Marlow and it's workhouse between 1775 and 1843

The Marlow Workhouse in Berwick Lane was in existence by 1775 when "a good and sober man and woman" with respectable characters were sought to take charge of the place and the Marlow poor. Application could be made to the churchwardens and overseers of the poor. Maximum salary £20 per annum plus obviously their accomodation was provided plus some allowances for items like fuel and candles for personal use. The successful applicants would be required to find work for the inmates so they could earn their keep and maintain the habit of working -  according to the ideas of the time innate idleness and poverty went together. Agricultural labour and flint picking (the flints were used to repair the roads) were popular local labour choices. 

In 1787 another workhouse labour supervisor was required. At this point there were 85 men, women and children in residence, all of which would be required to work to some degree. The responsibility for finding this work laid with the supervisor. It was suggested that the workhouse building and the land around it would make the place "well suited to becoming a manufactory" for example of woollen blankets or similar articles. Whether this suggestion was adopted to any degree I don't know. The contract to maintain and employ the poor there would initially be offered for a year. There is anecdotal evidence that finding work that covered the costs of running the work house was not easy to come by. 

Marlow workhouse continued in an independent capacity until the so called new poor law act of 1834. This tried to improve piecemeal local provision and reduce the possibility of getting "out relief" eg assistance that wasn't dependent on going into the workhouse if you were able bodied. Larger poor law unions were formed, and Marlow was part of the Wycombe Union. It was called a union because 34 parishes would be bought together under its supervision. Their first meeting was at the Wycombe work house in 1835, when it was decided to meet in future in Friday's as this was market day and so it would suit the many farmers who came into town then anyway. Marlow workhouse was adopted by the Union, as was the one at Bledlow. Originally the able bodied poor were supposed to go to Marlow, and the aged and infirm to Bledlow. But this does not seem to have been particularly closely enforced. 

Getting in

The primary motivation for maintaining Marlow was actually financial as it was considered that a great deal would be saved if they didn't have to build a new central workhouse. However money was spent on repairing and adapting it for wider use. When the work was finished the building was declared "excellent". But what it didn't have was many inmates. The guardians said few able bodied poor had applied for entry to the workhouse, and the applications of most of those who had applied had been refused. This state of affairs would not last long. There was an agricultural depression locally and as agricultural labouring was a major source of employment, things would get bad indeed. As of 1835, the Union had not however taken up an offer by the government to send our paupers as emigrants to Australia or  Canada, a fact that earned them criticism from some quarters. 

In 1835 the Reeves answered an advertisement for workhouse managers for the Marlow house now it was under Union control. You can read about the Reeves in a post  . This time the salary for the married couple would be £100 per annum. 

At this time if you required a ticket for admission for the workhouse or needing to request assistance because you were unable to work you had to personally apply to your Relieving Officer. The 1835 man in this role was Robert Turner who actually lived in Marlow. He however was also responsible for Fingest, Turville, Fawley, Hambledon, and Medmenham. There were times he would visit these places to receive applications, otherwise the poor were expected to walk to his place of residence if they could not wait. Little Marlow was grouped with Wooburn as part of the Wycombe town district. 

Everyday life

Marlow's 1830s workhouse residents still included children as well as adults. A school teacher was employed but the boys were sent to the National school with the Union paying their fees. They were also supposed to be taken to a Sunday School but there was criticism that they were not escorted there on a regular basis. The National school master was criticized in 1838 for his conduct towards a group of his pupils who were residents in the workhouse at Bledlow but who came to Marlow to school. He advised the boys to go to London to seek work (on foot)  and better opportunities than would come their way as workhouse inmates. He had provided them with a letter of introduction to a fishmonger there.  But they had no money or food when they were stopped by a waggoner at Hounslow who assumed they were runaways. The waggoner took them into London and handed them over to the authorities so their stories could be checked out. They were eventually returned to Wycombe. The school master was told he had no authority to arrange employment for the boys in such a way. 

