On this day … 22 August 1835

The Preston Chronicle carried two adverts on its front page that show just how much control employers had over their workers in early nineteenth-century Preston.

The first reads:

Absconded from his apprenticeship
A youth about 18 years of age, of the name of John Spencer, by trade a plasterer. He is about 5ft. 3in. high, and rather dark complexioned, and down-looked. He left the service of his master, Henry Seed, North Road, Preston, on the 10th inst. Any person giving such information as will lead to his detection, will be handsomely rewarded; and any one employing him after this notice will be prosecuted.

The second reads:

Absconded
Whereas, Thomas Heyes, of Preston, boiler maker, hath lately absconded from the employ of George Hill, of Preston, boiler maker, before the term for which he had contracted to serve had expired.
He is aged about 30 years, stands about 5ft. 6in. in height, is light complexioned, and rather lusty.
Any person, or persons who will give such information as will lead to apprehension of the said Thomas Heyes, will receive a reward of one pound, on application to the said George Hill.

It was probably fortunate for John and Thomas that this was before the days of photography, since the descriptions are so vague as to be practically useless: what does โ€˜down-lookedโ€™ mean, and does โ€˜rather lustyโ€™ describe Thomasโ€™s appearance or his character?

They had good reason to fear being identified. The 1823 Master and Servant Act (not repealed until 1875) meant they could be jailed for up to three months for breaching their contracts with their masters.

One of the difficulties facing workers, and this would surely have applied in Preston, was that the magistrates in industrial towns were mainly drawn from employers: in Prestonโ€™s case, the mill owners.

A key study of the workings of master and servant legislation by Douglas Hay examined trends in its use in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. He concluded that the greater use of prison sentences and the continual weakening of the protection the legislation offered to workers meant that โ€˜by the mid-nineteenth century the law of master and servant appeared far more significant in the creation of great social inequalities than it had a century beforeโ€™.

One case Hay discovered involved a Norfolk magistrate named Hoseason:

โ€˜His bailiff brought before him a labourer of 18 named Generel Batterbee who worked on Hoseason’s farm, and Hoseason convicted him for misconduct and refusal to do his work. Batterbee had been in the midst of his dinner after a morning of loading wheat, and refused to cut short his hour’s rest at the demand of the bailiff. The bailiff kicked and punched him, knocked him down, kicked him while on the ground. The servant went to Hoseason (whether as his magistrate or employer is unclear) to complain. Hoseason struck him in the face and immediately made out the warrant for his committal to the house of correction for one month at hard labour, and to be whipped at its conclusion.’

Preston 1832 advert about an absconding apprentice
1835 advert about a Preston absconding worker

Sources
The Preston Chronicle, freely available on line to members of the Lancashire County Council library: https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/libraries-and-archives/libraries/digital-library/newspapers-old-and-new/
Douglas Hay, Master and Servant in England: Using the Law in the 18th and
19th Centuries: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1141&context=scholarly_works


Discover more from preston history

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply