Author Topic: Committed to the house of correction for one year for being a lewd woman, 1832.  (Read 10517 times)

Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,336
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Which begs the question what Harriet Hillier of Collingbourne Kingston, Wiltshire,  had done?

She was a spinster and had at least five children over a couple of decades (1810s to 1830s).

Found another report in November 1829 - one year for having a bastard child chargeable to the parish.

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
I think "lewd woman" was a euphemism for a prostitute, a woman of loose morals.

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,336
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Thanks Stan.

So I guess that closes the line of enquiry as to who the father/s of her children were then.  I wonder what happened to the children (I do know that a daughter had children) - would they have gone with her?

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
She would have been charged under 50 Geo. III. c. 51. An Act to repeal so much of an Act, passed in the Seventh Year of King James the First, as relates to the Punishment of Women delivered of Bastard Children; and to make other Provisions in lieu thereof. [9th June 1810]
Section II And be it further enacted, That from and after the passing of this Act, in cases when a woman shall have a bastard child which may be chargeable to the parish, it shall be lawful for any two justices of the peace before whom such woman shall be brought and they shall or may at their discretion commit such woman to the house of correction for the district or place, and there to be set on work for any time not exceeding twelve calendar months nor less than six weeks.

The children would have been looked after by the parish.

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,336
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Thank you Stan.

If she was a prostitute she is the first I've found in the family.  I was surprised at how many illegitimate children she had. 

A few Collingbourne Kingston baptism records name a reputed father, but Harriet hasn't named anyone in the five baptisms I have found.

Offline Beeonthebay

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,092
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
My g. grandmother was born and died with the same name.  She called herself a widow in each census when on her own, she had 5 children over the census years.  Unless she married a man with the same surname which I've never found and he was missing from each census then she never married.

To confuse things further on her son's marriage certificate he gives *his* father's name as his grandfather (her father) which caused me many years of head scratching as to why his father would have the same name and occupation as his grandfather.

I've not found any baptisms so far so there could have been even more children.
Williams, Owens, Pritchard, Povall, Banks, Brown.

Offline hurworth

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,336
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
I don't think Harriet ever married.

When she was in the house of correction for the second time her eldest daughter gave birth, but did subsequently marry the father and go on to have a large family. Harriet's son-in-law appears in petty session records for not supporting his family (so they fell on parish relief) and for causing a disturbance in the workhouse, for which he got six weeks hard labour. 

Harriet is a pauper in later censuses.  Next to one it says Unmar and then the Un has been crossed out.

I think Harriet was poor and no one ever sets out to be a prostitute, but whoever fathered the first couple of children couldn't or wouldn't support her.


Offline ScouseBoy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,142
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
I think "lewd woman" was a euphemism for a prostitute, a woman of loose morals.

Stan
   Why would they need to use a euphemism in the first place?

My dictionary says lewd means lascivious or unchaste.     Quite different from being a prostitute.
Nursall   ~    Buckinghamshire
Avies ~   Norwich

Offline Beeonthebay

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,092
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
I don't think Harriet ever married.

When she was in the house of correction for the second time her eldest daughter gave birth, but did subsequently marry the father and go on to have a large family. Her son-in-law appears in petty session records for not supporting his family (so they fell on parish relief) and for causing a disturbance in the workhouse, for which he got six weeks hard labour. 

She is a pauper in later censuses.  Next to one it says Unmar and then the Un has been crossed out.

I think Harriet was poor and no one ever sets out to be a prostitute, but whoever fathered the first couple of children couldn't or wouldn't support her.

There wasn't a real lot of choice in those days.  Die of starvation for you and your children, the workhouse, steal or turn to "the oldest profession in the world".
Williams, Owens, Pritchard, Povall, Banks, Brown.