Poverty and Public Health in the old Parish of Oystermouth

Introduction

Oystermouth was a parish in the cwmwd of Gwyr, Cantref of Eginoy and County of Glamorgan, situated on the coast of South Wales. Its boundaries stretched from Caswell Valley in the west over as far as the river in Blackpill in the east. Within it were separate hamlets of Mumbles, Newton, Norton and Blackpill surrounded by fields. Nowadays three parishes of St. Peter's, Oystermouth and Llwynderw serve this same area and its much expanded population, and the locality is now part of Swansea, Wales' second city. Today, we have a national system of benefits, designed to alleviate poverty in times of unemployment and need, but this was not always so.

This article examines the care of the poor and the sick in Oystermouth parish from medieval times until the Edwardian era. Part One explores the operation of the 'Old' and 'New' Poor Laws, Part Two, the coming of Public Health measures during the nineteenth century and Part Three, the treatment of the poor in the Edwardian era.

In 1601, by order of the 43 Elizabeth 1 c 2, 'An Acte for the Reliefe of the Poore' was passed, superceding the 1597 one. In common with all Parishes in England and Wales, Oystermouth was to be responsible for its own ‘poor’. The Law held two main principles, firstly that there was a duty by society to provide work for anyone who needed and was capable of doing it and secondly the right to subsistence for those who could not work, whether through illness or old age.

The Parish would be, until 1834, the unit of Local Government, run by local untrained and predominantly unpaid officials, elected by the local community and known as ‘The Vestry’. It would be made up of Vicar, Churchwardens, Overseers of the Poor, Vestry Clerk and occupiers of land or property above a certain value and the meetings were open to all the inhabitants. However, it was not the practice to allow a vote to the ‘poorer classes’ of ratepayers. The money for the relief was raised by assessing each parishioner's property and levying a ‘rate’ on it. The rate in Oystermouth in the 17th and 18th centuries remains an unknown quantity due to the paucity of records, but becomes evident in the 1830s, when the extant records show that one shilling in the £ was agreed, later to be increased by another shilling in the £. The Vestry met every fortnight to manage all matters relating to the relief of the poor, such as who should be relieved and how. ‘In each case shall take into consideration the character and conduct of the poor person . . . to distinguish . . . the deserving, the idle, extravagant or profligate poor.’ The minutes of each meeting were open to all.

From the Middle Ages, the assumption had been that the relief of the Poor was every Christian's duty, even his privilege, and it had become customary to pay a tithe, or 1/10th of one's income for distribution among the poor. Gradually, it became to be thought of as not so much for the sake of the recipients as to enable the donor to get to paradise in the next life, or, at least, to shorten his time in purgatory. Later, in England and Wales, because of an increasing population and a corresponding increase in the level of poverty, due to war and bad harvests, it was thought necessary to change the system. This switch to the Poor Rates had the effect of gradually, over the years, changing the views of the ratepayers, who now tended to feel that if there was no storing up of glories in heaven, then there was nothing to be gained from generosity. Thus, the Poor came to be seen through the eyes of the Taxpayer and not the Christian. Parish accounts soon came to be subject to much scrutiny, as the conviction spread that much of the expenditure on the Poor was wasteful, that it encouraged people who might have found work for themselves, to rely on Parish Relief. That the Poor were lazy-good-for-nothings, enjoying themselves at the expense of their betters and placing a financial burden on the rest of the community i.e. that poverty was a man's fault, not his misfortune.

Settlement Certificate

Many people tried to better themselves by moving away, but this only moved the problem, not removed it! The Public's irritation was often with those who were originally from other parishes and so from 1662, under the Settlement Act, a Settlement Certificate, had to be obtained by acquiring a dwelling within the locality, which had a rateable value of £10 p.a., or over and by starting to pay local taxes. This of course, nobody in dire straits, would be able to do, thus requiring them to return to their place of birth. Nevertheless, residency over a long period was still no qualification, as even if they had married a local girl and had a family, they could still be returned to their native parish when illness or old age made them a candidate for help, the wife taking on her husband's parish of origin.

Some had jobs in other towns but kept their original settlement and entries in the Vestry book record the Overseer’s 'journey to Neath settling for the poor there, 5/-‘ (November 1835). Many parishes threw out newcomers in case they should become poor, or die and leave a family dependent on the Parish. In 1795, the 35 George III amended the laws so that a man might not be removable unless he actually became in need and chargeable to the parish. The local Accounts show an example of removal from our locality—28 April 1835, ‘M. B. to swear her parish,’ but on 3 May 1835, ‘M. B., an order of removal.’

