school (£462, 83% of the total income from 1848 to 1849). However, the school received government grants beginning in 1856 as a ragged school; the ratio of the government grants to the school’s total income from 1856 to 1857 was not large, at 35%.
In the 1860s, the government grant was gradually increased; it was £975 (the number of children was 150, of whom one-third were outmates) in 1865, £1,244 (of 222 children, one-fourth were outmates) in 1867, £2,566 (228 children, all inmates) in 1869, and £2,549 (216 children, all inmates) in 1871.
After 1872, Ardwick Green (for boys and girls) and Barns’ Home (for boys) received separate grants from the government and School Board. The sum of the government grant (58%) was very large compared with those of the School Board (15%) from 1 September 1873 to 1 September 1874; in 1880, the rates were 50% and 26%, respectively (Table 3). On the one hand, the public grant was increased rapidly, but on the other hand, the amount of charitable contributions decreased. As the schools were funded and maintained by local taxation, people who had donated to the schools questioned why they should pay twice to educate the children of the poor.57 However, after local authorities began to issue grants to these schools, activities seeking voluntary contributions were continued. We can probably understand this in the context of the culture of the urban elite. They held public support for
54 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1880, 37. 55 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 19 July 1871, 105. 56 Ibid., 5-8.
charity as an important aspect of social life. They donated money for the public interest as an obligation of the urban elite and as participation in urban social life at the same time.58 In the case of Manchester, women were the most important and active collectors. They used their network to seek these voluntary contributions and organized the Ladies Association, comprising around 600 women.59
Table 3. The change in the category and the amount of income (£) from 1 September to 1 September 1848–1849, 1856–1857, 1862–1863, 1867–1868, and 1873–1874 and from 1 January to 31 December 1880.
* After 1875, the term of the account was changed from 1 January to 31 December.
Source: Annual Reports of Manchester Industrial School, Ardwick Green, 1849, 1857, 1863, 1868, 1874, Manchester Archives, Manchester Central Library (RfNo. GB127. M369/1/4/1-4).
58 Ellis, The Georgian Town; Rosemary Sweet, The English Town 1680-1840: Government, Society and Culture, Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 1999; Shusaku Kanazawa, Charitei to Igirisu Kindai [Charity and Modern Britain], Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 2008; F.K. Prohchaska, Women and Philanthropy in 19th Century England, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1980.
59 The list of the members of the Ladies Association in the 7th to 34th Annual Report, 1853 to 1880.
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 1848-1849 1856-1857 1862-1863 1867-1868 1873-1874 1880※ 1848-1849 1856-1857 1862-1863 1867-1868 1873-1874 1880※ to Balance 36 16 133 549 842 0
to Interest (Endowment and
Bank) 1 9 143 148 230 5
to Government Grant (Ardwick
Green) 0 359 834 2,187 1,956 2,250
to Government Grant (Barns'
Home) 0 0 0 0 3,052 2,967
to Grant from School Board
( Ardwick Green) 0 0 0 0 540 915
to Grant from School Board
(Barns' Home) 0 0 0 0 778 1,825
to Subscriptions and Donations 462 440 435 489 295 231
to Ladies Association 0 137 284 208 230 158
to Payment from Children's Parents
or Friends 0 0 43 74 44 36
Wages and Profit on Work Done by
the Children 53 68 79 40 607 1,943
Management of and Local Networks for Educating Vagrant Children│ 109
Table 4. Categories of treatment of vagrant children found by the beadle during the six weeks ending 25 August 1880
No. Category of Treatment Number of Boys Number of Girls Total
1 Cases on hand and in progress 7 4 11
2 Cases inquired into and reported
a. Restored to their homes 1 1 2
b. Parents warned 12 9 21
c. To be further watched 5 3 8
3 Cases brought before magistrates
a. Remanded and still under remand 4 0 4
b. Warned and restored to parents 12 0 12
c. Sent to industrial school 3 6 9
4 Cases otherwise disposed of
a. Sent to the workhouse in Swinton 1 1 2
b. Reported to Bradford School Board 1 0 1
c. Reported to Officer, Newton Head 1 0 1
d. Induced to attend school regularly 4 3 7
Total 51 27 78
Source: ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1880, 1-2, Minutes of Miscellaneous Committees of
Manchester School Board, Manchester Archives, Manchester Central Library (RfNo. GB127. M65/1/8/5).
