This, the latest in a series of bilingual Merched Chwarel blogs by Elin Tomos, takes us through what she’s found out in her pioneering research looking at women of the quarrying districts around Llanberis who spent time in the Caernarfon Workhouse during the closing years of the nineteenth century. It’s harrowing reading - and there are attitudes and lessons in here that are scarily relevant to today in Wales, the UK and across the world.
If viewing on a smart phone or small screen, the English will appear below the Welsh.
Pan fetho popeth arall byddai’n rhaid i unigolion droi at wasanaethau iechyd a lles ‘y plwyf’. Trwy gydol y cyfnod Fictoraidd gweinyddwyd prif wasanaethau iechyd a lles y wladwriaeth trwy delerau Deddf ‘Newydd’ y Tlodion. Ym 1834, pasiwyd An Act for the Amendment and better Administration of the Laws relating to the Poor in England and Wales. Cuddiwyd gwir natur chwyldroadol y ddeddf tu ôl i’r gair syml ‘amendment.’
O dan fesur 1834, unwyd nifer o blwyfi ynghyd ledled Cymru a Lloegr i ffurfio Undebau’r Tlodion. Ar draws Cymru, ffurfiwyd 48 Undeb newydd ac ymhob Undeb roedd perchnogion eiddo â’r hawl i ethol unigolion ar Fwrdd Gwarcheidwaid a’r rheiny a fyddai’n gyfrifol am weinyddu cymorth i’r tlawd. Rhannwyd Undebau yn ddosbarthiadau, gyda pob dosbarth yn penodi swyddogion meddygol a swyddogion brechiad a fyddai’n gallu ymdopi â phoblogaeth ac ardal o faint rhesymol. Eu cyfrifoldeb nhw oedd gofalu am dlodion sâl.
Yn swyddogol – o dan Ddeddf newydd y Tlodion – roedd cymorth y plwyf yn gyfyngedig i unigolion anghenus yn unig. Nodwyd nad oedd gan dlotyn yr hawl bellach i dderbyn cymorth plwyf yn ei gartref. Er mwyn derbyn cymorth byddai’n rhaid mentro trwy byrth y wyrcws ar delerau bwriadol greulon. Cyfrifoldeb yr Undebau oedd adeiladu tlotai a hynny ar draul trethi’r tlodion. Araf ac anfoddgar fu’r ymateb yn Sir Gaernarfon i ddweud y lleiaf. Ffurfiwyd Undeb Tlodion Caernarfon ar 1 Mehefin 1837 trwy uno un ar bymtheg o blwyfi ynghyd. Yn perthyn i’r Undeb newydd yr oedd Dosbarthiadau Llanberis, Llanddeiniolen a Llanrug. Bu’r cwestiwn dros sefydlu tloty yn fater a achosodd gryn ddadlau ymysg Gwarcheidwaid Caernarfon gyda rhai yn credu’n daer y byddai’r gost o ofalu am dlodion mewn tloty yn llawer uwch na’r gost o ddarparu cymorth gartref. Yn y diwedd bu’n rhaid i Arolygwyr y Tlodion ofyn i Fainc y Frenhines orchymyn Undeb Caernarfon i godi tloty; agorwyd Tloty Caernarfon ym 1846 – deuddeg mlynedd wedi pasio mesur 1834.
Trwy gymysgedd o ofn a chywilydd roedd y llywodraeth yn gobeithio gorfodi’r tlawd i ddilyn bywydau gweithgar, moesol a pharchus. Roedd yr amodau byw yn y tloty yn fwriadol atgas; credai’r llywodraeth mai dim ond trwy sicrhau bod sefyllfa’r tlotyn yn llai dymunol na sefyllfa’r gweithiwr annibynnol yr oedd modd atal unigolion rhag mynnu cymorth plwyf.
