• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

Matilda Mayes

It says Ambrose Biggs. At one time he was a councillor and mayor. I'd surmise he and George Goodrick served on the board (or something similar) that decided what to do with the children in that situation.

The board (or whatever) maybe didn't sit everyday, so some children probably had to wait a few days before it was decided what to do with them.
 
Thanks for that @MWS I was trying to decipher the names and the explanation helps. I didn't know who Ambrose Biggs was and was actually googling when you posted but google didn't come up with much for me. It is confusing that Matilda in particular is listed on the 1871 census at Gem Street but admitted 1873 so I surmise she went back home and perhaps things didn't go well? She was aged 3 on the 1871 census....and shes a year out on their admission record being aged 7 in 1873 when she would have been 6 but I know record keeping as we all know has errors
 
The school was funded largely by subscriptions and donations, along with the board and lodging payments for asylum residents, and the income from the children’s labour. In 1858 the school began to take in a large number of children of soldiers killed during the Crimean War, who were paid for by the Patriotic Fund Committee. By 1864, however, income from this source was beginning to decline, and the school began to suffer financial difficulties; this led to the decision of the governors, in 1868, to certify the school under the Industrial Schools Act 1866. This meant that children between the ages of seven and 14 could be placed in the school by magistrates if they were vagrants, if they were under 12 and had committed an offence normally punishable by prison, or were beyond the control of their parents. The maintenance of each child was then paid for by the state, although the school continued to rely on donations and subscriptions for further expenditure. - so most likely Eliza and Matilda were placed by magistrates. Would they have been stealing or begging at their age?

By 1873 there was an increasing view that girls and boys should not be accommodated in the same industrial schools, and this, along with the overcrowded state of the Gem Street premises, prompted the governors to seek separate accommodation for the girls. Accordingly, in December 1873, the girls were removed to a board school at Sparkhill, and from then on the Birmingham Industrial School took only boys. The school by this time was licensed to accommodate 152 children.

So having done a bit more reading the girls were sent to an industrial school for girls which opened in 1873 with children admitted Dec 1873. The site was previously a convalescence hospital. Most of the initial intake came from the girls department at Gem Street which was being closed. Several girls were causing problems apparently that came from Gem Street, and the new school was taking 27 children. Classroom performances were improving but not far advanced. In 1877 the school was closed to make money saving measures and girls were transferred to York, Bath and Liverpool. I know in 1881 Matilda wasnt in birmingham but at Walter Major Lesters home, Kirkdale, Lancashire. So am assuming they transferred Matilda to Liverpool. Re Eliza....she would have been 16 by 1877 so perhaps she was free from the school then?
 
Last edited:
https://calmview.birmingham.gov.uk/...x?src=CalmView.Catalog&field=RefNo&key=MS+994 Hi Lynn I dont know if this link will work for you and I am so grateful for the info you got for me on Matilda. When I look at this link and open up 1-3 in particular it says that there should be initial registers of admissions, discharge and aftercare etc etc.....I know there's a 100yr rule which would have passed for Eliza and Matilda and I know records were lacking and often inaccurate but really surprised there was nothing on record about what happened to them when they left. I think Eliza and Matilda must have been readmitted well certainly Matilda, I dont know when Eliza first went into Gem Street as she was 9yrs old with the record you kindly found for me. But Matilda must have had an initial record given she was only 3 when in the 1871 census and surely they didnt charge children back then with Vagrancy? I like you think its very sad that children were charged with that given their age and the desperation of their plight
 
hi vixen until i found the girls in the admissions book we did not know how long they were to stay at gem st but i went through the discharge book i was given anyway in case they were released earlier...there must be other discharge books that cover the years they could have been released but that would take an age to go through them as we cant be certain of the year...regarding matilda who we know was at gem st in 1871...i checked admissions from 1869 just in case she was there then but the only admission i could find was the one for 1873...but at least we now know the reasons behind them being placed at the school..

regarding where you cant make out mothers name on elizas record...looks to me something like sybil but of course know its sabina..it reads.
the father thomas mayes resides in a delapidated house in cherry st..labourer..the mothers name is as i said looks like sybil mayes..they are both disreputable persons..

lyn
 
Last edited:
Thanks Lynn, thats quite condemning of both parents. I find it strange that if Sabina went to prison why there doesn't appear at present any records of that. And to describe them as Vagrants, really harsh considering these were two vulnerable kids. Is it possible do you think that with Matilda who we know was in Gem Street before the admission of 1873 that she was returned home or collected perhaps by Thomas but then things didn't work out? She obviously would not have been deemed vagrant surely aged 3? Did you find anything on John's inquest yet? It may have said more about Sabina? Really appreciate your help.
 