There were some bright moments for Marlow's inmates. They were treated Roman annual Christmas feast of roast beef and vegetables, plus a pint of beer for the men and half pint each for the women and children. Yes children. Everyday fare was not so elaborate but it was at least regular which was a luxury not all the residents would have been used to by any means. Contracts were offered to supply the workhouse masters tables at Marlow and Bledlow, plus the inmates own food of course. An advert for a contractor to supply bread  meat to Marlow specified they required bread, beef and mutton for the inmates consumption. Two years later the Marlow workhouse was broken into and a "quantity of beef, mutton, bacon and bread stolen therefrom." A £5 reward was offered for information leading to the thieves capture. This well stocked larder shouldn't give the impression that the inmates diet was luxurious - the meat offered to them wasn't given at every meal. As it was not usual for the poor labouring family to eat good meat every day, it was considered spoiling the poor to offer more than they would get outside. And if word got around the food was good in the workhouse, the motivation to avoid going in there would be reduced they thought.  In 1840 they had meat twice a week (in theory at least)  with hot soup on other days for their main meal and bread with or without cheese for other meals. 

There was no infirmary and no room to separate out the sick. In 1840 an anonymous letter writer complaining about the general management of the Marlow workhouse claimed that there was an abundance of lice and "itch" amongst the residents. 

Marlow stamps it's foot 

Almost as soon as Wycombe Union started, some suggested a new large workhouse would be best. A meeting in 1836 by the Guardian's decided to proceed with this plan and so the Marlow house would be closed, but not before 1837 to enable other premises to be made ready. In the end Marlow work house continued to operate until the large Saunderton work house open in 1843. Closing Marlow would save the £25 per year rent they paid on the building to the parish. The Guardians said that although the people in Marlow had at first suggested that the Union work house could be located in the town, but now accepted that the existing building could not be adapted to such an extent as would be required to house the poor from the entire Union. But did this mean independently spirited Marlow would willingly accept a Union house all the way in Bledlow 12-14 miles away by their estimation? (That is an extended version of the existing work house at Bledlow. Saunderton came later) No chance! A campaign was made to split Marlow from the Union and form a new smaller one with parishes actually closer  to their own such as Little Marlow and Stokenchurch. Or alternatively if other parishes where cut out if the Wycombe Union, the Marlow workhouse could be the sole house after all as it would be big enough. Critics of the one for all work house at Bledlow said it was not only distant from Marlow but in an unhealthy spot with low ceilings and poor ventilation. They argued few of the Guardians visited Bledlow to inspect things as things stood, and this would be much worse if it was the sole house going unsupervised. The guardians could not spare the time from their day jobs to take time  to visit Bledlow and as it was an agricultural district with no market, they didn't find themselves in the neighborhood otherwise as they had no reason to go there. These schemes were all unsuccessful. 

No more poor law says Marlow

In spring of 1841 Marlow men and current guardians Charles Susan (link to biography below) and Thomas Dukes has been gathering signatures asking the 1834 new poor law to be abolished in favour of a fairer alternative. Four hundred people signed it. The law had had a fair trial of six years they said, but just wasn't working for anyone. The petitioners said unnecessary difficulties had been placed in the way of those who needed help, and despite promises the law would make the system more efficient, the poor rates had gone up. But when the two men walked with others to Harleyford to either ask the Marlow M.P Sir William Clayton to present the petition to parliament or to support it (reports vary) he refused as he did not agree with it. He said the poor in the work house lived better than the poor outside it. He dismissed the idea it was hardship for married couples to be separated in the work house as he said it was nothing more than a businessman and his wife had to experience if he went off on a voyage for trade purposes!  Clayton also claimed that if the costs of administering the law had gone up (which he disputed) it was because the relieving officers were too afraid of criticism in the press. The guardians were also too timid to enforce the law properly, and Clayton says they delighted in a reputation for "spurious benevolence" which had allowed people to get in "the comforts of the workhouse"  when they should have been turned away. Hmmm.. Afterwards Charles Susan write to the press saying Clayton had accused those who wanted to abolish the new poor law as "interested parties". Charles agreed he was indeed such a person as he was "interested in helping the destitute." The poor had been "made to feel that poverty is a disgrace rather than a misfortune" said Charles. The most alarming statement he made was related to the diet of the poor in Marlow workhouse. He said the governor's had restricted the meat to a bare minimum and overall the diet was so poor that he thought some adults had died of malnutrition. No wonder he asked that married couples should be allowed to stay together as such companionship would be their sole solace in the time to come. I think the petition was presented by Marlow's other M.P but of course it did no good. 

In 1843 the new single Union house would be opened at Saunderton and Bledlow became the residence of the children who came into "the house". The regime there was different and I will cover that in a different post. 

*Some of the early Wycombe Union Marlow Guardians of the poor  included John Moss, Henry Webb, Thomas Gibbons, and George Brangwin. 

Written and researched by Kathryn Day. 

Related posts: 

Poverty in Victorian Marlow here

The most famous person to be born in Great Marlow Workhouse was showman John Richardson. See here

Biography of radical Charles Susan here

Everyday life for Marlow people at the Wycombe Union workhouse at Saunderton here and for the Marlow children at the Union residential school at  Bledlow here

Sources: 

Census 1841, from the transcripts made from originals by Jane Pullinger. 

Annual Report Of the Poor Law Commissioners Volume 1. 1835. Copy from Bavarian State Library digitized by Google.

Bucks Gazette 4th April, 6th June & 12th December 1835, 10th September 1836, 30th December 1837, 21st July & 4th August 1838, 17th April 1841. 

Bucks Herald 20th June 1840, 17th April 1841. 

Oxford Journal 1st April 1775, 5th May 1787

Windsor and Eton Express 14th March 1840

©MarlowAncestors. 

Benning Family Of The High Street

In what is now number 103-5 High Street Marlow  there was in late Victorian times a shop operated by the Benning family. A humble premises it was, double fronted officially but with not much of a window to display goods judging by a historic photo of the place, though a few items were hung around the door or propped amongst the outside wall to catch the eye of those hurrying around the corner to the railway station. 

Joseph and Mary Ann Benning and their children arrived in Marlow from High Wycombe sometime between 1872 and 1875. Both were born in Princes Risborough. Mary's maiden name was Benning too so it is possible, though unproven, that they were paternal cousins.

Joseph as a young man worked in High Wycombe as a chair maker. He went on to form a partnership in that respect with George Rackstraw, John Plumridge and Charles Gill under the name Charles Gill and Co.  For unknown reasons in 1855 it was decided to dissolve the partnership. Rackstraw, Plumridge and Joseph continued chair making separately thereafter. 

In 1862 Joseph married his first wife Esther but she was to die just 5 years later. They had as far as I can determine one child, James. A year after Esther's death Joseph remarried, to Mary Ann, in London. 

Between 1872 to and 1875 the family relocated from High Wycombe to Marlow as Joseph had been appointed foreman at the Buckinghamshire Chair Factory based there. The factory opened in 1872 so he may in fact have been there from the beginning. Initially the Bennings lived in what was then called Platts Row, a string of cottages in Mill Road, a short walk from Joseph's place of work in St Peter's Street. At the time Buckinghamshire chair making was beginning to decline. Difficult industrial relations and rising costs put considerable pressure on makers. You can understand Joseph moving into a paid position from being an independent tradesman for the security of his family.

In 1883 he was hailed a hero for his efforts to save the factory and surrounding buildings following an outbreak of fire there. A spark, it was believed from the chimney of the nearby pub the Fishermen's Retreat, had set fire to a pile of wood shavings in the factory and began spreading. Joseph was just locking up when smoke was spotted. He remained for hours in a smoke filled workroom, getting soaked by the water of the fire brigade so he could be the eyes and ears of the firefighters directing their hose from outside to where any smouldering flames remained. 

A very detailed post the history of the factory and life there for the workers is available on the blog here.