Pe bai llafurwr cyffredin yn colli ei waith trwy ryw anffawd neu’i gilydd ac yn gorfod mynd i’r tloty byddai gorfodaeth ar y rheiny a ddibynnai arno (hynny ydi, ei wraig neu unrhyw blant) ei ddilyn.
Ar gyrraedd y tloty, dosbarthwyd holl dlodion yn ôl eu hoedran, eu gallu a’u hiechyd:
Gwahanwyd gwŷr, gwragedd a phlant i wardiau gwahanol. Golygai hyn y gallai gŵr fynd am wythnosau heb weld ei wraig a’i blant. Caniatawyd i blant ifanc iawn aros gyda’u mamau, tra’r oedd plant dros saith mlwydd oed yn cael eu gwahanu oddi wrth eu rhieni a’u gosod yn ysgol y tloty. Roedd yn rhaid i bob tlotyn abl ennill ei le; byddai gwŷr yn torri cerrig a choed, yn pwmpio dŵr neu blicio ocwm (math o ffibr a geir wrth ddatblethu hen raffau) tra’r oedd merched yn gweithio yn y golchdy, yn glanhau neu’n paratoi ‘chydig fwyd a roddid i’r tlodion. Yn ôl adroddiadau Arolygwyr y Tlodion mae’n ymddangos bod amodau byw yn Nhloty Caernarfon ar ddechrau’r 1880au wedi bod yn eithriadol wael. Mae sôn am ddynion yn byw yn yr un dillad am dair os nad pedair i bum wythnos nes bod eu dillad isaf wedi eu gwisgo’n garpiau yn sgil yr holl faw a phryfed.[1]
Er gwaethaf gobeithion clir mesur 1834, prin y gwireddwyd yr amcan o atal cymorth allanol. Ym 1896 mynnodd F. H. Bircham, Comisiynydd rhanbarth Cymru ar ran y Bwrdd Llywodraeth Lleol bod Cymru yn ranbarth ‘where out-door relief has always been the rule and not the exception.’[2] Meddai,
‘it is very rarely the case that any applicant for relief, who has the slightest claim to consideration on the score of respectable antecedents, is to be found in the workhouse at all; such cases always get out-relief except of course where serious sickness or helplessness renders treatment in the workhouse infirmary a necessity.’
Carnarfon Poor Law Union Maps c. 1880s
Mae adroddiadau blynyddol Arolygwyr y Tlodion yn dangos y gwahaniaeth syfrdanol a fodolai rhwng y niferoedd o dlodion a hawliai gymorth gartref o’i gymharu â’r niferoedd a dderbyniwyd i’r tloty. Yn Sir Gaernarfon ym 1844, cynorthwywyd 56 tlotyn yn y tlotai o’i gymharu â’r 2,179 o dlodion a hawliodd gymorth gartref, gyda 641 ohonynt yn hawlio cymorth yn benodol ‘on account of sickness or accident.’[3] Mae’r patrwm uchod yn parhau yn ddigyfnewid trwy gydol y ganrif; erbyn 1894, cynorthwywyd 254 o dlodion Plwyfi Arfon yn y tloty o’i gymharu â’r 2,521 o dlodion a hawliodd gymorth gartref.[4]
Roedd mwyafrif llethol o dlodion Dyffryn Peris yn derbyn cymorth ar ffurf allanol, gan olygu nad oedd rhaid iddynt dywyllu unrhyw dloty. Os felly, beth oedd hanes rhai o’r merched eithriadol hynny a dderbyniodd gymorth yn Nhloty Caernarfon?
Derbyniwyd nifer o wragedd priod i’r tloty. Treuliodd Elizabeth Jones, gwraig chwarelwr o Landdeiniolen bythefnos yn Nhloty Caernarfon yn ystod mis Mehefin 1898. Gyda hi roedd ei merched, Eliza a oedd yn ddeuddeg a Margaret a oedd yn dair mlwydd oed. Ym mis Ionawr 1897, treuliodd Jane Pettit gwraig briciwr o Landdeiniolen a’i phlant John ac Alice ddeuddydd yn y tloty. ‘Does dim sôn am wŷr Elizabeth a Jane.
