Poverty and Theft in the Parish by Gill Selley
Agricultural labourers in the 19th century were amongst the poorest paid working men in the country, and Woodbury parish having so many farms had very many men employed as labourers. Work depended on the weather and needs of the farmers, and illness of the bread-winner or his wife giving birth to another member of a large family, meant that many of the families were obliged to get financial help from the St Thomas Union, and in many cases ended up in the Workhouse in Exeter. Such a large group of very poor families resulted in a great many appearances before the local magistrates for petty offences, mainly drunkenness and pilfering. The reason for
so much insobriety was due to the lack of possessions and illiteracy, and very
poor housing causing men to escape their overcrowded cottages and enjoy the
companionship of fellow workers in the pubs, leaving their wives to look after the home and large families. The local newspapers reported many of the cases at the Petty Sessions of both petty theft and drunkenness and in the following article I am going to describe a few of these cases of pilfering.
Many of the culprits came from one area of the parish, Ebford, where there appeared to be a hardened group of women who delighted in straying onto certain farmers’ land and stealing apples and turnips. The excuse was often that the family was hungry and needed the turnips to make soup. Below is a small selection of culprits and their crimes, and as you will see certain families appeared regularly before the magistrates.
In 1840 Elizabeth Back was committed at the County Quarter Sessions to the House of Correction for 14 days hard labour for stealing apples from Richard Coles, whose farm in Lower Ebford was the commonest target for theft. In 1851 Coles was the victim of two girls, aged 13 and 14, who were charged with stealing apples. When Richard Coles was riding past his orchard one morning he noticed the girls in the field with their aprons full of apples, which they threw in the hedge when they saw him. One of the girls was an old offender and Coles said that he had been looking out for her for a long time. When the girl’s father asked in what way she was an offender, Coles replied, ‘why, she steals everything she can come across of – she’s an incorrigible thief – she’s a daring thief’.
The girls were fined 10s each or one week’s imprisonment – the fine was paid!
Over many years one woman who regularly helped herself to produce from the fields was Elizabeth Back. In 1850 she pleaded guilty to stealing turnips from Col Brice Wakeford Lee of Ebford Barton – she had been charged with a similar
offence several times in earlier years. She said she was obliged to steal the turnips as she was starving, to put in some broth that Mrs Moore (of Mount Ebford) had given her. The defendant, who was very noisy, did not think she was worse than other people and said it was a shame to summon her for a few turnips. The witness said that nearly ½ an acre of turnips had been taken from the field amounting to 32 lbs! She was fined 10s or 14 days in prison – despite her pleas of poverty she paid up. She was prosecuted again in 1855 for stealing turnips from Richard Coles. It was stated that she was an ‘old offender’ and had just served a term of imprisonment for a similar offence. She was fined 20s and costs or one month’s imprisonment. Her name, and that of her relatives, appeared frequently in the newspaper Petty Session reports for many years.
In 1856 Matthew Webber, a labourer, appeared before the magistrates on a charge of stealing 65 apples from the orchard of his neighbour, Mr Richard Coles of Lower Ebford Farm. He was fined 20s and costs. He pleaded poverty saying that he could not pay the fine as he had only 7s per week and a wife and seven children to support. He was ordered to go to prison for 3 weeks. His plea of poverty was not accurate as not all his children were at home, and some of those still in the family home were in employment.
In 1861 Richard Knott of Lamb Park Farm in Woodbury Village was the victim of theft. A witness reported seeing Sarah Ann Gooding knocking apples off the trees in his orchard with a stick and putting them in her basket – she was also found to have 19 apples in her apron. She was found guilty and fined 18s.
In 1862 four women from Ebford, including the above Elizabeth Back, described in court as ‘poor women from Woodbury’, were all fined for stealing over 60lbs of turnips and turnip greens from a pile left out for the sheep from a field belonging to John Russell, another Ebford farmer.
In the same year Jane Sanders, a lacemaker and wife of a farm worker living in Woodbury village, was sent to prison for seven days with hard labour for stealing 39 apples from Ford Farm on Broadway. The local policeman had seen her with a basket under her cloak acting suspiciously. He inspected the basket and found the apples under a quantity of acorns – her footsteps were traced to the orchard and the apples found to be the same as the ones on the farmer’s tree. Mrs Sanders insisted that she had bought them on the road from a woman going to Exeter, but ‘never thort of axing her name’.
In 1863 another member of the Back family, who was fined 25s (including costs) for stealing apples from Richard Coles, was described in court as ‘an incorrigible old seafaring man’.
In 1871 Ann Moore, a lacemaker from Woodbury Salterton, was described in court as a very poor widow with five children. She pleaded guilty to stealing a quantity of turnip greens and was fined 1d with 6s costs and given 6 weeks to pay. This appears to be a genuine case of hardship and poverty as she does not appear again to be in trouble, and the leniency of the sentence shows that the magistrates considered it a genuine case of need.
These are just a few examples of many reported by the local newspapers of the pilfering that was occurring in the parish. As the same names occur frequently in the courts it seems likely that the risk of a fine or prison was no deterrent, and the farmers were considered fair game. The quantity of produce stolen implies that the apples and turnips were not for family consumption alone, and were probably intended for sale to neighbours. It almost seemed like a game of chance that the perpetrators were playing with the farmers – many times they would have got away with their pilfering, but whenever caught the farmers had no hesitation in reporting them to the magistrates. This constant thieving was probably happening in Clyst St George too and the farmers must have been fighting a losing battle with some of the culprits as a comment by one farmer in the court was that ‘the people of Ebford are like greyhounds’.
