The last time I looked into the financial woes of my ancestor George Wreford, I wanted a simple explanation into the change in bankruptcy laws in 1861. I’ve since learned the key to understanding is knowing the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency.

Bankruptcy or Insolvency?

Whether a person was declared bankrupt or insolvent, was dependent on the profession of the debtor.

Only traders could apply for bankruptcy and have access to some kind of relief – an ‘Order of Discharge’ – which would effectively clear the debt, and allow them to rebuild their business or finances. Any money earned after bankruptcy was theirs to keep.

Non-traders were not able to do this, and would be liable for their debts forever. Any future assets or inheritance could be seized by creditors to pay off old debts, and they could be kept in gaol indefinitely.

Why was this case?

It was a long-held belief that financial failure in commerce was a natural risk of business (think: ‘market fluctuations’), whereas failure in private life was a moral or personal failing (think: ‘extravagant lifestyles’). Debtor’s prisons were seen as a punitive measure to discourage living beyond one’s means.

What changed in 1861?

After the new Bankruptcy Act (effective October 1861), non-traders could also apply for bankruptcy – an ‘Order of Discharge’ – so that they, too, could have their debts cleared.

Unfortunately for George, he became insolvent in March 1861 while still under the old laws.

So why would George be considered a non-trader?

The answer seems to lie in the fact that as well as being an innkeeper, butcher, and journeyman butcher, George was also described as a farmer.

Farmers were excluded from bankruptcy because their livelihood depended on the ‘labour of the soil’ and the ‘uncertainty of the seasons’, NOT commercial trade.

So although George was a butcher and innkeeper, his farming defined his primary legal status. This meant the courts viewed his capital as being tied up in land and livestock reared by himself, rather than goods bought and sold. The meat he sold was likely butchered from his own animals rather than animals bought from someone else.

Being a ‘journeyman butcher’ also suggested that he was an employee rather than a business owner, and therefore could not declare bankruptcy.

The Petition

This notice in the London Gazette tells us that George voluntarily declared insolvency. He would have recognised he was in serious financial trouble and filed his own petition, giving over all his assets to the court to pay off his debts. Had he not done this, a creditor could have had George sent to prison and controlled whether he was released.

The ‘Benefit of the Act’

The post Bankrupt or Insolvent? appeared first on Geneageek.

For a long time, I’d been searching for one of my WREFORD ancestors on the 1861 census without luck.

On the night of the 1861 census, in the Devonshire village of Witheridge, 14 year old Drusilla was recorded as head of the household and her occupation as ‘Innkeeper ?’ (note the question mark). Also in the household were 4 siblings aged 7 and under (including my direct ancestor, Augusta Harriet), and a 17 year old servant, Emily Cheriton. Their parents, George and Harriet, were nowhere to be seen.

London Gazette, April 9, 1861

COURT FOR RELIEF OF INSOLVENT DEBTORS.
…
Before the Judge of the County Court of Devonshire, holden at Exeter, on
Tuesday the 23rd day of April, 1861.
George Wreford, late of Witheridge, in the county of Devon, Inkeeper, Butcher, and Farmer, also farming an estate at Tiverton, in the same county, previously of Withley Goodman Farm, in Tiverton aforesaid, Farmer and Butcher, formerly of Chulmleigh, Devon, Journey-man Butcher.

COURT FOR RELIEF OF INSOLVENT DEBTORS.
…
ORDERS have been made, vesting in the Provisional
Assignee the Estates and Effects of the following Persons: On their own Petitions.
…
George Wreford, late of Witheridge, Devonshire, Innkeeper, Butcher, and Farmer.—In the Gaol
of Exeter.

(London Gazette, March 26, 1861)

So there he was – bankrupt and in jail.

The census was taken for the night of April 6th, 1861. This now explains where George was that night. I presume his wife, Harriet had travelled to Exeter with him for moral support.

I now know where to look for them. This is brilliant, except my searches of the census are still not bearing fruit. My next step is to find ‘Exeter Gaol’ on the census and browse from there.

The post Ancestor Found (almost) appeared first on Geneageek.