Fel rheol, ni chaniatawyd cymorth allanol i ferched â phlant anghyfreithlon. Os nad oedd mamau yn gallu cynnal eu plant roedd yn rhaid iddynt fynd i’r tloty. Derbyniwyd Jane O’Flynn o Landdeiniolen i’r tloty ym mis Mehefin 1897. Roedd gan Jane bedwar o blant: Peter O’Flynn a oedd yn saith mlwydd oed, efeilliaid blwydd oed o’r enw David a Letisa Williams a merch fach ychydig fisoedd oed o’r enw Margaret. Ym mis Medi y flwyddyn hono, mae David a Letisa Williams yn gadael y tloty, nodwyd bod eu tad wedi dod i’w nôl, mae’n ymddangos nad oedd y gŵr anhysbys yn fodlon ysgwyddo cyfrifoldeb dros Jane, Peter a Margaret.
Un carfan o ferched a oedd mewn sefyllfa hynod fregus oedd merched sengl, beichiog. Yn wahanol i’r henoed a’r methedig, o dan delerau Deddf y Tlodion, ystyriwyd merched beichiog fel unigolion ‘abl’, golygai hyn bod rhaid iddynt weithio fel pawb arall a chyflawni nifer o ddyletswyddau llafurus ac ailadroddus. Er y rhestrwyd Maggie Jones, 21 mlwydd oed o Lanberis a Margaret Owen, 20 mlwydd oed o Lanrug fel ferched abl, pan dderbyniwyd y ddwy i’r tloty roeddent yn ferched beichiog iawn. Wedi mis yn Nhloty Caernarfon roedd Maggie – a oedd eisoes yn fam i fachgen tair blwydd oed o’r enw Thomas – wedi geni plentyn, bachgen arall o’r enw William. Yn anffodus, bu farw William yn dri mis oed a gadawodd Maggie a Thomas ddeuddydd wedi marwolaeth y bychan. Efeilliaid, o’r enw Mary a Grace a gafodd Margaret Owen, gadawodd y tair ohonynt ym mis Mehefin 1898. Derbyniwyd Miriam Roberts, 21 mlwydd oed o Landdeiniolen i’r tloty ym mis Ebrill 1897, ar 22 Gorffennaf 1897 ganwyd ei merch, Miriam, gadawodd y ddwy ymhen y mis. Roedd menywod yn aml yn defnyddio Tlotai fel ysbytai mamolaeth ac mae’n bur amlwg bod rhai o ferched ifanc Dyffryn Peris, mewn sefyllfaoedd argyfyngus wedi cael eu derbyn i ysbyty Tloty Caernarfon er mwyn geni eu plant.
O dan delerau Deddf y Tlodion, ychydig iawn o ystyriaeth a roddwyd i ferched a’u hanghenion. Prif amcan Deddf Newydd y Tlodion oedd atal dynion abl rhag hawlio cymorth plwyf. Roedd y Llywodraeth yn grediniol mai dynion diwaith – a hynny o wirfodd – oedd wrth wraidd problemau tlodi’r cyfnod. Trwy fynd i’r afael â diweithdra (a diogi!) ymlith dynion byddai modd adfer sefyllfaeodd o dlodi ymysg merched a phlant. Nid oedd mesur 1834 yn ystyried merched fel unigolion yn eu rhinwedd eu hunain: roedd merched, yn ddiffael, yn dibynnu ar ddynion. Yng ngeiriau’r diwygwyr cymdeithasol Sydney a Beatrice Webb,
‘the Report of 1834 was entirely directed to the treatment of the adult able-bodied labourer with the family dependent upon him… With regard to the treatment of women, it cannot be said that the Report of 1834 afforded much guidance… in this Report, the single independent woman is nowhere mentioned. The wife is throughout treated exactly as is the child; it is assumed that she follows her husband… the widow, the deserted wife, the wife of the absentee soldier or sailor, the wife of a husband resident in another parish or another country – the Report is silent.’
