In message <mailman.30.1446483965.30538.genbrit@rootsweb.com>, eve via <genbrit@rootsweb.com> writes: [] >> 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'. > Who apprehended them? [] >> 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'. I just meant, if he thought it worth his while to wangle his way to Doncaster Races, he must have had some money left to gamble there? [] >> 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, (QS?) >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) I was thinking more of widows rather than separated wives - though in practice rather than theory, there probably wasn't a lot of difference. [] So basically someone suddenly widowed - by, say, death of husband in an accident (e. g. to do with his work, be it ag. lab., builder, or whatever) - and knowing she had relatives elsewhere in the country who would take her in, would have little chance of reaching them, with her children, unless they could send her quite a lot of money (and I don't know how they'd do that, safely). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The first banjo solo I played was actually just a series of mistakes. In fact it was all the mistakes I knew at the time. - Tim Dowling, RT2015/6/20-26