Thanks Lynn, thats quite condemning of both parents. I find it strange that if Sabina went to prison why there doesn't appear at present any records of that. And to describe them as Vagrants, really harsh considering these were two vulnerable kids. Is it possible do you think that with Matilda who we know was in Gem Street before the admission of 1873 that she was returned home or collected perhaps by Thomas but then things didn't work out? She obviously would not have been deemed vagrant surely aged 3? Did you find anything on John's inquest yet? It may have said more about Sabina? Really appreciate your help.
all what you say could have happened but alas you may never find out for certain...most of us on here have family mysteries that just cant be solved...the word vagrant does seem harsh but i guess back then it was just the way they put it for children and adults alike who wandered the streets begging for food. etc..they had to put something down...

just one last thing..here is eliza morton on the 1911 census living with daughter margaret and her husband...oddly at gem st..click on it then click on the little spy glass top right of the page and it will enlarge


download (5).png


lyn
 
Last edited:
  • Appreciate
Reactions: MWS
all what you say could have happened but alas you may never find out for certain...most of us on here have family mysteries that just cant be solved...the word vagrant does seem harsh but i guess back then it was just the way they put it for children and adults alike who wandered the streets begging for food. etc..they had to put something down...

just one last thing..here is eliza morton on the 1911 census living with daughter margaret and her husband...oddly at gem st..click on it then click on the little spy glass top right of the page and it will enlarge


View attachment 191247


lyn
Thanks. I did have this but hadn't realised the address until you pointed this out. I dont think Thomas and Eliza married as I havent yet found a marriage record for them and I noted on here how she is down as Morton and Thomas died 1892.

On the documents you found = admission records...they have Thomas down as Labourer - Thomas was a fishmonger/dealer, journeyman would that have been classed back then as labourer? Was surprised to see this given all his records put him in the fish trade. Still weird too lack of 1871 census for the Mayes brothers and for sabina. I looked last night for criminal records and even tried searching newspapers but so far nothing

I also read last night that many of the girls who left Gem Street Industrial School went on to become domestic servants and I did come across a record for an Eliza Mayes who was working as a domestic servant and did wonder if this may be Matilda's sister. However the surname is down as Maisey and Eliza was Mayes on Gem street so dont know https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discover...7e0217fc&_phsrc=UEf754&_phstart=successSource

Then found this one, again surname May https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discover...8537986c&_phsrc=UEf762&_phstart=successSource In this one, this Eliza is at a lodging house for girls

Also found another https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discover...1046dccb&_phsrc=UEf760&_phstart=successSource Surname Mays
 
Last edited:
Thomas' sister in law (James' wife) and nephew are listed on Cherry St on the 1871 census, so perhaps he was living with them for a time.
 
Thomas' sister in law (James' wife) and nephew are listed on Cherry St on the 1871 census, so perhaps he was living with them for a time.
Thanks for this, I will check that census out and take a look. Is it the one with William on it? I do find it strange there being no records of sabina other than marriage. Eliza also seems to feature a lot in their lives, perhaps as you say because she was living with them? I find it strange she was at the death registration of one of the boys and not sabina.
 
It is frustrating, with so few mentions of her it's difficult to know if the things we know are true or not. Corroboration is important the further back you go as info becomes less reliable.
 
It is frustrating, with so few mentions of her it's difficult to know if the things we know are true or not. Corroboration is important the further back you go as info becomes less reliable.
I agree. I havent been on for a while and I find myself no further forward with Sabina at all and infact no further forward with where the brothers are during the 1871 census. I went back over some of the documents and I find it bizarre that on the 1861 census Sabina is down as Louisa. Then on the Baptism record for Matilda, initially someone wrote Elizabeth crossed it out then put Sabina, tho on all her siblings records Sabina is down correctly first time. I cannot find any birth record for Sabina but have the marriage record for Sabina and Thomas. And tho Gem Street Records that Astoness kindly got me, mentioned about Sabina being in and out of prison, I can find not one shred of evidence to back this up. I find it bizarre the documents make mention of Thomas but not of Sabina. I think there's a missing jigsaw piece. Its a shame too that due to lack of info, I havent been able to find out what happened to Matilda's sister Eliza and there are too many Eliza's out there. I did contact an ancestry project and asked if they had any records for a grave record. burial at any of the cemetries in Birmingham for Sabina and they had no record of her. The name sabina historically seems to have latin, gypsy, spanish and italian roots.
 
You never stop hoping that some new record or information will appear that will help your solve your ancestry mysteries, even if it's years later.

Every ancestry line ends with a dead end, you just hope it's a good few generations in the past.
 
Back
Top