[1] Cledwyn Flynn-Hughes, ‘The Workhouse of Caernarvonshire’, Trafodion Hanes Sir Gaernarfon, 7 (1946) t. 98.
[2] Twenty-fifth Annual Report of the Local Government Board (1896), t. 221.
[3] Eleventh Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners (1845), t. 166.
[4] Manylion Clerc Undeb Caernarfon, Mr. J. H Thomas, Y Genedl Gymreig, 26 Mehefin 1894, t. 7.
When all else failed, individuals were forced to seek parish relief. Throughout the Victorian period state administered health and welfare services were conducted according to the terms of the 'New Poor' Act. In 1834, An Act for the Amendment and better Administration of the Laws relating to the Poor was passed in England and Wales. The truly revolutionary nature of the law was hidden behind the simple word 'amendment.'
Under the 1834 amendment, parishes across England and Wales were instructed to join forces in order to form Poor Unions. Across Wales, 48 new Unions were formed; in each Union property owners had the right to elect individuals on to the Board of Guardians, they in turn were responsible for administering aid to the poor. Unions were divided into districts, with each district appointing medical officers and vaccination officers who could cope with a reasonably sized population and area. It was their responsibility to look after the poor.
Llanberis High Street c. 1905
Officially - under the new Poor Law - parish relief was limited to indigent individuals only. A pauper could no longer claim parish assistance in his home. In order to receive relief, the individual had to venture through the workhouse gateway on deliberately cruel terms. The responsibility for the building of Workhouses fell on the new Poor Unions and were to be built at the expense of the poor taxes. The response in Caernarfonshire was slow and reluctant to say the least. The Caernarfon Poor Union was formed on 1 June 1837 by the amalgamation of sixteen parishes, including Llanberis, Llanddeiniolen and Llanrug, all distinct quarrying areas. The question of establishing a workhouse had been a hotly contested issue amongst the Caernarfon Guardians with many strongly believing that the cost of caring for the poor in a workhouse would far outweigh the cost of providing support at home. The Poor Inspectors eventually had to ask the Queen's Bench to order the Caernarfon Union to erect a workhouse; the Caernarfon Workhouse was finally opened in 1846 - twelve years after the 1834 amendment was passed!
Through a mixture of fear and shame the government hoped to force the poor to lead active, moral and respectful lives. Living conditions in the workhouse were deliberately detestable; the government believed that it was only by making the pauper’s situation less desirable than that of the independent worker that individuals could be prevented from seeking parish relief. If an ordinary labourer lost his job through some misfortune and had to go to the workhouse and those who depended on him – that is, his wife or any children – would be forced to follow him.
On arrival, every pauper was grouped according to their age, ability and health:
Husbands, wives and children were separated into different wards. This meant that a wife could go for weeks without seeing her husband and children. Very young children were allowed to stay with their mothers, while children over the age of seven were separated from their parents and placed in the workhouse school. Every able-bodied pauper had to earn their place; men were ordered to break stones and cut wood, pumped water or peeled oakum (a type of fibre that is sourced by untwisting old ropes) while women worked in the laundry, cleaning or preparing food. Poor Inspectors reports reveal that living conditions in the Caernarfon Workhouse in the early 1880s was extremely poor. They mention some paupers living in the same clothes for three if not four to five weeks on end, until the dirt and insects had worn them into rags.