This fire was not the end of the factory (a later one did put pay to the premises!) though it must have disrupted production for a while. The enterprising Joseph had set up business as an ironmonger with his wife Mary running the shop on a day to day basis by 1883 so the family had a back up plan. It is not known where that shop was but by 1898 they operated from the High Street. They may well have been there from 1883 but shops moving about within Marlow was not uncommon so it can't be presumed that the Bennings were always in the same building. 

Joseph eventually retired from chair making to assist Mary in the ironmonger's while she also combined that business with running a grocer's and fruiterer's shop in the other half of the premises. An unusual combination of businesses you might think but in Victorian and Edwardian England all kinds of unpredictable hybrid businesses existed as families made ends meet any way they could.

In 1899 two young boys stole a can of preserved pineapple from the Bennings but were let off with a caution when their case got to court. Canned fruit seems to have been a particular favourite with little boys at the time and was not uncommon the focus of shoplifting by them - especially canned pineapple! Previously a Marlow man had been charged with obtaining 24 knives from the ironmongery side of the business by false pretences.

While the parents were busying about their shops, what of the junior Bennings?

Daughters Annie and Ellen ("Nellie") were active members of the Congregational Church in Quoiting Square / Oxford Road. Their parents may have been Congregational too though their older half brother James when grown up was a Wesleyan so family conformity of faith can't be presumed. Both sisters won local prizes aimed at young people for their display of Christian knowledge. The girls helped out in many church fundraisers, and Nellie was also the honorary secretary of the church's teetotal Band Of Hope in 1907 when she was in her late 20s. She is also listed as amongst those successfully completing a course on technical drawing at the Marlow Literary and Scientific Institute, so a clever young lady.

Meanwhile their brother Albert was running around for various Marlow youth football teams. He grew up to become a printer.

Big sister Lily worked as a dressmaker prior to her marriage.

A far sadder picture of Joseph's son James (from his first marriage) emerges. James became a soldier as a young man winning medals for his service in Egypt, was a skilled football, cricketer, and gunsman, was much liked by his army colleagues and had married and become the father of two children. His father and step mother must have thought all in his life was set up for his happiness but for unknown reasons James began running up debts which he kept hidden from his loved ones. As well as being the colour sergeant for his regiment he was the pay sergeant and began embezzling some of the money entrusted to him. He falsified his accounts to try to cover it up. That was never going to work long term and after a couple of months knowing that the game would shortly be up James at the age of 31 put the end of a rifle in his mouth, and pulled the trigger. His suicide occurred in a tent at a camp the soldiers were using near Reading Barracks whilst the barracks themselves were undergoing cleansing and repairs.

Joseph himself passed away in 1903, leaving a will with Mary as the main beneficiary. The family business had become focused on Mary's selling of groceries and green grocery by this time. The double fronted shop on the corner of Station Road was still let to Mary in 1905. She had however given up business by 1911 when Walter Haddock was running the premises as a greengrocer, followed by Thomas Wheeler by 1915. 

Written and researched by Charlotte Day. 

Note: Street numbers in the High Street officially changed twice in the 20th century and were also subject to minor alterations in between times so numbers 103 and 105 today were not numbered 103 and 105 in the Benning era.

©Marlow Ancestors. You are welcome to use my research for family or local history purposes with credit to this blog.

To find all mentions of any individual in this blog see the A-Z Person Index. More posts about people who lived in the High Street can be found on the Street Index. More biographies of Marlow families are listed here.

Sources included=

1907 Marlow Almanack and Directory, Marlow Printing Company.

1902/3, 1911 Kelly's Directories of Buckinghamshire etc by Kelly's Directories Limited.

Marlow Literary and Scientific Institute  loose handwritten memoranda.

Censuses of England and Wales, 1841-1901. Transcribed from microfilm by Charlotte Day and Jane Pullinger.

Maidenhead Advertiser, 6th September 1893.

Berkshire chronicle 9th sept 1893 .

