Tango01 | 26 Dec 2017 12:28 p.m. PST |
"IN the early 19th century there was certainly no talk of redundancies in the British Army. Quite the contrary, it had more than enough trouble hanging on to those who had been cajoled into joining its ranks without getting rid of any on purpose. During the Napoleonic Wars the strength of the Army was 250,000, the highest ever recorded, but there was desertion on an industrial scale and this led to the publication of regular lists of personel who had gone AWOL, from the humble footslogger to officers…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
huevans011 | 26 Dec 2017 1:18 p.m. PST |
But there was nothing to stop a man hiking to the next shire and changing his name. No ID in those days. |
rmaker | 26 Dec 2017 1:38 p.m. PST |
On the other hand, everybody in the village would recognize him as a "foreigner". |
arthur1815 | 26 Dec 2017 2:35 p.m. PST |
The leather stock worn around the neck by enlisted men tended to leave a rather distinctive mark, I believe. |
miniMo | 26 Dec 2017 7:43 p.m. PST |
With a 40 or 60 shilling reward offered, there might be a profit to be split with a conspiratorial bounty hunter. As long as the deserter doesn't mind picking up more floggings and a branding, and trusts their bounty-hunter companion to actually split the money… |
huevans011 | 27 Dec 2017 4:22 p.m. PST |
On the other hand, everybody in the village would recognize him as a "foreigner". Plenty enough of those at harvest time. And many a lonely widow glad of it! |
Tango01 | 27 Dec 2017 10:44 p.m. PST |
|
Captain de Jugar | 03 Jan 2018 10:20 a.m. PST |
In the early 19th Century no one was free to live just where they pleased. The local authorities were legally entitled to 'move on' any traveller who could not prove that he had sufficient means to support himself and might therefore become a burden on the local 'charities'. And this was vigorously implemented in every parish. |
huevans011 | 03 Jan 2018 8:38 p.m. PST |
In the early 19th Century no one was free to live just where they pleased. The local authorities were legally entitled to 'move on' any traveller who could not prove that he had sufficient means to support himself and might therefore become a burden on the local 'charities'. And this was vigorously implemented in every parish. A bluff, young, able bodied man would likely get a station somewhere. Those rules would be directed at widows, orphans and the old and crippled. |
britishbulldog | 07 Jan 2018 12:35 p.m. PST |
This thread has raised some interesting comments regarding the treatment of persons not born in the parish where they resided. During the 19th century the practice of 'moving on' residents who had not been born in the parish where they resided was implemented by the parish overseers when the resident person applied to the parish for financial assistance. Before removal the parish overseers had to satisfy themselves that the person concerned had no recourse to local parish funds and often the process of doing this was a long drawn out one. In the event persons were removed from the parish the cost of removing them was borne by the exporting parish. These 'removals' were not necessarily directly related to seasonal work drying up. Hueyevans011 is quite right it generally applied to widows, single women with children, unemployed men and their families, if they had one. Infirm people were treated no differently than able bodied people in as much as they were entitled to parish relief if born in the parish just like anybody else. In the case of children, (both sexes), whose parent(s) could not support them they were often taken in by local farmers as "apprentices" from the age of nine until they married or attained the age of 21. The farmer provided food and clothing in return for work. As we are all aware the regiments in Napoleonic times were made up of men from counties other than the regimental county and many of these were no doubt "farm apprentices" who had absconded and sought a different vocation. Hope this explanation has helped throw more light on this social aspect of the 18/19th century. |
Tango01 | 07 Jan 2018 3:00 p.m. PST |
And of course… if you have enought money… not matter were you go… or if they know you…(smile) Amicalement Armand
|