Canterbury Court of Guardians: Eighteenth Century - a Postscript
CANTERBURY COURT OF GUARDIANS:
EIGHTEENTH CENTURY - A POSTSCRIPT
F. H. PANTON
Previous papers by the author in Archaeologia Cantiana have given an
overall picture of the finances and government of Canterbury during
the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth century. One of these
papers (1996) noted that detailed records of accounts of the Guardians
did not seem to have survived, but that nevertheless some assessment
of the cost to Canterbury of the relief of the poor could be attempted
from the rather fragmentary secondary sources then only available.1
An account book kept by the Receivers (Treasurers) of the Guardians
from 1728 to 1786 has recently come to light and been acquired
at auction by the Canterbury Cathedral Library, and is available for
study.2 Using it, the opportunity has been taken to fill in some of the
gaps in the 1996 article, and to re-examine, where necessary, some of
the conclusions then indicated. This note reports that work as a postscript
to the 1996 paper.
RECEIVERS' ACCOUNTS BOOK
The book covers the years from 1728, in which year the Court of Guardians
was founded by local Act of Parliament, to 1786, ending with the
Receivership of Peter Godier, who in that year was relieved of his post
because a deficiency of £441 2s. VAd. was found in his accounts. Half
the pages of the book remain unused, except for some modern pencil
scribblings, probably by children, on some of the blank pages. The back
board and part of the spine is missing, and some later pages are damaged.
Accounts for the first three years of the Guardians existence, under
the Receivership of Bradnox Brandon, 1728-1731, reveal the overall
cost, and some details, of the fitting out of the Poor Priests' Hospital
as the workhouse. Amounts borrowed on bond from local citizens for
that purpose are listed. For that period also, running costs are recorded
under headings such as, Housekeeping, Clothing, Out Poor,
Accidental (sic) Charges, and income from poor law taxation and
343
F. H. PANTON
from the sale of goods made by, and from the labour of, the paupers.
Rentals and income from other sources are listed. A six-monthly income
and expenditure summary, each July and January, with approval
by a committee of Guardians, is recorded.
From 1731 to 1743, totals only of each item of expenditure are recorded,
with no indication of their nature. Six monthly reconciliations
continue to be produced until 1744 after which yearly reconciliations
only are recorded. Individual items of expenditure continue to
be listed, but there is no indication of their nature.3
FITTINGS OF THE WORKHOUSE 1728-1731
The records show that in the first six months of the Guardians
existence, from July 1728 to January 1728/9, income totalled £1,499.
This included £1,000 borrowed on bond in six £100 and two £200
tranches; £467 12s. from two sesses, on 6 August and 4 September
1728; and £32 from sundries such as security for a bastard. During
that period £874 65. 2Vid. was spent on adapting and fitting out the
workhouse, and £683 175. A3Ad. on maintenance of the poor; an overspendof£
59 13 J. VAd. A further £400(2 x£ 100, 1 x £200) in January
1728/9 and £300 (1 x £200, 1 x £100) in April was borrowed on bond,
including, with sundry receipts, £768 Is. 63Ad. Sesses in December
1728,February 1728/9 and April 1729 totalled £705 15s. WAd. Total
outgoings for January to July 1728/1729 were £1,719 8s. 6]Ad.
against a total income of £1,473 \7s. 5lAd. (£768 Is. 63Ad. +£705 \5s.
\OV2d.) leaving a negative balance of £245 lis. VAd.
In sum, for the first year of operation, July 1728-July 1729, total expenditure
was £3,218 8s. 6lAd and total income £2,972 17s. 5V2d. leaving
the negative balance of £245 lis. WAd. to be born by the Receiver.
Regarding income, a total of £1,700 was borrowed on bond, and £1,272
obtained from sesses, rents, sales and labours. Expenditure in the first
six months of a capital nature, fitting out the workhouse, was £874 16s.
2}Ad. Expenditure on capital costs in the second half of the year cannot
be clearly identified, but several hundreds of pounds may have been
spent in this way. It is possible, therefore, that capital costs in the first
year were in the region of £1,200 and running costs of the order of £2,000.
In the year 1729-1730, July to July, expenditure (in round figures)
was £2,710 (including £245 overspend brought forward) against an
income of £2,475, leaving an overspend carried forward of £235. Of
the income that year £1,854 came from five poor law cesses. In the
year July 1730 to June 1731, total expenditure was £1,662 and
income was £1,645, thereby increasing the negative balance carried
forward from £245 to £252. It would seem that the year 1729-1730
344
CANTERBURY COURT OF GUARDIANS: EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
saw further capital expenditure of several hundred pounds in completing
the fitting out of the workhouse, while expenditure in 1730-
1731 may represent annual running costs only. The sum total of fitting-
out costs in the first years of the Guardians' existence may
therefore have approached £1,500, and have been more than taken
care of by the £1,700 borrowed on bonds in that period.