Bucks herald 10th April 1883. This edition from the British Newspaper Archive's collection of scanned newspapers from the British Library Archives.

The gazette. 1855.

Walter Lovegrove - Marlow hero no 8

 We have previously covered something of the life of Marlow grocer come auctioneer Walter Lovegrove in a post about the various occupants of his grocers shop. That post explained that Walter Lovegrove sadly committed suicide in 1907 when his financial competence was questioned. I now want to write a post that focuses on the life of Walter to celebrate the many good and kind things he did in his time. He may not have been perfect but I think Walter deserves to be called a hero for his work for the town, and especially for its least fortunate members. 

Early years

Walter was born 1848, the son of grocer George Lovegrove. They took over the long running Aveling family business in the High Street, offering "high class provisions". The story of that can be found in our earlier post here.  In 1872 he married Harriet Sarah Maddison but less than two years later, Harriet would die age just 27.

 On a happier note, Walter was already busy with assisting community groups and we can hope they provided a distraction for him at such a sad time. He was an enthusiastic and regular member of Marlow's Literary and Scientific Institute which at this point had a reading room in the High Street and hosted lectures, readings and debates in various places. At this time it was not doing very well financially and the turn over of members and unpaid organisers was high. When the previous hon secretary resigned in 1875, Walter was elected to replace him. It was one of a large number of similar positions he would hold. There was some debate as to whether the Institute was becoming too recreational rather than educational but Walter supported the controversial idea of allowing games such as dominoes to be played in the reading room. No doubt he spent many happy evening there. He was however a man with some less than modern ideas about how universal education should be. He wondered if the education of the working classes was going too far. To teach a serving girl to play the pianoforte would be useless he said and would prevent her concentrating on her work. Better to teach practical skills relevant to employment he considered. 

Walter was not as you might expect, the oldest son taking over the reigns from his parents in their business, but rather the second son. The eldest, Henry would train to be architect.  Young Walter was full of ideas at how he could transform the grocers and top of his list was an update to what he considered to be old fashioned and pokey premises. It was apparently his idea to knock the historic building down and replace it with a specially designed purpose built equivalent. You can see the date of this rebuild under the gables of his fancy new premises in the High Street still. The architect was said to be brother Henry, which would certainly make sense. 

 

Stop thief! 

In 1876 Walter married again - to Ellen Louise Rogers of Staines. She assisted in the grocers along with paid staff. Walter was not very fortunate in this business it seems. In 1878 he took action against the third employee in a row that had stolen from him. It seems that he'd not pressed charges against the first two. But one of his fellow High Street shop keepers Charles Miller Foottit told him he had reason to suspect the behaviour of not one but two of Walter's staff. When one, Hugh Hatch of Lane End, was found to have stolen 4 oranges from him, he took the case to the court but asked for mercy to be shown to the accused. Hugh was a first time offender, and said he was motivated by hunger as he hadn't had his dinner. He was very lucky to get away with just a day in jail, as he had been detained since the previous week's session. The Lovegrove family were also troubled by shoplifters, such as Charles Allen who in 1891 made off with a quantity of pork, resulting in 2 months hard labour. 

When not considering nailing down his stock, Walter did his best to extend the business. He increased the alcohol range offered - he was the sole agent for Whitbread beers and stouts in the town in the early 1890s. You'd be charged extra he said if you failed to return the Whitbread bottles in good condition. Presumably that meant loosing a deposit. Amongst the goodies presented by the Lovegrove family for their 1896 Christmas display were bottled and tinned fruits, fancy boxes of dates, figs and Normandy pippins (apples), candied peel and nuts, Crosse and Blackwell pickles, and the finest teas. Some of this bounty found it's way found it's way to the Cottage hospital which he regularly donated food to. In 1891 amongst his gifts to the sick there were 3 bottles of port wine, which was considered fortifying for the unwell. 

