For some reason this came to me as an email rather than a post in the newsgroup soc.genealogy.britain, so apologies if the quoting's all over the place. I'll put "JPG>" before my responses. > [] > >>>>> as would their owners. Various religious establishments, and some > >>>>> secular ones, had a tradition of the travellers' dole whereby genuine > >>>>> travellers would get free food and water. The Hospice at St Cross, > >>>> > >>>> Were there enough of these establishments that a practically penniless > >>>> person could actually make a long journey? > >>> > >> [] > I expect the following question probably can't be answered, as I suspect > the majority of the sort of people I'm thinking of would be illiterate - > or, at least, not be in a position to either keep a diary or get it > published. But I'll ask anyway: > > are there actual accounts of people travelling long distances (say, over > 200 miles), relying entirely on these establishments? Especially with a > large number of children? In mediaeval times, the religious houses did provide for travellers. To a limited extent, the parish/churchwardens took over this function, usually where hefty travellers were involved (pay them 4d or 6d to go away). But weaker 'sturdy beggars' tended to be whipped to shift them. There were local charity funded 'doles' but usually limited to one day a month or even year, and jealously guarded by the local more or less poor. [A vicar charged with an annual dole of buns and pies locally decided enough was enough, and got thrown in the horsepond for it]. JPG> Who did what to whom there? I don't quite follow - a vicar was dunked? By angry beggars, or the local people? However, if a person was found begging/destitute in parish A, there was usually an investigation to discover the place of settlement (B) . Once this was established, theperson was given a pass from A to B, which allowed him to move from parish to parish (in a direct line) without being whipped, and usually being given either food or a few pence to keep moving. They were referred to as 'passengers', hence someone who died and was buried as a passenger was not someone off a coach. Some parishes (?Offley Herts) became known as generous, so tramps made extensive detours to get the benefits (like the economic migrants today) On main roads, the traveller problem sometimes got menacing, so counties employed 'cripple contractors' [so called because some people were lame, some faking lameness for sympathy], who loaded a bunch of travellers into a waggon and dumped them further up the road, ideally into the next county. The wily 'travellers' made use of this system to hitch a lift - if you declared your settlement as Scotland or Ireland, you might get a ride for several miles. One chap who lost his shirt at Aylesbury races declared Durham as his settlement, and got lifts most of the way to Doncaster Races. JPG> So presumably hadn't entirely "lost his shirt"! In many cases, farmers or cottagers were kind enough to allow a night in a barn and supply a bit of food, especially if there was a family with children. So again, wily travellers borrowed a few children, pinched them to make them cry, and got food that way. (The Roma do it now in London streets). Of course, there were genuine paupers on the roads, needing help,sometimes widows set adrift because their husbands had been settled far away, but a lot were exploiting the system and did rather better than the genuine cases, lacking shame. JPG> So the genuine widow - with, likely in those days, a gaggle of children - would have a hard time of it. > -- EVE [] JPG> So I remain semi-convinced that, in the majority of cases, most people were unable to travel more than a few miles - even if not destitute; journeys across the country (even without taking the danger of being robbed into account) being very much the preserve of the rich, or the single healthy person (probably male). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Who were your favourite TV stars or shows when you were a child? Sadly they've all been arrested ... Ian Hislop, in Radio Times 28 September-4 October 2013

> > > [] > > >>>>> as would their owners. Various religious establishments, and some > > >>>>> secular ones, had a tradition of the travellers' dole whereby genuine > > >>>>> travellers would get free food and water. The Hospice at St Cross, > > >>>> > > >>>> Were there enough of these establishments that a practically penniless > > >>>> person could actually make a long journey? > > >>> > > >> [] > > I expect the following question probably can't be answered, as I suspect > > the majority of the sort of people I'm thinking of would be illiterate - > > or, at least, not be in a position to either keep a diary or get it > > published. But I'll ask anyway: > > > > are there actual accounts of people travelling long distances (say, over > > 200 miles), relying entirely on these establishments? Especially with a > > large number of children? > > In mediaeval times, the religious houses did provide for travellers. To > a limited extent, the parish/churchwardens took over this function, > usually where hefty travellers were involved (pay them 4d or 6d to go > away). > But weaker 'sturdy beggars' tended to be whipped to shift them. There > were local charity funded 'doles' but usually limited to one day a month > or even year, and jealously guarded by the local more or less poor. [A > vicar charged with an annual dole of buns and pies locally decided > enough was enough, and got thrown in the horsepond for it]. > > JPG> Who did what to whom there? I don't quite follow - a vicar was > dunked? By angry beggars, or the local people? Risborough. The dole had been set up and for c 150 years, the viacr's wife/cook would bake the buns each year. The new vicar's wife was above such things, and the vicar said it was just an excuse for gathering at the vicarage and making an unseemly noise, so he wouldn't do it. (In an earlier year, some lads from the next villaghe had turned up for a share and got thumped heartily, so he had a point) The locals -even reasonably comfortably off, regarded it as a perk and turned up anyway. When they vicar came out to remind them the good times were over, they grabbed him and dunked him. Among those apprehended were a couple of young farmers, who definitely did not count as 'poor'. > > However, if a person was found begging/destitute in parish A, there was > usually an investigation to discover the place of settlement (B) . Once > this was established, theperson was given a pass from A to B, which > allowed him to move from parish to parish (in a direct line) without > being whipped, and usually being given either food or a few pence to > keep moving. They were referred to as 'passengers', hence someone who > died and was buried as a passenger was not someone off a coach. Some > parishes (?Offley Herts) became known as generous, so tramps made > extensive detours to get the benefits (like the economic migrants today) > On main roads, the traveller problem sometimes got menacing, so > counties employed 'cripple contractors' [so called because some people > were lame, some faking lameness for sympathy], who loaded a bunch of > travellers into a waggon and dumped them further up the road, ideally > into the next county. > The wily 'travellers' made use of this system to hitch a lift - if > you declared your settlement as Scotland or Ireland, you might get a > ride for several miles. One chap who lost his shirt at Aylesbury races > declared Durham as his settlement, and got lifts most of the way to > Doncaster Races. > > JPG> So presumably hadn't entirely "lost his shirt"! EM He conned the Aylesbury overseers into funding the first part of the journey, and (according to descendant) boasted about getting similar hitches on the strength of his 'pass'. > > In many cases, farmers or cottagers were kind enough to allow a > night in a barn and supply a bit of food, especially if there was a > family with children. So again, wily travellers borrowed a few children, > pinched them to make them cry, and got food that way. (The Roma do it > now in London streets). Of course, there were genuine paupers on the > roads, needing help,sometimes widows set adrift because their husbands > had been settled far away, but a lot were exploiting the system and did > rather better than the genuine cases, lacking shame. > > JPG> So the genuine widow - with, likely in those days, a gaggle of > children - would have a hard time of it. > > > -- EVE Yes, though kind people on the way might have thrown the odd bun and cup of milk their way. The dodgy ones took the money and stayed put, or close by. > [] > JPG> So I remain semi-convinced that, in the majority of cases, most > people were unable to travel more than a few miles - even if not > destitute; journeys across the country (even without taking the danger > of being robbed into account) being very much the preserve of the rich, > or the single healthy person (probably male). Some wives or wife equivalents did trail after their man, walking 90% of even very long journeys. Soldiers' wives etc not on the strenght would trail their man too. You get records (QS) of women who have followed for 100 miles, then ditched because the baby cried or got ill. Establishing settlement and sending the women back could get very complicated. (There was the qquestion of whether they were married properly, for a start) > EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society