Despite the clear objectives outlined in the 1834 amendment, the aim of stopping parish relief at home was scarcely achieved. In 1896, F. H. Bircham, Poor Law Commissioner for Wales, insisted that ‘Wales is a region where out-door relief has always been the rule and not the exception.’ According to Bircham
‘it is very rarely the case that any applicant for relief, who has the slightest claim to consideration on the score of respectable antecedents, is to be found in the workhouse at all; such cases always get out-relief except of course where serious sickness or helplessness renders treatment in the workhouse infirmary a necessity.’
Poor Inspectors’ Annual Reports show the startling difference that existed between the number of paupers who claimed aid at home compared to the number who were admitted into the local workhouse. In Caernarfonshire in 1844, 56 paupers received poor relief in the workhouses compared to 2,179 paupers who claimed relief at home – 641 of whom received assistance specifically 'on account of sickness or accident.' This pattern remains unchanged throughout the century; by 1894, 254 paupers were assisted in the workhouse compared to 2,521 paupers who obtained relief at home.
A vast majority of paupers who lived in the quarrying districs of Llanberis, Llanddeiniolen and Llanrug were granted relief at home. Therefore, it’s interesting to consider the women who entered the Caernarfon workhouse.
A number of married women were admitted into the Caernarfon workhouse. Elizabeth Jones, a quarryman's wife from Llanddeiniolen spent two weeks at the Caernarfon Workhouse during June 1898. She was accompanied by her daughters, Eliza who was twelve and Margaret who was three years old. In January 1897, Jane Pettit, the wife of a bricklayer from Llanddeiniolen and her children John and Alice, spent two days in the workhouse. There is no mention of Elizabeth and Jane's husbands.
Women with illegitimate children were not normally granted parish relief from home. If mother couldn't support their children they had no choice but to enter the workhouse. Jane O'Flynn from Llanddeiniolen was admitted to the workhouse in June 1897. Jane had four children: seven-year-old Peter O'Flynn, one-year-old twins named David and Letisa Williams and a little girl only a few months old named Margaret. In September 1897, David and Letisa Williams left the workhouse, it was noted that their father had come to collect them, it seems that the unknown man was unwilling to take responsibility for neither Jane, Peter nor Margaret.
Single, pregnant women were particularly vulnerable. Unlike the elderly and infirm, pregnant women were classed as able-bodied individuals, which meant that they had to work like everyone else and perform many laborious and repetitive tasks. Although 21-year-old Maggie Jones from Llanberis and 20-year-old Margaret Owen from Llanrug were listed as able-bodied, they were both very pregnant when they were admitted to the Caernarfon workhouse. After a month Maggie - who was already the mother to a three-year-old boy named Thomas - had given birth to a child, another boy named William. Sadly, William died at three months of age, Maggie and Thomas left two days after the child’s death. Margaret Owen gave birth to twins, called Mary and Grace, all three left in June 1898. 21 year old Miriam Roberts from Llanddeiniolen was admitted to the workhouse in April 1897, on 22 July 1897 her daughter who she named Miriam was born, they both left within a month. Women often used Workhouses as maternity hospitals and it appears that some young women in desperate situations were admitted into the Caernarfon Workhouse in order to give birth.
The new Poor Law gave very little consideration to women and their needs. The main objective of the 1834 amendment was to prevent able-bodied men from claiming parish assistance. The Government believed that voluntary unemployed men were to be blamed for the poverty problems that prevailed during the era. By tackling male unemployment (and laziness!) they believed that it would in turn put an end to poverty amongst women and children. The 1834 measure did not consider women as individuals in their own right: women were, by default, dependent on men. In the words of the social reformers Sydney and Beatrice Webb,
‘the Report of 1834 was entirely directed to the treatment of the adult able-bodied labourer with the family dependent upon him… With regard to the treatment of women, it cannot be said that the Report of 1834 afforded much guidance… in this Report, the single independent woman is nowhere mentioned. The wife is throughout treated exactly as is the child; it is assumed that she follows her husband… the widow, the deserted wife, the wife of the absentee soldier or sailor, the wife of a husband resident in another parish or another country – the Report is silent.’