As a result of the rise in the relative importance of the government grants, the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools had to accept children sentenced by magistrates instead of voluntary enrolments. However, the treatment of young offenders and vagrant children was one of the most serious problems in Manchester; therefore, enrolling sentenced children was not contrary to their mission. In addition, the grants from school boards were gradually increased, and the Manchester School Board had more influence on the managers of the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools than the Home Office, which inspected it only once a year. The Industrial Schools Committee of the Manchester School Board invited the governor and secretary to their meetings several times to hear directly about ideas for or the condition of the school and conducted detailed inspections.60
While the government legislated the creation of industrial schools and reformatories for the treatment of vagrant, neglected, and destitute children and young offenders, only some of these children were sent to industrial schools. The school boards tried to find a solution for the treatment of vagrant children. A sentence of enrolment in an industrial school was one way of dealing with these children. In 1871, James B. Power, as the beadle, an officer of the board, was employed from the hours of nine am to twelve pm and six pm to eleven pm to find and inquire about vagrant children on the streets in Manchester. In addition to the work of patrolling the streets, the beadle was instructed to obtain in every case the full particulars as to the circumstances of the parents or guardians of every child committed to the industrial schools by the board.61 Before the beadle was hired by the Manchester School Board, a
60 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 28 June 1871, 92-97. 61 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1871, 141.
charitable person or policeman who found a vagrant child made contact with the school officers. Table 4 shows the categories of treatment of vagrant children found by the beadle.
When the beadle found vagrant children, he inquired closely regarding the condition of the family budgeting and the treatment of the child in the home, and then he decided on the reaction to the family and child. He classified them into three categories of treatment: (1) direct reaction (returned children to their homes, warned parents, or kept watch), (2) appearance before a magistrate, and (3) other. Most frequently, the parents were warned. Magistrates often decided to warn parents not to send the children to a certified industrial school. For the beadle, it was very important to know the situation of the family of vagrant children because many vagrant children had a mother or father or both. Indeed, most children of the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools had a parent. 49% of the 5,563 children who entered the school from September 1746 to December 1894 had parents, 32% had only a mother, 14% had only a father, and 5% were orphans.62
J. B. Power reported on the family of a child at the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools who had an insurmountable difficulty as follows:
The case where the heaviest burden seems to fall is that of Thomas Batters by whose weekly earnings appear to be 10s. per week, out of which five persons have to supported and 2s. 8d. rent to be paid. The sum due to the Secretary State with police expenses already amounts to 15s. 6d. and increase at the rate of 1s. per week, the amount claimed. They are in very poor circumstances, and can neither pay the rent, nor the 15s. 6d. to the police. Their sad state chiefly arises from the delicate health of the mother.63
The Secretary of State claimed a weekly payment from a parent or step-parent ‘if of sufficient ability’ according to the act, but many parents could not afford to pay. The beadle had to judge whether the family could make a weekly payment or not.64
In addition to economic difficulties, the beadle often faced the difficulty of public interference with parental authority. Some parents disliked the visits and support from the beadle. On this point, Rev. J. F. Bryan, the governor of Ardwick Green, had the same impression. Rev. Bryan testified at the meeting of the Industrial School Committee that ‘parents generally were very unwilling to give up their children, as they found them useful for begging purposes comparatively few of the children were deserted by their parents.’65 It is likely that cases of cruelty were brought before magistrates, who then sent the children to an industrial school to separate them from the parents if the children were judged able to bear the industrial training.
The judgment on the ability to bear industrial training also was very important to enter the industrial schools. For example, one girl who was sent to the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools for begging by magistrates was ‘subsequently discharged an account of
62 The 3rd to 48th Annual Report, 1846 to 1894.
63 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1871, 157. 64 Ibid., 139.