Indoor and Outdoor relief

Poor Relief was given ‘outdoor’ to various categories of the community in several different ways and in some places, the Vestries rented cottages for the reception of the poor. For example, for several years, the Parish of Oystermouth rented premises from Mr. Wright at The Dove in Norton, which comprised five rooms in which twenty people could be accommodated, though the greatest number ever there at any one time (until 1835) was twelve. These ‘indoor’ paupers were to receive weekly pay of 2/- a week and provide they and their families with food.

‘Outdoor’ paupers were helped with casual or occasional assistance in money or in kind e.g. in October 1834 ‘6/- for cloathing [sic] for H. N.’ and M. D. received shoes, 9/-; W. T. received a shirt, 1/6d and a frock, 1/8d (5 November 1834). On 14 February 1834, lether [sic] and nails and mending J. K.’s shoes cost 1/-. Several payments in money were made—‘M. P. of Brinney is to have 1/- per week for one month to help maintain her child untill shee shall receave [sic] some wages being lately gone to service.’(29 October 1835) and E. P., Widow, is to have 1/6d per week. (10 March 1836) Payments were agreed to cover medical treatment—October 1834, ‘P. W. being unwell and having been relieved before is to have 2/- per week towards his maintenance and the vestry agreed that Dr. Boyson should attend him during his illness.’ Later, on 17 March, 10/- was paid to the Doctor. On 3 September 1835, ‘E. D's son having three wounds to his lim and nee [sic] we consent and agree with Dr. Boyson to call on him and to examine his wounds.’

The Poor could also obtain help towards baptisms and funerals—10 April 1835, paid for the baptizing of D. J.’s child, 2/- and 26 March 1835, funeral expencis [sic] of E. T., £1.

Illegitimacy

An illegitimate child was the responsibility of its parish of birth, therefore many parishes tried to evict any unmarried pregnant women in the area, before they were to give birth. However, if the child was born there, the young woman had to appear before the overseers. At Llanrhidian, 19 April 1836, ‘an order for removal of M. J. and her base child from the parish of Lanriddian [sic] made on the 2nd day of April last, on our parish (Oystermouth) and if removed accordingly, the Overseer is to receave [sic] her and her child into the poor house.’If the parties were both ‘local’, the girl would have to appear before the Overseers and admit the name of the father, who would be then summoned and given several options to pay. For example, (1) pay her enough privately to keep her and the child (2) pay the overseer £40 immediately, which represented £2 for the lying-in and a shilling per week for 14 years (3) sign a bastardy bond and pay the expenses in the future. Entries would appear in the vestry minutes recording that e.g. on Dec. 1834 J. H. consarning [sic] J. G., 3/-. Orphaned or abandoned children were normally left with relatives, but if all these powers regarding its maintenance failed, the child would become the responsibility of the Parish and might be contracted out to parishioners, who, in return would receive a premium from the Parish

Changes needed to the Old Poor Law

Expenditure on the Poor continued to rise during the second half of the eighteenth century and the early part of the nineteenth, putting more pressure on the ratepayers, many of whom were small farmers, who by then, might be feeling the pinch or perhaps becoming in need themselves. The system had worked reasonably well for many years. However, gradually with the ever increasing population, which was not matched by an increasing jobs market, and a worsening economic climate, which sometimes necessitated their being laid off or having fewer hours' work, more people fell into the ranks of ‘The Poor’ and many Parishes could not cope. As the Webbs stated in their book, English Poor Law history, ‘the Poor in the 1830s were worse off than they had been fifty years earlier,’ the causes being inflation, a rising population, 63% in our Parish from 1801-1831. Across Britain in 1802, there were 1,000,000 on relief including 30,000 children under 15 i.e. 11% of the population.

The 'New' Poor Law

In order to make the maintenance of the Poor more cost effective, the Poor Law Amendment Act or ‘New’ Poor Law Act of 1834, introduced ‘Unions’ of parishes to endeavour to deter people from seeking help. It prohibited ‘outdoor relief’, forcing them, if there was absolutely no other alternative, to enter the Workhouses in order to obtain relief. By making the regime within as forbidding as possible, the stigma attached became so immense that going ‘On the Parish’ became something to be avoided at all costs. At first, the twenty-seven parishes of Swansea and Gower combined into one Union, but in 1857, Gower, which included Oystermouth, broke away and formed the Gower Union and from March 1860, when plans were first put forward, its workhouse designed to accommodate fifty inmates, would be situated overlooking Three Cliffs Bay at Penmaen. By 1881, the Master and Matron, were Christopher Davies and his wife, Ruth, but one good sign was that there were only twenty-nine inmates, which included an unknown number of Oystermouth people.

In common with many other towns and villages throughout Victorian Britain, Oystermouth underwent dramatic changes of the most fundamental kind in the latter years of the nineteenth century. There had been a crying need for action on the community's health since the cholera outbreaks of the 1830s and 40s, as the population and consequent number of houses continued to increase. In 1848, Edward Chadwick's Public Health Act stated that towns and villages could adopt a health policy ‘if 10% of the ratepayers petitioned the Central Board’.

The Prince's Fountain

In the early 1860s, Mumbles brought in a contribution to public health, prior to the formation of a Local Board, with the introduction of a communal fountain. Mumbles people all recognise the now-neglected landmark fountain near the Rugby Club, but perhaps not many realise its original purpose.

It was decided to mark the marriage on 10 March 1863, of the then Prince of Wales (later to be King Edward VII) to Princess Alexandra of Denmark, in a way in which the village would benefit too. As clean drinking water was coming to be seen as an important priority in the battle for public health, a communal fountain was decided upon for a village that, as yet, had no proper water supplies.

The villagers celebrated the wedding in style. All the houses and boats in the bay were decked out with flags and bunting. The focus of the celebrations was the laying of the Fountain’s foundation stone with seven hundred children of the Parish taking part in the ceremony, which ended with the singing of ‘God Save the Queen’. They were then formed into processions and marched through the village to the British (site of today’s library) and National (in the Churchrooms) schools, where 'they partook of generous supplies of cake and tea.' Later, they were entertained on the open fields opposite the White Rose.

Additionally, there was a dinner for two hundred ‘aged poor’ of the Parish, paid for by public subscription. This was also held in the British Schoolroom, which had been decorated for the occasion. The Cambrian News told of souvenir tickets printed in gold on a royal blue background being issued and delivered to each recipient in their homes by Mr. Colston, the Headmaster of Thistleboon School. However, some were so infirm that they could not attend and these were delivered of their dinner and a bottle of ‘good beer’ at home. The guests who attended were waited upon by several eminent people from the village and the dinner, provided by Mr. Knight of The Mermaid, consisted of roast beef and pork and boiled beef together with bread, potatoes, carrots, greens or turnips followed by plum-pudding and brandy sauce. Mr. Orrin’s band was in attendance and the old people declared that it was the best day they had ever spent!

A year later on 28 March 1864, the completed fountain was handed over by ‘the Committee of Management’ to its future custodians, the Rev. Samuel Davies, Rector of all Saints Church and the Churchwardens, R.M. Bennett and Jacob Rees. For many years it proved of ‘great and permanent benefit,’ but over time and with the introduction of a mains water supply, it fell into disuse.

Formation of the Local Board

It was not until after the Public Health Act in 1875, introduced to try to combat poor living conditions, by now known to spread diseases such as cholera -- and following a local poll to judge opinion, that a Local Board was eventually set up in the Parish to control various environmental aspects i.e clean water, drainage and scavenging. It met at ‘Mr. Orrin's rooms’ in the former British School premises in Dunns Lane, on the site of the present‑day library. Its first members were Samuel Horman Horman Fisher, John and William Burt, John Tudor, Thomas Gammon, James Nettell, William Clement, Thomas Lloyd, John Bevan and John and Richard Woolacott. The rateable value of the Parish was £9934 and, at that meeting, they voted to raise a rate of one shilling in the £ to cover the cost of cleaning up the locality.

Various Officers had to be elected. The Medical Officer who had to, according to the new law, be a Registered Doctor, was Dr. Morris, duly appointed at a salary of £30 p.a. John Webborn became Collector of Rates, at £15 p.a. and John Rosser, Inspector of Nuisances, at £20 p.a.