RUNNING COSTS 1731-1786
At the A.G.M. of the Court of Guardians in July 1731, Brandon retired
and John Castle took over as Receiver. The Account Book records that
£52 12s. 5%d. owing to Brandon was paid to him, with the remaining
£200 being acknowledged by the issue of a bond. From 1728 to 1786,
a succession of twelve Receivers managed the accounts for the Guardians.
The office was electable from year to year, but most served several
years at a stretch; five served over five years and two of these over
ten years. William Jorden served fourteen years from 1741-1754.
A summary of year by year expenditure, taken from the Account
Book, is given at Appendix 1. From this it can be seen that yearly
expenditure in the 1730s, 1740s, 1750s and early 1760s was generally
between £1,500 and £2,000 p.a. In the later 1760s, expenditure began
to rise, reaching about £3,000 p.a. in 1774 and approaching £4,000 p.a.
in the 1780s. This information enables some of the gaps in knowledge
of the Guardians' expenditure, noted in the 1996 paper, to be filled in.
But first it should be noted that the figures given in the 1996 paper for
expenditure in 1746, 1752 and 1753 are identical with those in the
Account Book in those years. The conclusion in the 1996 paper that the
burden of expenditure on the poor in the late 1820s early 1830s had
increased several fold in real terms when compared with the burden in
the 1750s is therefore confirmed. However, it now becomes clear that
the cost of maintaining the poor in the 1770s and 1780s steadily increased,
reaching levels nearly twice the yearly cost in the 1730s to
1760s, and it may be that similar increases took place in the 1790s and
early 1800s, though no figures are available for those years. The
process of escalating cost may therefore have been more gradual than
a comparison between the 1820s and the 1750s may have implied.
Nevertheless, the broad conclusion, that over the years from the
1750s to the 1820s and 1830s the expenditure on the poor in Canterbury
became several times greater in real terms, remains valid, and
's supported by the evidence of the Account Book. It should also be
noted that the necessary income of the Guardians mainly through
Poor Law taxes, was always several times greater than the total
income of the Burghmote. With hindsight, the Burghmote, with no
345
F. H. PANTON
tax raising powers, acted with enlightened self interest in 1728 in
acquiescing in the creation of the Court of Guardians as a separate
Corporation with tax raising powers, and in distancing the Corporation
of the Mayor and Commonalty from responsibility for the maintenance
of the poor by transferring the ownership of the Poor Priests
Hospital with its revenues to the new Corporation.
OUT-POOR
Only in the years of Brandon's Receivership (1728-1731) are the
accounts sufficiently detailed to enable some estimate to be made of
the cost, within the total expenditure, of maintaining poor and needy
outside the workhouse. In the year 1729-30 it would seem that expenditure
on the out-poor was (in round figures) £313, and in 1730-31,
£390. It would therefore appear than in those years, out-poor costs
represented some 15 to 20 per cent of the Guardians' expenditure. It
must be assumed that throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries expenditure on out-poor continued at least at similar levels,
but there is no evidence to indicate how great this continued to be.
However, it is known that the original capacity of the workhouse in
1728 to accommodate in-poor rose from 170 to 270 by the 1800s.
Such an increase may have assisted the Guardians in keeping outpoor
numbers and expenditure as low as possible.
THE CASE OF PETER GODIER
As noted above, the Account Book stops in 1786, the year in which the
Receiver, Peter Godier, was relieved of his post because of a deficiency
of £441 2s l%d. in his accounts. Curiously the account for that
year in the Book is certified by the Guardians as being correct, so that
the deficiency must have been uncovered after audit. The records of the
Court of Guardians do throw some light on this matter - at least in
dealing with its aftermath - and it may be of interest to set down a short
history of the Godier affair, extracted from the Guardians' records.
Godier, who had previously served as President of the Court of
Guardians, was elected Receiver of the Court of Guardians at an Extraordinary
General Court on 21 January 1782 (in the place of Philip
Riguebourg, who had died in office). He was re-elected Receiver at the
A.G.M. of the Court on 2 July 1782, and yearly for the next four years
at a salary of £21 p.a. At a Court on 3 August 1786 (only a month after
his yearly accounts had been audited and accepted, and his re-election,
at the A.G.M. Court on 4 July 1786) he was discharged from Receiver-
346
CANTERBURY COURT OF GUARDIANS: EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
ship because his accounts showed a deficiency of £441 2s. l3/4d. which
he was unable to make good. Thomas Charlton was elected acting Receiver
until such time as another Receiver could be appointed.