Management of and Local Networks for Educating Vagrant Children│ 111
her having taken the smallpox whilst under remand.’66 The beadle continued to watch this girl after annulment of the sentence to the industrial school. He confirmed and reported that she was at work at the meeting of the Industrial School Committee the following month.67
Other notable cases were reported to another school board. Children who lived in other towns were often found to be vagrants in Manchester. The school boards established and maintained close coordination with each other not only in finding vagrant children but also in sending them to industrial schools. On 26 August 1880, the number of children attending industrial schools at the Manchester School Board’s cost was 624, 518 of whom were boys and 106 were girls. Regarding religion, there were 394 Protestant children and 230 Catholics. 364 of 624 children were admitted to the industrial schools in Manchester, and 260 were sent to other local industrial schools: Liverpool, Birmingham, York, and Glasgow.68
In contrast, the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools accepted children from various regions at each school board’s cost. For example, in 1879, Ardwick Green received grants from the Manchester (£447), Salford (£175), London (£93), Leicester (£66), Norwich (£13), and Stalybridge (£2) school boards; Barns’ Home received grants from the Manchester (£440), London (£962), Salford (£270), Oldham (£13), Nottingham (£9), Blackburn (£7), West Bromwich (£5), Leicester (£4), and Reading (£2) school boards; and Sale received grants from the Manchester (£223), Salford (£80), Leicester (£28), Bolton (£7), Liverpool (£6), and Derby (£4) school boards.69
In addition to the cost per head, the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools contracted to receive grants for the acceptance of a fixed number of children from other school boards. For example, a contract of the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools with the Salford School Board of 16 July 1881 stated that both agreed that Barns’ Home would ‘receive a grant of the sum of four hundred pounds from the school board of the district of the borough of Salford’ in exchange for acceptance of the children ‘not exceeding at any one time the number of eighty boys’ as may be sent to Barns’ Home ‘by the magistrates acting for Salford.’70
The Manchester Certified Industrial Schools was not only way to treat vagrant children found on the streets by the beadle. The beadle and magistrates chose appropriate steps depending on the children’s circumstances, namely having been returned home, parents warned, under observation, or induced to attend elementary school. They sometimes had to decide the children to send the industrial schools to separate them from the parents. Among the methods of dealing with vagrant children, sending them to an industrial school was a potentially effective way to send vagrant children into the local community. The Manchester Certified Industrial School tried to perform their duties to educate vagrant children and bring them up to be industrious workers. The main objective of the Manchester Certified Industrial
66 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1871, 140. 67 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 15 September 1871, 155. 68 ‘Proceedings of the Industrial School Committee’, 26 August 1880, 37. 69 The 33rd Annual Report, 1879, 19, 26, 32.
70 ‘Minutes of Executive Committee’, between 14 July 1881 and 4 August 1881, Manchester Archives, Manchester Central Library (RfNo. GB127. M369/1/1/4).
Schools was not to raise vagrant and destitute children in a more favourable situation or to prevent the children from entering a career of crime but to send the children into society ‘successfully’ as workers. Moreover, they could not fulfil these duties without cooperating with other institutions and people. Support networks were indispensable to the management for the treatment and education of vagrant children.
Conclusion
In late nineteenth-century England, the state intervened in the education of vagrant children by enacting legislation, awarding grants, and conducting inspections. The government provided money and inspected the management of each industrial school. However, the power to make decisions was put into the hands of local people, including who should be sent to the industrial schools, how the children should be educated through industrial training, and how the children and their families were treated with respect to public responsibility. In the case of Manchester, local people tried to find vagrant children and collect information about the children and their families to decide on the treatment of vagrant children using the networks of the people of Manchester and other local authorities, cutting across religious, political, and regional boundaries. It is likely that everyone who was concerned about the education and treatment of vagrant children had their own reasons for supporting the management of the Manchester Certified Industrial Schools. Some took pity on poor children and families, while others considered this support a solution to a serious problem in the maintenance of public order, the responsibility of wealthy people, or participation in urban social life. Whatever they thought, there is no doubt that many women and men collected donations, placed orders for various products made by the children at the school, and offered employment to the children after they left school. Of course, it was very hard to manage. The beadle of the School Board and the officers of the school faced refusal of support and intervention from parents. The governors and schoolmasters experienced difficulty with the children. The officers of the school and the Committee of the School Board had to regulate and negotiate with other school boards or the Home Office and their inspectors. They served as a welfare complex to deal with the education of vagrant children.