A guardian to the poor who really did his job

Throughout the 1880s Walter served various roles with local governing bodies. He was elected to represent Marlow on the Rural Sanitary Authority (and subsequently chaired it) and was a Guardian for the Poor eg sat on the Board of Guardians for the Wycombe Poor Law union. It's in these roles that in our eyes Walter shines. He constantly raises questions as to the treatment of Marlow's poor and it's obvious he is genuinely aware of the practical difficulties they faced. When someone died and had a paupers funeral, their goods could be seized to meet the funeral expenses. Walter pointed out that in many cases this was not done with any kind of compassion. In 1882 he cited a case of two young women who had suffered the loss of both parents suddenly and in quick succession. The younger unmarried girl was told by the Guardian's representative that the board would take "every stick they had".  Walter said kindness might have lead to leaving her with a few bits so she could furnish a bare room subsequently offered to her. 

Another concern of Walter was the fact the poor who received "parish bread" (poor relief in the form of bread) recieved it only once a week. The bread dished out to them was supposed to last the full 7 days. Walter asked his fellow guardians how many of them had their bread order sent once a week. None did, for the obvious reason that the fresh bread however good, would be hopelessly stale and hard by the end of the week. Walter said it was a "hard and cruel system" that made the poor try to eat such bread as they had no choice. He noted bread deliveries in some parts of the Union were always late and so the poor were forced to wait outside for an hour at a time no matter how cold and wet it was. Others had to walk a couple of miles to the distribution point. He suggested that money could be given out instead so provisions could be bought as needed, but this caused uproar. There was a fear people might spend it on something the Guardians didn't think they should, like beer. He tried to promote a compromise that would see money given out as a trial in some areas where the worst quality bread was reported or the population was more scattered but no one could agree to do this. Nevertheless Walter personally examined all the bread delivered to Marlow and was not going to let anyone get away with delivering poor quality stuff just because it was for the needy. As a Guardian Walter was selected to attend the Poor Law conference at Exeter Hall. He reported back that is was a depressing experience with much harsh and unfeeling attitudes on display by the speakers. He agreed however with one who said it was "absurd" to expect a labouring man to put money away for hard times it old age when he was paid just 13s a week. For such a man to be driven to the workhouse at the end of his life would be cruel indeed said Walter. 

Walter helps the workhouse residents

 Walter badgered his friends and neighbours for general donations for those unfortunate enough to find themselves a workhouse inmate at Saunderton or Bledlow (the children).  This included in 1893 a gift of footballs from Marlow Football Club to the children of the Bledlow workhouse. After someone donated dozens of pairs of reading glasses to the older citizens residing at Saunderton, Walter acted as a collection point for donated material so the little Workhouse library - or rather "capital reading cupboard" would no longer be bare. He appealed particularly for donations of papers that covers the war in the Transvaal as at least 10 workhouse men were ex soldiers and were especially interested in updates. 

He constantly asked after of the welfare of the children in the Union workhouse for example if they had much opportunity to play. He was also chosen to distribute Christmas gifts to the needy by wealthy citizens who knew he'd know best where they'd be appreciated. You can find out more about everyday life for Marlow people in the Wycombe Union workhouse at  Saunderton in a post here

Many of many parts 

Walter's organisational abilities also saw him taking a lead role in organising the Jubilee festivities in town - see below for links to more information on those. He was the executive chair of the 1897 committee for example, and also sat on both the Jubilee dinner and sports committees that year. 

Other campaigns of Walters were for better provision of clean drinking water in the town, improved paving (the old paths were "a series of duck ponds" according to Walter) and for a new post office when the old West Street one was considered hopelessly cramped. In support of the first he had the water in the 50ft deep well in his premises chemically tested and the results were as bad as he feared - it was declared unfit for human consumption. 

Walter sounds busy enough but he was also a churchwarden and hon sec of the Fire Brigade. In his leisure time, such as what he had, Walter had two passions. One was music, the other poultry! During his grocer years he had advertised eggs for sale from his own farms. He bred his own stock and exhibited his birds far and wide. He even took some to the Crystal Palace poultry show, scooping several rosettes. He continued to do this all his life. He also gave lectures on the finer points of poultry keeping at the Institute and headed up the Wycombe & District fanciers association. 

