Begging In A Bowler

[tozzin]

Beggar outside Stewart & Stewart corner of Pinstone Street and Cross Burgess Street , seems this unfortunate dressed slightly better than todays beggars.

[Unitedite Returns]

Well composed image, but it looks 'cropped' somehow.

Victorian-Edwardian, I would guess.

I wonder if he was paid for the pose?

Looks smarter than a lot of folks that you see on the streets today that aren't begging, but that is progress, I suppose.

[Athy]

Is it a bowler, or a "tin hat" denoting an ex-serviceman?

[lysander]

The photo predates the introduction of the Brodie helmet by several years ( May 1916) and public begging was frowned on by the police..

[Athy]

No date was given for the photo.

I don't think that public begging is encouraged by the police today!

[lysander]

I agree, but the clothes style indicates, as uniteditereturns suggests, a date of late Victorian/early Edwardian.

[Athy]

I wonder if the camera caught him while he was blinking, or if he was begging because he was blind.

[RLongden]

1 hour ago, lysander said:

I agree, but the clothes style indicates, as uniteditereturns suggests, a date of late Victorian/early Edwardian.

Almost certainly after 1894, when the Stewart and Stewart building was completed, but hardly narrows it down?!

http://www.picturesheffield.com/frontend.php?keywords=Ref_No_increment;EQUALS;s18762&pos=35&action=zoom&id=21328

[HughW]

Strange differences between this version and the one at Picture Sheffield - what is happening across his chest?

[lysander]

It seems to me to be a placard of some sort with signs of a strap around his neck. There appears to be something written on it which has been obscured or have I had too much Port?

[Unitedite Returns]

7 hours ago, HughW said:

Strange differences between this version and the one at Picture Sheffield - what is happening across his chest?

An impression of having been 'photo-shopped' BADLY. Possibly because if there had been a placard there originally, it might have made a statement that the publishers thought were perhaps best obscured, lest it upset decent folks.

[Edmund]

Not suggesting it's the same gentleman, but in July 1928 a sentence of 3 months hard labour was imposed on William Beadle, boot repairer, for begging in Pinstone Street and using obscene language. He stated that he had only been out of prison a fortnight and had not been able to obtain work.

[Athy]

18 minutes ago, Edmund said:

Not suggesting it's the same gentleman, but in July 1928 a sentence of 3 months hard labour was imposed on William Beadle, boot repairer, for begging in Pinstone Street and using obscene language. 

"Got any spare f****** change please?"

[Unitedite Returns]

It may come as a surprise to us today, but during the 19th Century much effort was put into the categorisation of different types of destitute individuals. Categorisation was based very much on those circumstances that had brought about such penury, but essentially, there were the 'deserving poor' and the 'undeserving poor', and there was any manifold number of graduations in between those two extremes.

The 'deserving poor' were essentially those of a 'respectable' sort who had fallen on hard times, through unfortunate circumstance. The 'undeserving poor' however, were those whose decline into penury had been brought about by a 'lack of moral fibre', general idleness, addiction to drink, etc., etc.

Whilst such ideas had lost much of their scientific credibility by the end of the nineteenth century, they never-the-less retained some measure of resonance with the public at large, and arguably, still retain some measure of resonance even today.

These were times when the fear of penury and its associated disgrace and consequences were very much on the minds of both, the middle and the working classes alike, and so, those perceived as being the 'deserving poor', otherwise respectable individuals that had fallen on hard times, through unemployment, injury, sickness, or death of the family wage earner, were likely to entice a greater measure of sympathy than those of the other sort.

So, it is probable that a beggar portraying some measure of 'respectability' was more likely to be tolerated and more likely to be successful than one that did not portray such 'merits'.

Much middle class income was derived from investments and savings, and in the unregulated financial markets of the time, banks and businesses could disappear overnight, along with investors entire savings and income.

The rules of inheritance, and of entailment meant that on the death of the father, that entire estates could be passed onto the next surviving senior male member of that blood-line, (a nephew, cousin, second-cousin for example), leaving the deceased surviving spouse and family without home, or means of support.

Such circumstances were a recurring theme in 'romantic' literature of the time, most notably, in that of Jane Austin, (of a slightly earlier time, where many of the storylines are based in the obsession with finding suitable husbands for eligible daughters), and this theme can also to be found in some of Charles Dickens' works.

So, using obscene language was hardly likely to gain sympathy from the public at large.

 

[Athy]

You talk a lot of sense for a Blades supporter.