Cleaning up

Much needed to be done as ‘in all accessible spots about the cottages, there are collections of decaying vegetables, slops and excreta.’ Drains and dry‑ash closets were to be dug by the residents and two scavengers to be employed to clear the rubbish — Mr. Morris for the western part at £40 p.a. and Mr. Eley for the eastern section at £30 p.a. It might appear strange today, that two of the butchers should also be the two village scavengers!

Slaughtering of cattle would henceforth need licensing and Messrs. Eley, Morris, Williams and Peachey put in applications. There was also a ‘man and horse’ needed in order to ‘water the main road as often as necessary’ at a pay of 6/‑ a day — B. Williams and his horse obtained the job. Other roads had to be cleared as, in the case of Castle Lane, where ‘there was stagnant water and . . . several heaps of stable manure and vegetable matter are deposited and brambles reach nearly from one side to the other.’ Bye‑laws were implemented and notices served on residents who did not deal with ‘nuisances’ on their property.

Clean water

For clean water, pumps were installed outside the 'Ship and Castle' at Newton and at Norton Square. Six wells were dug at ‘the George’, Village Lane, Castleton, Church Park, outside the National school and Chapel Street, and the villagers also had the use of the communal 'Prince's' fountain, erected back in 1863. Some of these wells, however, became contaminated by dirty water seeping into them from surrounding privies. Later, a system of pumped water from Caswell, via Newton, was instituted, although, even with this, all sorts of things could come out of the taps e.g. worms! However, it came to be realised that a co‑ordinated approach was required to combat the piecemeal proposals for public drainage, so, by 1882, ten tenders had been received for ‘a regular system of drainage for the district’ and Mr. Rhys Davies of Brecon won the contract.

Planning Permission

As well as all these factors, the Board was also in charge of overseeing planning permission for new buildings and one such request was received on 20 October 1881 from ‘Taylor and Co. for additions to their premises at The Dunns’ and, another on 13 July 1882, for ‘a house and shop in The Dunns for Mr. Sanders.’ Gas street lighting was introduced in the village from 1869 but, by January 1880 ‘calico sheets were ordered’ for them because they kept blowing out in the wind and Mr. Hoskins was appointed ‘lighter of lamps’ for the pay of 5/‑ per week.

Health Matters

‘Without question, this must be one of the healthiest places in Great Britain,’ said Dr. Jumeaux, by now M.O. to the Local Board, at the meeting on 8 April 1880. Unbelievably, this had been found to be so at a time when there was much poverty as the oyster industry was gradually dying. The people must have been a hardy breed! Nevertheless, there was disease and childhood was a hazardous time. The infamous cholera epidemic of 1849, had killed only two villagers, compared with the industrial towns of Swansea, which had lost 262 and Merthyr, 539. The General Board of Health issued a list of precautions, which were to be taken in the event of an outbreak and various trade advertisements appeared which claimed to be ‘a sure preventive’.

There were many cases of measles in the epidemics of 1880, 1885, 1892 and 1894; of whooping cough in 1885 and 1897 and scarlet fever in 1876, 1891 and 1892. In the 1876 outbreak, there were four deaths in three weeks ‘near the George’. The only means of curtailing the spread of these diseases at that time, was to send any pupils who had disease in their families, home from school, and failing that, to close the school.

Besides these ailments, there were also several outbreaks of small-pox and, in 1880, there were two fatalities, one being a resident of Village Lane. The Council ordered the families to burn the deceaseds' bedding, but requests were refused until the Board offered compensation! Typhoid also broke out and, in 1882, there were six cases, one ‘a lad named Hullin living with Mrs. Lewis near the Post Office’, but there were no fatalities.

Long Livers

However, the healthy climate of the village (at least by the standards of the day) seems to have made up for the somewhat dubious sanitary arrangements, childhood diseases continuing to be the dreaded killer. Notwithstanding, if they managed to survive all these hazards, there was a good chance of reaching a ripe old age, as Mr. Colston's 1863 survey of the ‘two hundred aged poor' of the Parish, had shown. He found that one was over 100, thirteen were over 80, forty‑five between 70 and 80, and fifty-three between 60 and 70. These, did not, of course, include those ‘aged wealthier’ villagers, so this was quite an achievement.

The Local Board continued its good work and became the Oystermouth Urban District Council in 1894. However, it took many years before all areas had clean drinking water — Newton school still had only a cask in the 1890s and even in the late 1940s, some cottagers in Hall bank continued to have to use earth closets.