St Thomas Workhouse in Exeter
Agricultural labourers in the 19th century were amongst the poorest paid working men in the country, and Woodbury parish having so many farms had very many men employed as labourers. Work depended on the weather and needs of the farmers, and illness of the bread-winner or his wife giving birth to another member of a large family, meant that many of the families were obliged to get financial help from the St Thomas Union, and in many cases ended up in the Workhouse in Exeter. Such a large group of very poor families resulted in a great many appearances before the local magistrates for petty offences, mainly drunkenness and pilfering. The reason for
so much insobriety was due to the lack of possessions and illiteracy, and very
poor housing causing men to escape their overcrowded cottages and enjoy the
companionship of fellow workers in the pubs, leaving their wives to look after the home and large families. The local newspapers reported many of the cases at the Petty Sessions of both petty theft and drunkenness and in the following article I am going to describe a few of these cases of pilfering.
Many of the culprits came from one area of the parish, Ebford, where there appeared to be a hardened group of women who delighted in straying onto certain farmers’ land and stealing apples and turnips. The excuse was often that the family was hungry and needed the turnips to make soup. Below is a small selection of culprits and their crimes, and as you will see certain families appeared regularly before the magistrates.
In 1840 Elizabeth Back was committed at the County Quarter Sessions to the House of Correction for 14 days hard labour for stealing apples from Richard Coles, whose farm in Lower Ebford was the commonest target for theft. In 1851 Coles was the victim of two girls, aged 13 and 14, who were charged with stealing apples. When Richard Coles was riding past his orchard one morning he noticed the girls in the field with their aprons full of apples, which they threw in the hedge when they saw him. One of the girls was an old offender and Coles said that he had been looking out for her for a long time. When the girl’s father asked in what way she was an offender, Coles replied, ‘why, she steals everything she can come across of – she’s an incorrigible thief – she’s a daring thief’.
The girls were fined 10s each or one week’s imprisonment – the fine was paid!
Over many years one woman who regularly helped herself to produce from the fields was Elizabeth Back. In 1850 she pleaded guilty to stealing turnips from Col Brice Wakeford Lee of Ebford Barton – she had been charged with a similar
offence several times in earlier years. She said she was obliged to steal the turnips as she was starving, to put in some broth that Mrs Moore (of Mount Ebford) had given her. The defendant, who was very noisy, did not think she was worse than other people and said it was a shame to summon her for a few turnips. The witness said that nearly ½ an acre of turnips had been taken from the field amounting to 32 lbs! She was fined 10s or 14 days in prison – despite her pleas of poverty she paid up. She was prosecuted again in 1855 for stealing turnips from Richard Coles. It was stated that she was an ‘old offender’ and had just served a term of imprisonment for a similar offence. She was fined 20s and costs or one month’s imprisonment. Her name, and that of her relatives, appeared frequently in the newspaper Petty Session reports for many years.
In 1856 Matthew Webber, a labourer, appeared before the magistrates on a charge of stealing 65 apples from the orchard of his neighbour, Mr Richard Coles of Lower Ebford Farm. He was fined 20s and costs. He pleaded poverty saying that he could not pay the fine as he had only 7s per week and a wife and seven children to support. He was ordered to go to prison for 3 weeks. His plea of poverty was not accurate as not all his children were at home, and some of those still in the family home were in employment.
In 1861 Richard Knott of Lamb Park Farm in Woodbury Village was the victim of theft. A witness reported seeing Sarah Ann Gooding knocking apples off the trees in his orchard with a stick and putting them in her basket – she was also found to have 19 apples in her apron. She was found guilty and fined 18s.
In 1862 four women from Ebford, including the above Elizabeth Back, described in court as ‘poor women from Woodbury’, were all fined for stealing over 60lbs of turnips and turnip greens from a pile left out for the sheep from a field belonging to John Russell, another Ebford farmer.
In the same year Jane Sanders, a lacemaker and wife of a farm worker living in Woodbury village, was sent to prison for seven days with hard labour for stealing 39 apples from Ford Farm on Broadway. The local policeman had seen her with a basket under her cloak acting suspiciously. He inspected the basket and found the apples under a quantity of acorns – her footsteps were traced to the orchard and the apples found to be the same as the ones on the farmer’s tree. Mrs Sanders insisted that she had bought them on the road from a woman going to Exeter, but ‘never thort of axing her name’.
In 1863 another member of the Back family, who was fined 25s (including costs) for stealing apples from Richard Coles, was described in court as ‘an incorrigible old seafaring man’.
In 1871 Ann Moore, a lacemaker from Woodbury Salterton, was described in court as a very poor widow with five children. She pleaded guilty to stealing a quantity of turnip greens and was fined 1d with 6s costs and given 6 weeks to pay. This appears to be a genuine case of hardship and poverty as she does not appear again to be in trouble, and the leniency of the sentence shows that the magistrates considered it a genuine case of need.
These are just a few examples of many reported by the local newspapers of the pilfering that was occurring in the parish. As the same names occur frequently in the courts it seems likely that the risk of a fine or prison was no deterrent, and the farmers were considered fair game. The quantity of produce stolen implies that the apples and turnips were not for family consumption alone, and were probably intended for sale to neighbours. It almost seemed like a game of chance that the perpetrators were playing with the farmers – many times they would have got away with their pilfering, but whenever caught the farmers had no hesitation in reporting them to the magistrates. This constant thieving was probably happening in Clyst St George too and the farmers must have been fighting a losing battle with some of the culprits as a comment by one farmer in the court was that ‘the people of Ebford are like greyhounds’.
St Thomas Workhouse in Exeter
