Agricultural Labour - increased mobility and increased concern over child labour and the employment of women.
The increased mobility of people due to the Railways and the increased literacy of people as education improved meant that labour could be sought in adverts and people could travel to different locations for work. Hence we see the Statutes being used less to seek employment and an increased flexibility of labourers and employers. The following adverts for employment in two fenland farms are examples of this:
“Wanted on October 11th a Married Man, Yardman able to milk – Apply Geo. Oldershaw, Dawsmere Holbeach.” 1896 [i]
“Oldershaws, Shepherd for lambing season wife to rear poultry and horseman.” [ii]
Hiring fairs were being replaced with registry offices, or by private enquiry for work. The old master-servant relationship was changing. The nineteenth century saw increased use of casual labour and gang work. Agriculture saw an increase in mechanisation, but in my opinion adoption of this was slowed towards the end of the nineteenth century by the agricultural depression with America, Canada and Russia taking a lead in what was a growing global market. Agriculture in England remained labour intensive but increasingly the need for that labour was seasonal seeing the emergence of Agricultural gang labour in the nineteenth century.
The First World War saw the labour market affected by the reduced male population. But the effects of War and the shock of concern regarding supply of imports to feed the nation saw the Corn Production Act of 1917 establish what was to become the Agricultural Wages Board that was to provide increased protection of wages. We see May hirings still happening in most market towns in Lincolnshire into the 1920’s but increasingly they were becoming a social event where hirings were less and less.
The growth of Agriculture throughout the country in the 18th and 19th century had a particular problem in that as more and more land was improved, more livestock and more crops required more people to work on the farms. But there was an absence of housing to enable growth as many villages had not grown as the cities and larger towns had. Also there were great peaks and troughs in work load.
In the past it had been perfectly normal to see gangs come into the fens to do certain tasks such as the navigators or “navvies” coming in to work on the drains, roadways and bridges whether it be from Belgium, Holland or other parts of Britain such as Ireland or Durham. But to have 900 workman descend on a rural area meant that they had to be kept fed, watered and sheltered with the limited resources of the locality that in itself was being stretched by the expansion of agriculture. This could have consequences on law and order as we see in Bardney in 1812.
“A dispute arose on a particular Friday between the navvies and a baker named Edmonds, from Wragby, who supplied them with bread; the riot began on the west side of the river, at a public house with the sign “The Plough” – they drove the landlord away from the house, took out his barrels and drank the beer; having taken the sign down they also took the baker’s basket and bread, and , crossing the river, proceeded up to the village of Bardney, one man carrying another cross-legged on his shoulders, the ‘rider’ carrying the captured sign, holding it up in his hands, and being surrounded by the mob armed with their plank-hooks and other tools. They pelted the baker with his bread, and hung his basket on the top of a tree in the village; the then attacked the ‘Bottle and Glass’ public-house, - fetched the barrels of beer out of the house, knocked the ends out and drank the ale; Mr. Benson, a person who was then the landlord of the ‘Angel’ Inn, to prevent them entering his premises, brought or rolled out his barrels of beer himself, and by this means saved himself and his house.”[iii]
Agricultural Gangs started to form in the early 19th century as farms grew. The nature of some, like fruit pickers could be sourced seasonally from local towns, as a result you see fruit farms and orchards develop on an increasingly large scale where there is a source of seasonal labour on the edge of a town or on good travelling routes. Some gangs formed out of natural family ties, Romany gypsys being an obvious example. Other gangs would be very local. In addition to gangs you would have journeymen with particular skills that were following a centuries old tradition of moving from place to place, such as a sheep shearers , tanners, butchers and stack-thatchers. You see journeymen advertising for work into the 1950’s. With mechanisation you also see “catch work” or “running men” who are more like the Agricultural Contractor of today especially the steam threshers that employed them.
The Agricultural Gangs of the 1830’s started to raise concerns as whilst their work was required they increasing had women and children and were prone to corruption and abuse. This is the era where the abolition of slavery had begun as we appear to be seeing a greater social conscience by those in power possibly fuelled by witnessing the French Revolution and subsequent rise of Napoleon. The gang labour appears to be in two forms, the private gangs, often family or local units employed by the farmer directly or the public gangs which employed anyone from anywhere by any means. This latter group was of greater concern regarding crime, abuse, moral behaviour, exploitation and slavery. The Agricultural Gangs Act 1867 sought to regulate these public gangs by having them subject to a compulsory registration. This meant that such public gangs had to be authorised by the local magistrate who could satisfy himself regarding the decency of such a gangmaster and withdraw his ability to trade his labour if there was any impropriety. The idea of such a rule is sound, but in practice good people do not need laws and bad people circumvent them. This we see with the public gangs who became “private” by having the farmer pay the workers directly. This may have still improved things as a farmer has a vested interest in keeping good workers happy so that they return the following year.