His other love saw him playing with the Marlow orchestral society on his flute. And yes, he managed to be the Hon. Sec of that body too. 

Above, advert from 1891 guide to Marlow. 

Walter moves on

In 1898 things looked like they were going well for Walter. He was supplying groceries to some of the biggest homes in the neighborhood such as Bisham Abbey. When the latter had a ball to which the tradesman they dealt with were invited, Walter was chosen to give a speech to thank the hosts on behalf of all attendees. A description of the festive sights in Marlow describes Walter's premises as a scene of animation as the staff rushed to fulfil orders. There is no obvious indication of financial difficulties. He had been elected to the Marlow Urban District Council and chaired it by 1896, and was a J.P. Walter seemed to be at the pinnacle of his success. 

The next year he decided to give up the grocers and start up as an auctioneer and estate agent, something he'd dabbled in previously. I get the impression that this was a relatively quick decision as he was advertising for a new grocers apprentice less than a year before he  sold the shop. (The applicant had to be a respectable person, with a quick head for figures and a good neat hand.) He obviously could not live-in anymore, so he moved at first to Ellerslie in Institute Rd before moving to the newly developed "Cromwell Gardens Estate" then Ennismore, Station Rd. 

With no children of his own, he took on as an "auctioneers pupil" his young nephew Oscar, son of brother William. 

Constantly innovating, it was at this point Walter became the agent for the South Bucks Standard. If you had an item of news or a report of an event that you wished published, you could take it to Walter's home or Station Rd office and he would arrange for it to be inserted in the paper. 

Dark clouds are gathering 

The news Walter would read in his copy of the South Bucks Standard was going to become increasingly uncomfortable in the next few years. Walter had been appointed collector of poor rates (a tax) for the Marlow district as well as some other rates. His election to this role makes sense given he had a reputation for being organised and efficient and he frequently handled funds on behalf of charity appeals and various organisations. But things did not go well. Walter's role was a paid one, and when he asked for a raise, it was refused despite several people speaking up about the relatively low level he received for the amount of work he did. By 1906 the overseers of the poor had begun to raise questions about how Walter was doing his job. There was a large amount of arrears owed by various rate payers and they did not think he was doing enough to collect them. Someone suggested that "misplaced kindness" was hindering Walter. The authorities said he had not co operated with them in their investigations. By December that year they wrote to the Marlow Urban District Council to suggest they terminate Walter's services immediately. The council decided to hold a special meeting as soon as possible and offer Walter the chance to resign if he would not follow the Overseers instructions, with the threat of dismissal if he didn't. Walter was furious. He strongly denied that he had refused their requests to bring his books to their meetings for some 9 months. He said they were at his office and open to inspection by anyone at any time, and had been seen on average once a month. He had refused their requests to take the books away as he said that before when they had done so they kept them for days and prevented him getting on with his work. 

Walter was required to pay in any collected amounts promptly, not keeping more than £5 in hand. He admitted sometimes being late doing so but not for long. The auditor's had passed his accounts and commented that they felt Walter was simply too busy to give the rate collecting task the attention it needed. They had raised the issue that he was not paying in his money as quickly as possible though, and he was late filling out his receipt book too. Part of the problem was caused by a falling out with assistant over seer Reuben Nereus Smith, who Walter had asked to put all communications with him in writing due to previous misunderstandings of who wanted who to do what when. Several people spoke up for Walter at this special meeting. Walter Porter said Water Lovegrove had worked hard and long and at some cost to himself. He should be given time to catch up with his paperwork he said. Things struggled on with Walter promising to pay in sums collected faster. He asked that the out of pocket expenses owed to him would also be paid promptly in future. 

Goodbye Walter. 