By the end of the nineteenth century, the parish of Oystermouth possessed many fine houses, whose owners were Solicitors or Doctors etc., and there had been a huge influx of people, such as teachers and tradespeople, to the new houses being built at Oakland and Queens Roads, Promenade and Devon Terraces. Yet for many others, there still remained the spectre of the dreaded Workhouse, which from 1857, for Mumbles people had been situated at Penmaen, overlooking Three Cliffs Bay. Today, this is a select home for Senior Citizens.

Board of Guardians

Back in 1901, The Presiding Officer of the Board of Guardians was the Rev. J. V. Roberts, the Relieving Officer, Mr. S. Bevan and the representatives (or Overseers) for Oystermouth were Richard Woolacott, a Farmer from Newton, and Robert Morris, who was a Butcher in Newton Road. In 1910, there were seven representatives from the Parish on the Board of Guardians — the Revs. Harold Williams and T. Davis and Messrs. A. S. Beer, H. Davies, J. Harris, H. Beynon, and J. Sanders. The Board, in the past, had been elected from the wealthier sections of the community, as there had been a property qualification to stand, but, as from 1892, this had been abolished, leading to a wider cross‑section of people submitting themselves for election. Their job was to administer the money from the local ratepayers, allocated for the ‘Relief of the Poor’, in the most efficient way that they could. The needs of the ‘Poor’ had to be balanced by the willingness of the ratepayers to fund the system, consequently money was always a problem e.g. in January 1905, a proposal was put to the meeting, to decrease or cease outdoor relief to those persons ‘who were known to habitually frequent public houses or who were under the influence of intoxicating liquor’. Another suggestion was to offer them ‘Indoor Relief’ i.e. a place in the workhouse, as a deterrent.

Tenders for Services

Annual tenders for services to the workhouse were re‑allocated in February 1905 to W. S. Clarke of Swansea for groceries, W. Abraham for meat and M. Perry of Argyle Street for boots. Miss Talbot of Penrice Castle would continue to provide free firewood if transport could be supplied. In 1906, the contract for ‘pauper funerals’ went to David Lloyd of Blackpill.

Old Age Pension

By November 1908, there had been 200 applications in Mumbles and Gower, for the Old Age Pension (introduced that year by Lloyd George) for those over 70. This would give the elderly some security, although the Workhouse continued to be thought (presumably by those who did not have to live there) a necessity for the very poorest of the community.

Christmas Time

Gradually, as a more enlightened attitude to poverty emerged and Christmas became a time to think of the underprivileged and in December 1905, a little Christmas cheer was extended to the inmates. It was decided to give them a festive allowance of beer and a dinner of roast beef and plum pudding. As an extra, the men would be given 2oz of tobacco and the women and children, fruit. That year too, there would also be extra relief for ‘outdoor paupers’— 2s for bedridden cases, 1s for adults and 6d for each child!

By July 1908, a Report from the Board stated that the cost of maintenance of each inmate was £5..16s..7d for the half‑year ending the previous Lady‑day and for the Michaelmas half‑year would be £5..14s..4d—the difference being that clothing and drapery were purchased during the first half.

Workhouse Regulations

There were further regulations which governed such aspects of daily life as the cataloguing of inmates' property on entry; lists of prohibited articles such as tobacco, food or commodities ‘conducive to gaming’; the bathing of inmates on admittance and at regular intervals (in 9½ inches of water at 88‑98 F); the uniform clothing supplied to all inmates, which was instantly recognisable to those outside; and compulsory attendance at regular religious services. The sexes were stringently segregated and the times of waking, meals and retiring at night were all strictly controlled and signalled by a bell, which was to be obeyed promptly. (However, there were three meals a day, to which perhaps, few of them had had access, outside in the everyday world.)

Working Hours

Inmates could be employed from 7 a.m.‑12 noon and 1‑6 p.m. in the summertime and 8‑12 noon in the winter, but no male was to work with females or vice versa. They were allowed out, other than to work and, at these times, were permitted to wear their own clothes.

Punishments

Punishments could be dispensed for such offences as willful absence, slovenly dress or uncleanliness, yet the long list of rules concludes with the following sentence —‘ No physical force, on any account whatsoever, is to be used, to compel an inmate to obey an order, no matter how lawful . . . an inmate who refuses to obey . . . shall be dealt with under article 34.’