Public gangs around Spalding were considered some of the worst: “…this is mainly caused by the admixture of women of bad character. They are represented as far worse than the men. To the same effect speak many witnesses. Mr. Leaper, a superintendent of police at Spalding says, ‘It’s no use separating boys from girls, unless you separate the young girls from prostitutes and the elder women who demoralize them.. No girl ought to go to work before she’s 10, and then only with those of her own age. They go too far, and work too long; 10 or 12 hours is too much for a young child. I met a gang today five and a half miles from here, taking up mangolds. They start now at 6; in summer they will go before. It varies according to distance and so does their pay. Boys go very young with horses. The law forbids their going on the high-road with carts under 13. But they are all taught to say they are 13; and besides they are mostly employed on the farm not the road.’”[iv]
There was a general low regard for the public gangs as illustrated by Mr Bright’s comments from Pigeon End, Spalding: “My girl of 8 goes to work. She doesn’t go in a gang; she goes to a farmer. I wouldn’t let her go in a gang. She goes at 6 and gets back at 6. I have six children. We’ve two bedrooms. I’ve seen 13 or 14 come out of a morning from that house (two doors off), boys and girls and women. We don’t know whether they’re married or not. It’s the same size as mine. They lie thick as thieves and live like pigs.” I had to smile reading this as I live close to Pigeon End in Spalding and certainly pre-pandemic in 2019, apart from the ages, there were several multiple occupancy houses with similar overcrowding of workers for the food and farming industry. I wonder if in 170 years our advancement has possibly been rather slow.
It has to be noted that a public gangmaster even said he would not want the work for his own daughters as stated by Thomas Osborne a public gangmaster from Market Deeping, who on the day of being interviewed (November 28) had 21 children in his charge.
Concern for the welfare of women and children was such that there was a Royal Commission instructed in 1865 instructed to look at the employment of children, young persons and women in Agriculture which delivered its report in 1867. It needs to be remembered that up to 1857 women were considered a chattel (property) of their husband, even after that date children were considered either chattels of their parents or wards of the state. Furthermore the ability for women to own property was not put on an equal footing with men until 1870.
The 1867 Royal Commission Report relied upon reports and evidence from several Commissioners that covered several parts of the country. The report for Lincolnshire was investigated and compiled by the Hon. Edward Stanhope. He showed great wisdom in compiling the report for when he looked at Lincolnshire he divided it into five districts largely dictated by soil type and the type of farming to be found there, for example The Wolds he found to grow turnips continually throughout the year, was owned mostly by large farmers, and had multiple villages not far apart, in contrast to the Fens with elongated parishes and farms some distance from the somewhat sparser and smaller villages.
It has to be noted that Lincolnshire had some of the highest rates of pay for agricultural labourers at that time, but possibly also a higher incidence of abuse and problems. Those agricultural labourers who were lucky enough to be in settled employment could afford to have their wife’s not to work, indeed they would rather send out their children, girls and boys from the age of six. Indeed their wife could be more profitably “employed” keeping their own personal plot, allotment or animals.
Edward Stanhope identifies the key tasks done by women and children on farms in the Lincolnshire Fens in the 1860’s:
February saw the dibbling of beans for boys and girls over 7 or 8.[v]
March – June saw the twitching and weeding of corn by women, boys and girls over 8 in private gangs, but usually older children in public gangs.
June- July – singling mangolds and osier peeling
August – November – Harvest, making bands and tying-gleaning. Twitching, taking up mangolds and some potatoes. Treading wheat for boys and girls.[vi]
It has to be noted that of its time both the report and its evidence is gathered by and given mostly by men, although some women give revealing evidence. It gives a great insight into attitudes and biases of the time.
Mr H.H. Tatam of Moulton was a large landowner and occupier in Deeping Fen: “ I don’t like field labour for girls; if they do go I am inclined to think it suits them better between 10 and 14 than just after that age. But I object to it, because even if they escape moral contamination, it unfits them for future life, and makes them unable to make a husband’s home comfortable. They can’t cook or look after the house, or sew. Many of the labourers families have to employ dressmakers to mend their clothes, and the result is that no amount of wage will make the husband well off, because the wife does not know how to make use of the money. It may be that where a family consists wholly of girls, they could ill afford to spend their earnings in the fields, but in most cases our labourers are so well off that they could do so; moreover, they have no excuse for saying they can’t afford their children schooling. I have labourers on my farm earning 25s. to 30s. a week with their children, yet they are all in rags and tatters because the wife goes out to work.”
