h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Today's rather tragic family tale takes us from East London out to a provincial town to the west of the city. Here, in 1798, my many times great grandfather was born. He was a carpenter and he married Harriet who was a dressmaker, and they settled down together and produced thirteen children, ten of whom survived, six of whom married and had children of their own.

Three children died in infancy, not an unusual state of affairs for anyone doing family research in the nineteenth century. One of those infants did not survive a month. This child was born in August 1839 and died on the 22 September. The circumstances of the death were such that an inquest was held. This is the record of that inquest:

An Inquisition indented, taken for our Sovereign Lady the Queen, at the Public Office, on Monday the twenty third Day of September, in the third Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lady VICTORIA, by Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland Queen, Defender of the Faith before JOHN JACKSON xxxx, Esquire, one of the Coroners of our said Lady the QUEEN for the said Borough, on View of the Body of a male child (not named) aged about one month now laying dead at the House of his Father Benjamin, in the Parish and Borough aforesaid, Carpenter upon the Oath of several Persons whose names are hereunder-written and Seals affixed, good and Lawful Men of the said Borough, duly chosen, and who being now here duly sworn and charged to enquire, for our said Lady the QUEEN, when, how, and by what Means, the said male infant child came to his death, do, upon their Oath, say, That the said male infant child on the twenty second day of September in the year aforesaid in the Borough and County aforesaid, being fed by his Mother Harriet, Wife of the said Benjamin, with a piece of pork it so happened that accidentally, casually, and by misfortune the said piece of pork stuck in the windpipe of the said male infant child by which it was then and there choked and suffocated of which choking and suffocating the said male infant child then and there instantly died. And so the Jurors aforesaid upon their Oath aforesaid, do say that the said male infant child in manner and by the means aforesaid, accidentally, casually, and by misfortune came to his death, and not otherwise. In Witness whereof, as well the said CORONER as the said Jurors, have, to this Inquisition set their Hands and Seals, the Day, Year and Place first above written. Signed and sealed by J.J. xxxx (Coroner) and witnesses.

To which, fourteen members of the parish, set their signatures or marks.

Not being a parent, or in any sense child friendly, I took this at first to be an account of a tragic accident as per the judgement of the fourteen good men and true. But then I started to think more closely. I am not au fait with weaning processes in the 1830’s, or indeed at any time, so my initial question would be ‘Is feeding solid food to a one month old child normal practice?’

According to the inquest evidence, it was the mother, Harriet who was feeding the child at the time the piece of pork got stuck in its windpipe. Harriet had already lost a son in 1834 (Samuel), but she had successfully raised eight others, so she was not a novice.

Remember, this is a child no more than one month old. Surely an experienced mother would not be feeding it solid food, however mashed it may be? (The food, not the mother.) Two possibilities occurred to me. The first is that, with at least seven children already, she deliberately choked the child and made it appear an accident? Horrific thought.

The second possibility is that Harriet was covering up for someone else when she claimed to be feeding the child. In 1839 she had three daughters Harriet aged 17, Helena aged 15, and Mary Ann aged 11. Harriet and Helena would at those ages most likely be working. Perhaps the child, (along with his three brothers, aged from 9 years down to 2 years) was left in the care of Mary Ann, who may have sought to console a screaming baby by popping a piece of food in its mouth.

[Amy P]

Who'd've thought family history could be so full of intrigue? Another fascinating read!

Deb

That does seem very young to be giving a child something other than milk, but in the history of weaning, from the late 18th century the fashion was to wean early, around 2 months, so it's quite possible that Harriet was trying to wean her baby.

However the usual weaning food seems to have been milk mixed with flour, breadcrumbs or egg. Certainly not pork. And Harriet would know this, having raised all those children already.

What a mystery!

F S

coelacanth, all information and opinions gratefully received and added to the electronic database. Thank heaven for computers