But by December 1907 the secret troubles that had worried Walter were beginning to overcome him. He had got into personal financial difficulties as his business had struggled and he was on the point of bankruptcy. He was late paying in rate money again, and there were still very many uncollected rates. Walter had to pay a bond when taking on the role of collector which he would loose if he left without the majority of rates bought in. He had repeatedly tried to sell his old grocers premises in the High Street but could find no buyer. He said he felt luck was always against him as he could sell "rotten old shells" of buildings but not his spacious and purpose built grocers. Questions about how he was managing the rates would have been fatal to his personal business. So one sad day, Walter left to attend an auction in Cookham, and never returned. His body was found several days later, by a hay rick. He had shot himself through the heart, leaving a number of letters. He wrote "I have been a good natured fool, and tried to do right, but without good results ....the world has been hard to me. ...Over work and worry have done their work". He begged his wife for forgiveness and said he thought she would soon have found herself a widow anyway as he'd felt unwell. He added he wished she would find "more friends in adversity than she found in life."  He also left a note asking that Marlow policeman Sergeant Pearce should be asked to identify his body to save his wife the horrible task. This Pearce did. 

A wife left behind 

Poor Ellen was left with absolutely nothing. She must have feared the worst when Walter disappeared. On the day he was found, the overseers came and collected the parish books from Walter's home. When asked at his inquest whether it was not true that Walter had been unfortunate in all of his business affairs, she replied simply, yes. She said she knew he had been worried about money matters but the extent of the problems was revealed only after his death. Less than a month after his suicide, the entire household contents of the Lovegrove home was put up for sale, down to the kitchen utensils. The Rev Light, who had gone to Ellen immediately on hearing of Walter's disappearance, repeatedly reminded everyone that she was left "in very straightened circumstances". The previously unsellable shop, then let to grocers Harridge & Dorrell,  was also auctioned off and found an immediate buyer this time. Ellen would eventually leave town, and live as a "companion" to a lady in Maidenhead. 

At their first meeting after his death, the Board of Guardians in passing a motion of sympathy for Mrs Lovegrove highly praised Walter for his work with them. Fellow board member Rev Light said Walter was "one of most obliging and pleasantest of men and one for whom he had the greatest regard". Walter's accounts with the overseers were eventually settled and the task of chasing the late payers became someone else's responsibility. As there is no evidence Walter had appropriated any funds for his own use, he earns his place as a Marlow hero. 

Written & researched by Kathryn Day. 

More information: 

Previous grocers occupying Walter's premises - here

To find out about other shops or specific premises see the index here

The Jubilee celebrations 1887 and 1897

Marlow Institute here

Index of posts about everyday life in Walter's Marlow - here

Other Marlow Heroes - 

Arthur Corby and Charles Bonny - here

- Andrew Means  - here

- Nurse Cassidy here

- Matron Mary Ann Cole here

- the Dunbar Dicksons - here

- John Langley here

Sources:

Marlow Directory and Almanack 1907. 

Marlow Guide 1903 & 1907. 

Marlow Directory and Tourist Guide 1891, South Banks Standard. 

 Census returns from the transcripts taken from the originals by Jane Pullinger with thanks. 

Bucks Advertiser & Aylesbury News October 26th 1872, August 14th 1886, January 18th 1908

Bucks Herald June 8th 1878, January 3rd 1880, January 18th 1908.  

Maidenhead Advertiser November 23rd 1877, February 2nd 1887,  December 30th 1891, March 30th 1897, March 18th 1908. 

Reading Mercury June 8th 1878. 

South Bucks Stands February 27th & December 24th 1891, November 4th 1892, January 6th 1893, January 18th 1895, November 20th &  December 18th 1896, February 25th & September 1st 1898, December 8th 1899, July 28th 1905, October 6th & December 7th 1906, December 11th 1907

England and Wales Death Registration Index 1837-2007," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:2JXP-4SX : 31 December 2014), Harriet Sarah Lovegrove, 1874; from "England & Wales Deaths, 1837-2006," database, findmypast (http://www.findmypast.com : 2012); citing Death, Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, England, General Register Office, Southport, England.

© MarlowAncestors.