Mr J. Morton of Peak Hill seemed a fair and principled man in his view of employing girls and young boys and perhaps a little critical of those that did in his evidence: “ …in my opinion girls should not go at all. It’s dreadful to see the little things coming out wet and draggled. It’s as bad for their health as it is for their morals. Farmers could well do without them. I believe the system of farming which require so much labour of very young children to be no cheaper than mine. I never employ girls, or very young boys. Little boys ought not to go weeding. It’s all very well when the corn is a few inches high, but when it begins to grow, they are not fit for it. In the spring I send my man to get as many boys as he can to weed. When he brought the lot this year, I asked them all their ages, and sent some home as not old or strong enough for work. With respect to young children, it seems to me that their going to school depends upon their employer, and he alone can make them really go; while the minister if he works alone, as some will do, cannot accomplish it. Little boys can well be spared in the winter, and for a month or so just before harvest at any rate; but let them choose their own schools and their own times, and then make them go to school some part of the year. It would soon be known in a village who were certified boys and who could be employed. Cottages are much wanted, and the only objection to building them is that the question of schooling is made more difficult. But I think that would right itself. One advantage of more cottages is that the men would get more regular employment. Now many farmers in Deeping Fen employ no men regularly all the year. How can you expect to get good labourers on such a system? I have just about the same number all year, except harvest.”
Throughout the evidence for the whole of Lincolnshire there was a general expression of a need for more housing in rural areas – a situation that many could sympathise with today. But the Fens had a particular problem in that the villages had developed along the raised highways of the area and the agriculture had spread along land reclaimed from fen and marsh in long narrow parishes. To understand this if you look at Gedney just off the A17 near Long Sutton the “heel” of this parish would have been Gedney Hill a distance of 10 miles. The provision of schools tended to be by the Church and there was a natural prejudice against the fens as being damp and disease ridden that was a considerable barrier to recruiting clergy in fenland parishes and could only be resolved by providing a good living for prospective clergy. This meant that schools could be distant from the small amount of housing there was. E Morris Esq. M.D. the medical officer for Spalding for the past 26 years gave accounts of overcrowding with two room houses holding a family in one room and the waggoners in the other. He also commented on the size of houses being too small “the amount of cubic feet of air in such cottages is inadequate for health.” Whilst Pinchbeck appeared to be an exception with plenty of cottages Mr Clement Laxton, farmer of Pinchbeck considered them, “not fit to put a pig in.”
Mr. Ashton of Deeping St Nicholas appeared to judge the wellbeing of the women working on his farm by the food they brought: “I employ a private gang of girls to do all my weeding, and I have noticed that they almost all of them bring mutton or meat of some kind to their dinner. I used formerly to live in Hertfordshire where they used to live on bread and onions only.” He then criticises a neighbouring farmer for allowing women to ride astride the horses on manure carts.
There is indication that Edward Stanhope viewed all evidence with a critical eye as illustrated in this:
“Mrs. Kisby, labourer’s wife, Pinchbeck Bars. – I’ve come to Spalding to complain against a public ganger for beating my boy. My boy is 11; he can’t read. I can’t afford to give none children schooling. This boy earns 4s.6d. a week. My husband only gets 10s. I’ve kept my girls from field work; I don’t like it for them. I’ve worked on machines ; I know one woman who lost her arm by it, and one that lost her foot. (Her husband was a foreman, and was really better off than his wages seem to show.)”
Whilst Mrs Kisby may have exaggerated how low her income was, the accidents she described were not unusual and Edward Stanhope was clearly aware of at least three women that had been killed as a result of injuries from threshing drums. It was felt that their clothes and skirts were more likely to get caught.
Of all the evidence prepared by Edward Stanhope in the Fens of Lincolnshire you could see a general consensus: Labour was so scarce that excluding women and children would have a detrimental effect on the local Agriculture, although part of this would be the increase of men’s wages which would hit the tenant farmer of that time who was also having to cope with increases in rents. It was agreed that an improvement in the supply and quality of housing would aid the supply of employment. It was generally agreed that for boys to learn on the land the early experience of work was more valuable than school, whereas for girls they risked becoming undomesticated without the skills to either work in service in a household or to look after a household for her husband. The introduction of machinery, whilst it had improved production, it also had resulted in an increased demand for harvest workers. The distances between houses and schools and likewise houses and work places were too great. The low density of the population in the Fens provided particular problems with labour and schools. It was also considered that the general lot of the rural peasantry was good as they enjoyed high incomes compared to the rest of the country. However, this was to change as we saw a downturn in the fortunes of farmers and their workers in the south of Lincolnshire as they were particularly hit by the agricultural recession from the 1880’s.
The Commission made wide recommendations about children and women, education and housing, but their implication in the fens was, in my opinion, slow and limited. It has to be noted that the compulsory education of children between the ages of 5 and 10 did not come into being until the 1880 Education Act and by the early 1890’s attendance in this age group, especially in South Holland was particularly low at around 70% compared to a national attendance figure of just under 82% in this age group.
[i] Guardian 15 Sept 1896
[ii] Guardian 14th Feb 1899
[iii] Fens and Floods of Mid-Lincolnshire
[iv] Page 307 evidence to 1867 Commission of Employment of Children Young Persons and Women in Agriculture
[v] Dibbling is planting in the case of beans prodding a hole in the ground with a stick or “dibbler” and dropping the bean down it.
[vi] Treading wheat would normally be walking over the straw to separate the corn from the straw a practice that was disappearing fast as steam threshers appeared on the farms, however it is more likely in this case is getting children to walk over freshly sown corn to tread it into the soil. The same word was used for two different processes.
Comentarios