Rutland Local History and Record Society recounts story of baby abandoned in 1662 at Market Overton Church

This article is a summary of how the Poor Law, that was in force from 1601 to 1834, reacted to an unexpected birth, writes Rutland Local History and Record Society.

In August 1662, a heavily pregnant Elizabeth Holt, travelling the Great North Road, staggered into Stretton crying out that she was in labour. Before anyone could help, she gave birth in the porch of a nearby house.

The women of the village then rallied to her and ‘they did perform those offices that were necessary both to the woman and child’: they took her to an alehouse and provided ‘her with necessaries’ plus clothes for the child. Elizabeth remained in Stretton for 10 days during which it was established she was a widow who previously lived with her husband, at Barnet, until he died a few months earlier.

Under the law, wives were seen as economic dependants of their husbands and poor widows the responsibility of his parish. However, to avoid being returned to Barnet, Elizabeth claimed that she was travelling to her father, in Derbyshire. After 10 days she left Stretton, with her baby, thanking the inhabitants for their kindness.

The same afternoon, at Market Overton, she left the child in the church porch and travelled out of Rutland. She was not heard of again. The baby became the responsibility of Market Overton’s Overseers of the Poor who hired a wet nurse to suckle the child. Afterwards, hearing that a baby had been born at Stretton some days before, the Overseers travelled with the baby and wet nurse to investigate. Confirmation that it was the same baby was provided by several Stretton women who recognised the baby or had provided clothes.

The question now arose as to who was responsible for the baby, Stretton or Market Overton? As Stretton refused to accept the baby, Market Overton took the dispute to the next Justice of the Peace Meeting, who ordered Stretton to receive the child and take care of it till either the father or mother could be found, or the next County Quarter Sessions ordered differently, which it didn’t. The matter was then referred up to the next Assize Court, at Oakham Castle.

That judgement has not survived, but it’s likely that it would have confirmed those of the lower courts that the baby was the responsibility of its place of birth.

As to the baby no more is known and its fate is lost in the mists of time.

If you are interested to find out more about Rutland’s past or join its history society, go to: www.rutlandhistory.org.