During the years he was Receiver, Godier carried large positive
balances on the Guardians' accounts; £231 in 1783, £297 in 1784,
£260 in 1785 and £114 in 1786. These balances were held by him
personally, and may therefore have contributed to the masking by him
of the shortfall finally exposed. However that may be, the Guardians
attempted to extract the £441 from Godier's guarantor, John Halbot,
at an Extraordinary General Court on 9 October 1786. Cyprian Bunce,
appearing as Attorney for Halbot, argued for remittance of part of the
debt then outstanding. The request was refused, but it was agreed that
half of the £292 15s. remaining to be reimbursed should be repaid in
six months and the second half in twelve months, provided Halbot
himself produced sufficient security. A week later, at another Extraordinary
Court, Halbot offered to settle an estate worth £700 as
security, provided he was elected as Receiver. On 7 November 1786
the Court accepted that offer and on 3 January 1787 the conveyance of
the estate was formalised and Halbot elected Receiver. At the Annual
Court on 3 July 1787, Halbot was re-elected Receiver and also appointed
Deputy President of the Court. At that Court, it was decided to
borrow money on bond, and by August, £200 had been borrowed from
John Pearce and £200 from Alderman Jackson, both at 5 per cent.
Halbot was charged with paying Jackson's 5 per cent, since £200 of
Halbot's indebtedness to the Guardians was still outstanding.
By March 1791, Jackson's bond was due for repayment, and Halbot's
debt was still outstanding. Halbot offered to pay £125 immediately,
towards the repayment of Jackson's bond, with the remaining
£75 at £25 yearly, with no interest. This offer was accepted, and the
matter appears to have ended there.
On the face of it, the Guardians attitude towards Godier and Halbot
appears remarkably tolerant. Nevertheless they would seem to have
made good the loss eventually to the Guardians' satisfaction. The
whole episode, however, clearly illustrates the dangers of the financial
arrangements then operating, and the fallibility of year-end auditing
by colleagues.
NOTES
F. H. Panton, 'Finances and government of Canterbury: eighteenth to mid-nineteenth
century Court of Guardians', Archaeologia Cantiana, cxvi (1996), 147-181.
3 Canterbury Cathedral Archives, Wood's Guardian Records U361/1.
Canterbury Cathedral Archives, Canterbury Court of Guardians Minute Book, QGB
A/4 1780-1783.
347
APPENDIX 1
CANTERBURY COURT OF GUARDIANS YEARLY EXPENDITURE
Extracted from the Receivers Account Book; Wood's Guardians Records, U361/1 in Canterbury Cathedral Library
Year Receiver Charge Discharge Balance
June-December 1731
January-July 1731/2
July-January 1732/3
January-June 1733
July-December 1733
January-June 1733/4
July-February 1734/5
February-June 1735
June-February 1735/6
February-June 1736
July-January 1736/7
January-June 1737
July-February 1737/8
February-July 1738
July-January 1738/9
February-July 1739
July-January 1739/40
John Castle
John Castle
John Castle
John Castle
John Fuller
John Fuller
Thomas Hollingberry
Thomas Hollingberry
John Castle
John Castle
Richard Barham
Richard Barham
Joseph Greenland
Richard Hollingberry
Richard Hollingberry
Richard Hollingberry
John Iken
£
999
1818
1089
2031
952
1041
1089
629
943
642
927
670
1235
1386
961
482
1831
s
7
4
18
14
10
15
19
18
15
12
18
17
7
15
15
13
0
d
3
0
6
8
0*4
7
4
6
11*4
6*4
11*4
VA
1
6
3
10
2
£
889
1713
981
1863
557
751
904
609
878
601
899
647
1283
1386
978
488
1687
s
18
18
2
13
11
19
12
16
1
13
18
18
16
5
10
13
13
d
1
8
1
3
114
0
11
1
314
11
8
0
3
VA
1014
0
0V4
£
+109
+94
+108
+167
+393
+289
+185
+20
+65
+40
+28
+22
+1
-
-17
-5
+143
s
9
5
16
17
18
16
6
2
14
18
0
19
10
9
4
19
6
d
2
4
5
5
11
7
5
5
8
9*4
3*4
7*4
10
10!/4
7
2
11
CANTERBURY COURT OF GUARDIANS: EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
•a
60
Q ^
1>
S3
u
C*
£
l n>— CN -* \ o © O •-' CN OS
i n h M O - o o M n o o n N N o o o \ M n
p - > — t N < n t ~ - - ^ t s t N r - - v o \ o o \ r - ' * r - o
(N ' ' + CN + + — + + + + — —« ~ -*
*"•' b i s ™ F- So vb ?t- S\ " - -"' FO
N T i - i n ( n v o i n t ~ - - 5 t T f r - f » i o v D o o ' o v o
v o < N O \ v o o o o o r - ^ ^ i o O f o - H V D i n f s - -
>n So &\ "-• voir- » F~?f 6 0 3 b ' -
' * v o < N « r > t - ~ , * © © r » i r - < n r- <3\ m ON
f > v p v o c N o o r ^ - * > — o o — v o o o - ^ - r - o s —
C 3 c c c 3 e c c c c c e c c c c
-O T3 T3 T3 "O "O T3 "O "O 'O T3 T3 "O" "O "O *0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £
© T)- T* ^
•* MN fO t- t 5
fllilti
s'
\£>oogOON