this period. There had been moves for some time towards greater schooling, not only as a means of educating the young against vice, but more importantly it was becoming increasingly recognised that a better educated workforce was vital to keep British industry competitive in an increasingly industrialised world. Furthermore, it was believed that educated children would be more able to look after themselves as adults and as a result less likely to claim poor relief as adults (which was a burden to the tax payer and the state). New educational initiatives, Legislative change, and changing attitudes over the period 1818-1859 meant that by the 1860s, education for children was being taken much more seriously.

Such developments included:

• The 1833 Factory Act which stipulated that child workers should receive two hours of schooling a day, and that a certificate had to be produced by the school master to the inspectors of the Factory Commission. As a result, the government coughed up £20,000 to help resource these schools. Though not enough money, and primarily given to the two denominational education societies in existence at the time (the National Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor – C of E; And The British and Foreign Schools Society – Non Conformist), it was a big turning point regardless, as it marks the state getting more involved in the lives of children and their education.

• The Ragged School Movement (started by John Pounds of Portsmouth in 1818) and developed further by Lord Ashley’s Ragged School Union in 1844. These ragged schools were non-denominational, and enabled the poorest children to receive some kind of a basic education and by this period some 350 schools, teaching 300,000 children were in existence.

• ‘Self Help’ a book by Samuel Smiles was published in 1859. This book argued that the individual could succeed by his own efforts and therefore, implied that his health, wealth and happiness was his own responsibility and not the state’s. Though this was initially used as a stick to beat education with (as critics pointed out the government was spending some £800,000 a year on education by 1860), this moralistic attitude only served to push the local educational societies on. They argued that the government money was being used for Church run institutions and therefore education was not being provided for all and was too selective. With educational inclusivity and equality as their goal, they continued to strive for further change during the decade following this 1861 census.

1871 Census

Lots of children in school again, notably a number of the Goddard and Matthews children who in previous censuses had often been working with their parents as Framework knitters from a young age. Henry Matthews (11) was still in school in 1871, contrasting with his aunt, who was already working at 10 in 1851.

This increase in education is hardly surprising given the efforts since the last census of the National Educational League when in 1869 when they put forward a bill to parliament calling for local authorities to provide education for all children in their district and that these schools should be founded and maintained by public money.

The resulting 1870 Elementary Education Act was passed the following year (and the year before our census) making elementary education available for all children aged 5 to 13. However, there were a few key limitations to the Act. Firstly, parents had to continue to pay for their children’s education (though those in dire straits could have their fees paid for by the school board). Secondly, and rather counter-productively, schools could apply for powers to make attendance compulsory but this was not the case everywhere. The Act also put a deal of pressure on working families who could no longer rely on their children to bring in additional wages resulting in many children skipping school.

This loophole in the 1870 Act might explain the lack of schooling for the Kienlin Children (aged 6-12); The Smith Children (aged 6-9) and George James (10). It is quite possible still that they were in education and their parents didn’t put this down on the census. However, it might be noted that the Smiths and George James were living in rural Hampshire and Norfolk respectively, and it was not uncommon in such areas for schools to allow children to leave school to conduct necessary agricultural labour when required.

As for working teenagers – again the pattern is pretty much the same where they either following the careers of their parents/grandparents (e.g. Samuel (14) and William (11) Hurst living and working as FWKs), or actively assisting their parents (e.g. Charles King (13) bricklayers assistant; alternatively the Candy children, who were helping on their father’s new 159 acre farm in Lydiard Tregoze, Wiltshire.

So there you have it, new legislation and more money for schools, but with optional attendance. Next post - will the 1880 Education Act make a huge difference to the lives of the family's children? And will they begin to eke out careers outside of their parent's occupations? These are the two key questions that I hope to find answers to this week.