Who got soup at the Hexham Soup Kitchen? Part One

This guest blog has been written by Phil Carstairs.

NRO 604/14

The Hexham Soup Kitchen seems to have started life in the cholera epidemic of 1831/32 but finally became more permanently established in the late 1830s judging by reports in local newspapers, notably the Newcastle Courant.  Hexham Soup Kitchen’s minute books and other documents dating from 1841 to the early twentieth century are held in the Northumberland Archives at Woodhorn.  Contained in these documents are lists.  Lists of subscribers to the charity, lists of worthy committee members, lists of ingredients for making soup, of expenses for converting a vacant factory building into a soup kitchen, and lists of the deserving Hexham poor who were deemed worthy enough to receive soup and bread during the winter months.

This last category of list, recipients of soup, is the subject of this article.  Although there were many thousands of soup kitchens across nineteenth-century Britain, lists of those receiving soup at these soup kitchens have almost never survived.

Like many other soup kitchens, Hexham’s did not rely on subscribers to hand out tickets.  It invited the poor to apply for tickets which could be exchanged for soup and bread.  The Soup Kitchen’s committee interviewed applicants for tickets at the start of each ‘season’ (usually December to March) to determine their worthiness.  In 1851 the committee asked Mr Fairlamb, Hexham’s Relieving Officer, to attend the application process at the Vestry.  He was the poor law official appointed by the Guardians of the Poor for Hexham Poor Law Union. His job was to provide immediate relief to those poor in crisis and to refer cases for long-term relief or admission to the workhouse to the Board of Guardians.  He would have known many of Hexham’s poor and have had an opinion on who was deserving of charity and who was not. Mr Fairlamb was co-opted onto the committee in January 1861, cementing the close relationship between the charity and Hexham Poor Law Union.

The list of successful applicants would inform the committee how much soup to make and bread to order.  The eligible got only the amount of soup they deserved, and no more.  Further people could be added to the list during the season and ‘casuals’ (a category ranging from those suffering an emergency to tramps and vagrants) could be given soup on a case-by-case basis.

Soup lists for seven different seasons survive in the Northumberland Archives collections; each list contains the names of between 200 and 400 people.  The first five lists are written in the back of the minute book used between 1841 and 1881.  These five lists are on consecutive pages and so must have been recorded in chronological order.  Only the last is dated, 1880-1881.  The other two lists are in alphabetical ledgers.  The lists record the names of the heads of household and the family size or the soup ration awarded, and their approximate address (except for the second list).  The first list also records the occupation of many of the applicants.

Although six lists are not dated, we can work out to within a fairly narrow period when they were drawn up comparing the data recorded in the lists to census data and burial registers.  Street addresses can also provide data evidence for a list.  For instance, Jubilee Terrace probably got its name from Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee in June 1887 and first appears as an address in the first of the alphabetical ledgers (other preliminary data from the census suggests a date in the late 1880s or early 1890s for this list).  Identifying the exact dates of these lists is ongoing, but there appears to be one list from roughly each decade of the second half on the nineteenth century.  The rest of this article focusses on the 1880-1881 list, made in December 1880, coinciding roughly with the 1881 census which took place in early April.

The 1880 list contains the names of 339 heads of household, 23 names are crossed out and one a female first name was replaced with a male one.  People’s names will have been crossed out for various reasons.  Some died that winter, like Dorothy Dodd and Thomas Brown.  Others moved away, like Davison Bell, a joiner, whom the 1881 census records in Ryhope, Tyne and Wear.  His family were still in Hexham at census time but not on the soup list so, having found work in Ryhope, Davison may have been sending money home to his family.  Others were later deemed to be ineligible, perhaps because they found to be undeserving, or because they became so destitute that they had to enter the workhouse, like labourer William Askew and his two children.  Charles Lowe appears on the list twice, once crossed out, probably the correction of a bureaucratic error rather than him trying to cheat the system, which would probably have resulted in him losing all entitlement.

The 1880 list is not in alphabetical order, suggesting that it was drawn up in the order in which people applied.  In several instances people who were recorded in the census as being neighbours appear next to each other on the list.  This indicates that they probably attended the application meeting together and is evidence of community and solidarity.  Ann Dinwoodie and Isabella McGill were neighbours in Tyne Green and both worked at the paper mill as ‘paper dressers’; they attended the application meeting together, perhaps to provide each other with moral support: applicants for charity were exposed to intrusive investigation and to shame.  Similarly, Thomas Welch a painter and Ellen Ritson, a cordwainer (shoemaker) lived next door to one another in Bell’s Court on Priestpopple, and attended together.  All the soup applicants lived in Hexham town rather than the surrounding rural parts of the parish.  Although they had occupations listed in the census, they were mostly without work or only working part-time as queuing for soup and taking it home would have taken several hours.

