Poor Law Records Paisley

Items of general interest

Moderators: Global Moderators, Pandabean

Corsebar
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:35 pm

Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by Corsebar » Tue Jun 17, 2014 3:04 pm

Hello,
Went to the Paisley Library last year and managed to find my g.g. Grandfathers application in the Poor Law Records in 1920. It was a claim from the Hamilton Council to the Paisley Council, by the looks of it.
His status was Married, however slightly penciled in after Married was & S. Considering he was 69 and his wife was 71, in that record. Always had the thought that older people in those days might have kept on going even though times might be hard!
What might and S mean, first thought was, separated, or could it be something else? I Know his wife didn't die until 1929 in Hamilton.
Thanks,
Ray

carlineric
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: West Lothian, Scotland

Re: Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by carlineric » Tue Jun 17, 2014 3:14 pm

I came across this as well with my great grandfather's application in Paisley in 1907 where he is described as "married and separated". He was only in the poorhouse a short time and he continued to live with his wife until she died. I wonder if because he was in the poorhouse it was treated as a separation.

Eric
Eric

Falkyrn
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by Falkyrn » Tue Jun 17, 2014 10:37 pm

Possibly a ploy to prevent the authorities chasing up the wife or other family members to make them pay for the services provided.
~RJ Paton~

Corsebar
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:35 pm

Re: Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by Corsebar » Wed Jun 18, 2014 10:29 am

Thanks for the replies, just wondering about the Poor House thing or it could be a ploy, although he did seem to be living in a house in Hamilton at the time of the application.

Thanks again,
Ray

Falkyrn
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by Falkyrn » Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:17 pm

It may not have been admittance to the Poorhouse itself - unless you could afford otherwise the main source of medical treatment was often through the hospital which formed part of the Poorhouse.
~RJ Paton~

Currie
Posts: 3924
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 3:20 am
Location: Australia

Re: Poor Law Records Paisley

Post by Currie » Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:43 pm

In Parliamentary Papers prior to 1937 the term “married and separated” occurs only seven times.

1867 - separation from a business partner.
1868 - married and separated prostitutes in Portsmouth.
1882 - married and separated in Scotland and husband imprisoned for non support.
1910 – description of the daughter of a Paisley pauper who cares for her father.
1914 – men in India married and separated from the parental roof.
1923 – an army officer who is married and separated by duty.
1929 - description of a Paisley Poorhouse inmate.

Two of those are for Paisley Poorhouse, which seems a bid odd when some have nothing to do with a marital separation, and Paisley Poorhouse represents only a very small part of the UK and Colonies.

Alan