Part of Article 34 of Workhouse Rules states that-

Any pauper who shall neglect to observe such of the regulations herein contained as are applicable to and binding on him:-

Or who shall make any noise when silence is ordered to be kept

Or shall use obscene or profane language

Or shall by word or deed insult or revile any person

Or shall threaten to strike or to assault any person

Or shall not duly cleanse his person

Or shall refuse or neglect to work, after having been required to do so

Or shall pretend sickness

Or shall play at cards or other games of chance

Or shall enter or attempt to enter, without permission, the ward or yard appropriated to any class of paupers other than that to which he belongs

Or shall misbehave in going to, at, or returning from public worship out of the workhouse, or at prayers in the workhouse

Or shall return after the appointed time of absence, when allowed to quit the workhouse temporarily

Or shall wilfully disobey any lawful order of any officer of the workhouse Shall be deemed Disorderly

The Beginning of the end of the Workhouse

The end of the system was a long time in coming. In 1905, the Government had set up a Royal Commission on the ‘Poor law and the Unemployed’. However, its members were unable to agree on recommendations and so, in 1909 two further reports— the Majority and the Minority appeared. One favoured a thorough reform of the existing system and the other, the complete abolition of the Poor law, although no action was taken on either. However, the introduction of the old age pension in 1908 and unemployment insurance schemes in 1911 began to provide the basis for a new approach to social welfare.

In 1913, a new and hopefully, more compassionate, Poor Law Act was passed, following on a greater public awareness of workhouse conditions, a changing attitude to poverty, the extension of the franchise, implementation of the 1906 Liberal Budget and the foundation of the Welfare state. Henceforth, the Workhouse was to be known as the ‘Poor Law Institution’—the name Union Workhouse ceasing to exist at least in theory. Among its many regulations was one, which stated that ‘all children under 3 shall be placed in separate institutions, free from the taint of the Workhouse.’ As there were only 12 such children in the whole of the Gower Union, it was thought locally, that the cost would be prohibitive.

The Poor Law system, which had begun in 1601 in the reign of Elizabeth I and had evolved over the years, began to be dismantled by the Local Government Act of 1929, which came into effect on 31 March 1930, under which the responsibilities of the Boards of Guardians were handed over to County Boroughs and County Councils. But the absolute end of the system did not come until the National Assistance Act of 1948, which made provision of assistance a national obligation.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

All Saints' Church Churchwardens' Accounts WGA, cat. no. P/115/CW/261

All Saints' Church Parish Records, author's own copy

All Saints' Church Overseers' Accounts WGA, cat. no. P/115/CW/292

Minute Books of the Oyst. Local Board WGA, cat. no. TC 68/1/1, 68/1/2, 68/1/3, 68/1/4

Census Returns, 1881

Minute Books of the Board of Guardians for the Gower Union. WGA, Cat. No. U/G 1/1, 1/2, 1/3 and 1/4

Parliamentary Papers, 1842, XIX, pp.42-3

Cambrian News, 16 March 1860, 10 March 1863, 28 March 1864

Secondary Sources

Briggs, A., The Social history of England (London, 1984)

Davies, J., A History of Wales (London, 1993)

Hammond J.L. and B., The Labourer, 1760‑1832 (Stroud, 1995)

Harrison, J.F.C., The Early Victorians (London, 1971)

C.P. Hill, British Economic and Social History, 1700-1982, 1984

Inglis, Brian, Poverty and the Industrial Revolution (London, 1971)

Lodwick, J &V., The Story of Carmarthen (Carmarthen, 1994)

May, Trevor, The Victorian Workhouse, Princes Risborough, 1999

McLaughlin, Eve, Illegitimacy (Birmingham, 1985)

McLaughlin, Eve, Annals of the Poor (Birmingham, 1986)

Powell, C., Inklemakers — Life in nineteenth‑century Oystermouth, 1993

Andy Reid, The Union Workhouse, Chichester, 1994

Taylor, G., The Problem of Poverty, 1660‑1834 (London, 1969)

Thomas, N., The Mumbles: Past and Present, 1978

Webb, S and B., English Poor Law History: the Old Poor Law (London, 1927)

Local Historian vol 8, no; 7 1969

http://www.historyhome.co.uk/peel/poorlaw/ruleswh.htm

N.B. In order to maintain confidentiality, only initials have been used when mentioning items of relief.

If further identification is required, the Overseers accounts are available to view at West Glamorgan Archive Office