I did not answer some of these questions.. I really do not know the cost of the bath-house - 3d (three pence) maybe? In a time when the average was, or at least to provide the food for the family or what I would consider now large proportions, say 4 or more children - could be as little as about 7 shillings. 12 pence - pennies - to the shilling, 20 shillings to a pound back then. Running water? Have no idea, but I do know that some areas of England did not get it till say the 1950s, even the 60s. Tanks I guess to catch the rainwater, springs, maybe one tap in the yard for a community... In the drought here, many people incliuding me got rainwater tanks - I lived once nt he country and had them - wanted them in suburbia when we came, were told they woere illegal, and we would be prosecuted. Now they give government grants if you get them! In the same country place, we lived for 11 months without electricity. It was too fatr away, about a quarter mile each direction, to be got to us without a transformer. Took that long to arrange others on the subdivision, but actually living there then, to get it, loans from the bank, etc etc. quite do-able - the local laundromat got a work out though - I had three young children, two still in nappies - diapers to the US residents. Disposable were available BUT far too expensive for normal use. Dawn -----Original Message----- From: staffordshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:staffordshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marilyn L. Arnold Sent: Sunday, 4 March 2012 11:06 AM To: staffordshire@rootsweb.com Subject: [STAFFORDSHIRE] LIFE in the 1870-1900s Dawn: Thank you Dawn! for this very interesting perspective you provided (below) on life in this time period. My GGG uncle was said to have worked in a mill by the age of 8 and was so small that he had to stand all day on a stool. His father was killed in an iron mill accident when the child was 6, and his mother was left with 5 young children under 12 to raise alone. She was described in the 1851 Census as a pauper. I know that one of the children at 13 was a servant, not living at home, and another I think was in an orphan asylum (school), but not sure, given the common DAVIES name. My grandmother's cousin stated that the census did not specifically have to state her condition as "pauper" so that indicated (to her) Ann's very desperate condition. I do know that Ann, b. ~ 1815 could not read and write. One daughter was taken to the US by her husband's younger brother and wife and raise as their own, so poor Ann was forced to say goodby to her "Nellie" age 8, not knowing if she would ever see her again, but also knowing that she'd have a better life with them. How tragic. One by one the Uncle George brought over her other children to Pittsburgh, with only her son Samuel (my GGG GF) remaining in Moxley. Thank you for describing the conditions of the loo and the wash house. I guess I just didn't think about it. We so take things for granted these days! Could you describe what you mean by "cooper up?" I can't imagine Ann and family would have had money for a public bath house, but perhaps son Samuel & family (b. 1838) may have (siblings b. 1865-1880 or so). Questions: * How expensive would a trip to a bath house have been, relative to pay for an iron worker might you imagine? * When might running water/indoor facilities common in the Moxley, Wednesbury, Dudley, Bilston area? (Since my GG GF, b. 1865 Moxley; d. 1947 New Hampshire, US used to collect water daily from the well even as an elderly man, I suspect that was the norm for when he was brought up.) Thanks for the description of the house; I suspect my rellies lived in similar, modest homes, as my grandparents visited cousins in the 1960s and described conditions as modest, relative to theirs. I know a couple had shops in the front of their homes. One sold candy ("humbugs!") (1870s) and another bakery good (1960s). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dawn Webb" <dawnwebb@optusnet.com.au> To: <staffordshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [STAFFORDSHIRE] Where is: 160 Catherines Cross Foundry Street -- 1871/ and an 11-year old vintner??? >I think the things you describe Marilyn are about normal for the times - my > grandmother also worked in a mill from a very young age and she was born > 1886; my grandfather, her husband, had to stand at meals with all the 9 or > so other children - Mum and Dad sat - they could only afford two chairs in > the entire house. Grandma slept with her siblings - six on one double > bed - > three top, three tail. Five girls one boy. By the time my grandparents > were growing, they did have a legal entitlement and requirement for > education - perhaps three or five years. G grandma, the generation > earlier, > could not read nor write and she died 1942. Grandma said he mother did > not > have the opportunity to ever learn and that she (grandma - and presumably > her siblings, starting 1881 births) had, like me, gone to school. 1901 > census, Grandma and her younger sister were both mill workers. Only one > who > was not was Olga, aged 10 or maybe JUST 11. (Grandma was third youngest > of > six.) > > Shared toilet - in the back yard of several houses - but we are most > likely > talking terrace houses, possibly front and backs too - small in dimensions > and number of rooms - say one loo for every six or so households, outside > wash=house too, rostered which days you could use it. Bath - either het > the copper up or pay and go to the public bath house if there was one, Sat > nights most likely. > > A newish house my g grandfather lived in with about five opr more siblings > and ?Mum and Dad had three rooms - I have been in it! One main room > downstairs with a tiny kitchen and lobby utility room off the back of it, > through which you went these days to the back yard. Stairs ina > cupboard - > and though I did not go upstairs, maybe then two rooms up. Whether they > have > now made two small bedrooms and a bathroom up there, who knows? But more > likely, one larger - still small to my Australian modern eyes - and a > bathroom. No outside buildings in the small back yard these days. And > they > had bought a few more backyards from the neighbours over the 150 or so > years, so it is now bigger and lovely. 1861 census (or 1871) I think it > was > listed as back to back but the old maps and modern show the "footprint" > has > not changed - so, two families would have lived in these two rooms in > effect > - no access to the "back" either - the whole row of the houses, about 40 > or > more in a long line. Talk about crowded! But then, they did not have much > it seems. Or any expectations of things being better, either, possibly. > They would have walked to work - there was and still is! a mill at the end > of the road, perhaps 100-200 yds away. And many more within walking > distance back then, but gone now. I visited there in 2010. > > Dawn (Melbourne Australia) ****************************** ATTENTION TO ALL:- When replying please remove the details that do not apply to your mail and change the SUBJECT LINE for best useage of ARCHIVED MATERIALS. ------------------------------- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to STAFFORDSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6935 (20120303) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6937 (20120304) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com