How did parish removal orders, settlement examinations work?

[melba_schmelba]

I have been looking through several parish's removal orders (both to and from the parish) and also settlement examinations, which often provide quite fascinating information about a person's origins, early life, or type of work they had and at what age and time. It also gives a very good idea of how people moved around the local area, and around the country (and even wider British territories). When people became destitute, perhaps through illness and becoming unable to work, they became chargeable to the parish in where they resided. That parish would then enquire as to whether that person had a legal settlement in the parish and so was eligible for parish relief. If they had served one year as a servant, or served an apprenticeship, the parish in which that occurred would be their legal place of settlement, rather than their parish of birth.
   What I am really unclear about is how the process of removal was handled. Would the person, and their family if they had any, be escorted to their legally agreed place of settlement? If they were not, what was to stop them becoming vagrants and moving parish to parish as they liked? What about cases where people's legal place of settlement was agreed to be in Wales, Scotland, Ireland, or some other British territory, such as America, Australia, India etc? Or the other end of England say from Hampshire to Durham? Surely it was not practical to expect the people to return to there? So in such cases, how was it handled?

[KGarrad]

Does this article help?
https://www.genguide.co.uk/source/settlement-certificates-examinations-and-removal-orders-parish-poor-law/

[melba_schmelba]

Does this article help?
https://www.genguide.co.uk/source/settlement-certificates-examinations-and-removal-orders-parish-poor-law/

Thanks K, this page is very informative thanks, I have seen it before. I just wondered whether anyone had any more detailed information or anecdotes on the actual process of removal. It does say in that article that people were sometimes forcibly removed - how did that work? Did someone have to be paid to escort a person, or a whole family perhaps to another end of the country or even somewhere outside England entirely? Such a process would seem very costly for a parish if it had to be done regularly.

[jonwarrn]

Anecdote!
My most beloved family were sent by waggon in 1840

[melba_schmelba]

Anecdote!
My most beloved family were sent by waggon in 1840

Thanks Jon, it must have been a distressing process, especially for people who may have been ill or elderly or with young children. I suppose the waggon was driven by someone so they were in effect directly escorted, and in addition the parish official also went in your case in more comfortable transport ! Some significant expense must have been involved for parishes to do this on a regular basis. I wonder if people were ever allowed to find they own way back to their place of settlement, or there was always some sort of transport involved.

[coombs]

I have come across a few settlement examinations, certs, where the man was actually born in the parish, thanks to other records, but had to gain settlement in that parish later in life. I guess he lived somewhere else and his father became settled there and he took his fathers settlement.

Poor law documents can be quite complex when you think of it.

[Bookbox]

Would the person, and their family if they had any, be escorted to their legally agreed place of settlement?

Officially, yes: before 1834 by a parish officer, after 1834 by the relieving officer for the relevant district of the poor law union.

If they were not, what was to stop them becoming vagrants and moving parish to parish as they liked?

In practice nothing, and many returned to the parish, some almost immediately. Before 1795 they could be removed again at any time on the basis of being ‘likely’ to need relief, unless they carried a settlement certificate from their own parish. After 1795 they couldn’t be removed again unless they actively reapplied for relief.

What about cases where people's legal place of settlement was agreed to be in Wales, Scotland, Ireland, or some other British territory, such as America, Australia, India etc? Or the other end of England say from Hampshire to Durham? Surely it was not practical to expect the people to return to there? So in such cases, how was it handled?

No, it wasn’t practical, but it was often done nevertheless. The rate-payers in a parish would not tolerate paying relief for paupers who did not ‘belong’ there. They would be escorted by a parish officer or a trusted deputy, on foot if the parish was close by, or by a local carter or carrier, or later by train. There are many examples in parish accounts showing expense claims made by officers for escorting paupers to other parishes.

After 1834 it was the Relieving Officer’s responsibility to remove paupers: he would claim back his travel expenses from the poor law union, and these would sometimes include overnight stays. I have seen plenty of poor law accounts showing claims for escorting paupers from London and southern counties to the Liverpool docks, for removal back to Ireland.

It wasn't unusual, but it was impractical and very expensive, it took a vast amount of time to organise administratively, and the legal costs were huge when something went wrong. The spiralling cost of removal was one of the factors that prompted the setting up of the Poor Law Commission in the 1830s. But the situation did not improve greatly until legislation specifically regarding removal was introduced in 1846 (modified twice in the 1860s), which allowed unions to recompense each other and trade off expenses, reducing the need for the actual physical removal of paupers.

[Gan Yam]

Removal orders can't always have been straight forward.  The sister in law of my 2xgreat grandmother and her 5 children, were ordered to be removed to another parish outside of the city in 1859. Her husband (2xgreat grandmother's brother) was assessed to have deserted her and the children, but had joined the army and was serving in India.  The parish where they were to be removed decided not to accept the decision and made an appeal to the courts. (The court documents are sometimes difficult to follow) The removing parish said she wasn't their responsibility because the maternal grandfather of her husband came from the parish she was being removed to. However the appeal was successful and she wasn't removed because it was proved her husband had rented a property, which she was still living in, and had paid the poor rate for that property and had therefore gained settlement in the parish.  The court cost for the case were
£21-15-2.

Presumably the whole incident was a temporary financial blip because shortly after the court case she started a second hand clothes shop, her husband returned from India about a year later and they went on to have a further 2 children.

[melba_schmelba]

I have come across a few settlement examinations, certs, where the man was actually born in the parish, thanks to other records, but had to gain settlement in that parish later in life. I guess he lived somewhere else and his father became settled there and he took his fathers settlement.

Poor law documents can be quite complex when you think of it.

It is all a bit confusing . Being born somewhere, didn't necessarily give you a settlement there, if you father didn't have one. Also I think there would be a somewhat strange possibility that you could originally have had a settlement somewhere from your father, but you then gained a settlement elsewhere through apprenticeship or at least a year's service, so if you then applied to your place of birth for relief, you would likely not get it and be removed!