Newcastle’s Bath House Estate, a journey through maps

One of the aims of the Northumberland Archives Charitable Trust is to improve and promote access
to documents held within Northumberland Archives. Projects have been funded to list collections as
well as adding descriptive content to existing collections. This additional information is added to our
catalogue making the content available and searchable via the Online Catalogue on the
Northumberland Archives website either at home or in the search rooms. The current cataloguing
project focuses on a collection of deeds relating to lands owned by members of the Clayton family in
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

In 1884 Nathaniel George Clayton acquired the Bath House Estate in Newcastle-upon-Tyne which
included a mansion called Bath House, shops and dwelling houses at Westgate Road, dwelling
houses in Villa Place, and tithes from hereditaments formerly called Moats Gardens. The
conveyance refers to an earlier deed of 1873 in which the boundary of the lands was defined and
detailed on a map. In between the two transactions a number of mortgages raised funds secured
against the Estate. Like his uncle, John Clayton, before him, Nathaniel was also interested in
acquiring property and land with a close proximity to the Roman Wall.

Using the plan included on the 1873 deed it is possible to compare it to other plans to see changes
to central Newcastle-upon-Tyne. The main streets named on the plan are Bath Lane and Westgate
Hill.

ZCY/3/22

The 1844 ‘Plan of Newcastle and part of Gateshead’ by Thomas Oliver predates the conveyances mentioned; it highlights that part the boundary of the Bath House Estate matches the boundary between St. Johns Parish (in pink) and Westgate Township (in yellow). Again, Bath Lane and Westgate Hill are named.

NRO 00324/G/7

Google Earth shows the current view, the route between Bath Lane (highlighted with a blue dot) and Westgate Road (rather than Westgate Hill) is now intersected with St. James’ Boulevard; however, the ‘point’ where the two roads meet is still visible.  Adjacent to this is part of the Roman defensive wall built. 

Looking at the hand-drawn plans on various 19th century conveyances, it is amazing how often it is possible to match up an area of land to compare it to its modern usage. Why not have a look to see what other maps and plans you can find that show the changing use of this estate.

Deed with a story to tell…..

One of the aims of the Northumberland Archives Charitable Trust is to improve and promote access to documents held within Northumberland Archives.  Projects have been funded to list collections as well as adding descriptive content to existing collections.  This additional information is added to our catalogue making the content available and searchable via the Online Catalogue on the Northumberland Archives website either at home or in the search rooms.  The current cataloguing project focuses on a collection of deeds relating to lands owned by members of the Clayton family in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. 

During the nineteenth century the names of women appear in deeds less frequently than men.  One deed in the Clayton collection stands out because of the female parties involved and the story the document tells.  On 21 May 1873 John Clayton bought land at Layside in the township of Henshaw. Two of the five parties involved were women; Margaret Bell of Brownrigg, Henshaw and Hannah Laing of Hill House, Henshaw. 

As is common with deeds, the first section details previous conveyances, wills etc. as a way of explaining the history of the ownership of the property (buildings, land etc).  In 1869 Edward Laing conveyed land to Margaret Bell subject to her receiving a payment of £200 plus interest.  If the payment was defaulted upon, Margaret had the right to sell the lands at either a public auction or by private contract.  When the sum was not forthcoming, Margaret “with approval of her husband” decided to sell the mortgaged property at a public auction held at the Sun Inn, Haltwhistle.  John Coats was the highest bidder and declared the purchaser of the premises at a price of £750, with £75 being paid to Margaret Bell as a deposit. 

The second women mentioned in the deed is Hannah Laing, she was entitled to ‘dower out of the same hereditaments’ that is she had rights to the property that she was able to inherit.  Hannah is recorded as being the wife of Edward Laing, and therefore has not inherited those rights at the time of the conveyance.  Edward Laing is an agricultural labourer, which also makes this deed interesting, the naming of a labourer in a legal document.  Is this the same Edward Laing that was party to the original 1869 transaction? It is difficult to answer with absolute certainty, but it may explain why Hannah has rights to the property.   

As part of the sale to John Clayton, Hannah agreed to release her rights to the hereditaments.  The price paid was £750, with £675 going to Margaret Bell and her husband Robert and £75 to John Coats (this indicates that he had paid only the deposit following the purchase at the Sun Inn).  Hannah Laing did not benefit financially.  The conveyance deed is signed by both women. 

Accompanying the document is a certificate relating to the Deeds by Married Women Act, whereby both Margaret and Hannah were examined to ensure that they “freely and voluntarily consented” to the sale.  Through modern eyes this appears demeaning; there is no such certificate to confirm that the men had the same understanding.  Was it intended to confirm that the women were not placed under any duress to agree to something?  The interviews were held apart from their respective husbands.  Regardless of the intention behind the certificate, the fact that it remains with the conveyance is unusual. 

Details of the documents can be seen via the online catalogue using Ref.No. ZCY/4/13* (the * will return the details of both individual documents) or at the Woodhorn Search Room.