Bristol and Inebriates (2)
The Royal Victoria Homes (Brentry)
England's first and last inebriate reformatory
 |
The Reformatory in 1903 (from Ordnance Survey)A - D Womens villageD 'Village' HallF GreenhousesG Engine HouseH ReceptionJ Stable Block for women retreat (and main house)I LaundryK - O male VillageK Male reception and Police Station
|
Brentry, by Westbury on Trym, northwest of Bristol, became an Inebriate Institution because of a need to expand the Royal Victoria Homein Horfield.
The decision to look for a site such as Brentry was determined by the 1898 Inebriates Act, which created Inebriate Reformatories for the compulsory detention and treatment of inebriates. To work though, it needed a lot of new Inebriate Reformatories to be set up. The Act allowed councils to contribute to the maintenance of a retreat or a reformatory, but few were likely to be keen to incur the expense of setting them up. The charity of the RVH could not hope to have the money to set up a reformatory. The plan conceived was to set up a reformatory in which Councils bought what were effectively shares, so they were not frightened by having to put up large expenses.
The Rev. Burdenfirst rented Brentry and on the 9 January 1899 licensed Brentry as an extension of the RVH. It was licensed as a retreat for 50 women and used only the old buildings so little work was needed. With this evidence that the site could be a 'going concern' and even though it was still empty, Councils were approached for serious funding. Brentry was licensed as a Female Reformatory (for 75 women, operated jointly by Mr Burden his wife Katherine) on the 31 March 1899 thus achieving the 'credit' of becoming the first reformatory ever licensed under the new Act. A number of County Councils agreed to contribute a lump sum each to purchase the site and build residential blocks, in return for admitting rights and reduced payments for inmates. The first woman inmate was admitted to Brentry on the 24 April 1899. On 28 July 1899, the scheme was legally set out by means of a trust deed.
The institution was called the "Royal Victoria Homes, Brentry, Near Bristol", with the approval of Queen Victoria. The trust deed created the Institution as a joint venture between the Management of the Horfield Royal Victoria Home (known as the Promoters) and the founding councils. The deed sets out that future subscribing councils would contribute a member to the management Board, with the intention of eventually taking over the running of the reformatory. This is indeed what occurred, as by 1901 23 councils had subscribed, so that the council members outnumbered the Horfield members by 2 to 1.
The main building programme occurred between 1899 and 1900. It was then licensed as a Reformatory for 150 Females and 111 Males. Brentry now operated as a Licensed Reformatory called The Royal Victoria Homes, Brentry.
The main officers of Brentry 1901 - Rev Burden and his wife are in the middle we assume deputy warden is man in bowler (Lt-Col. Small) and Medical Officer (Dr Ormerod) in boater.
Brentry had an eventful time - it ran into debt, leading to the disowning and closure of Horfield, followed by a complete takeover by the Councils and resignation of the Burdens. It suffered from Typhoid and had a series of mutinies and walkouts.
Early in June [1909] symptoms of unrest were noticed among the men inmates, caused by the expectation of reduced sentences in view of amendments proposed in the Inebriates Acts. This unrest developed later into discontent at the delay in legislation, culminating in a serious disturbance and mutiny on Saturday morning, 3rd July, when no less than 29 men left, but were all captured the same day some distance from the Reformatory.
[The officers] heard what the men said amongst themselves, and among the other inmates. …Dr Fleckhad warned the police to be in readiness, and last Saturday the matter came to a head. A complaint was made about the bread served for breakfast. It so happened that the thundery weather made the yeast 'go off' and that morning it was not so good as usual. Dr Fleck tested the bread, and told the men it was not so nice as usual, but he and the other officers had used it. He also told them he had had a fresh supply of yeast in, and that they could have anything else, except bread. The men did not agree, but apparently marched down to the gate and got away.
[After locking up the other inmates] as many attendants as could be spared set out after the recalcitrants, who had taken the road to Filton. The policewere also informed, and Inspector Thompson, of Westbury, with one or two of his men, set off on their bicycles in pursuit. The alarm was also sent to all the surrounding village stations, Hambrook, Stoke Gifford, Thornbury, Patchway, Fishponds, Staple Hill, etc., and police were dispatched in vehicles and on bicycle in all directions.
The fugitives, who were most of them in their shirt sleeves, as soon as they got outside the home armed themselves with tools, sticks and stones, and soon presented a very formidable appearance. Instead of dispersing, as they might have been expected to, they proceeded together down the main road in the direction of Filton, and then striking across the Thornbury highway, proceeded along the road to Patchway and under the railway arch to Hambrook. As they were going through the brickfields some of the searchers overtook them, but they refused to return to the Home, and their strength and numbers forbade arrest. The only thing that could be done was to follow them till reinforcements came.
It was a novel sight to see these recalcitrant fellows strolling at their own pace through the narrow lanes and across fields, stopping here and there to pick a flower. They went quietly enough without opposition, but an attempted check would have brought about disastrous consequences. So the police followed behind pushing their bicycles, carrying them where the ground was too rough to permit of riding or over stiles. …
The mutineers proceeded steadily in the direction of Staple Hill, pausing only and then to demand refreshments at wayside houses. It did not appear polite to refuse them, and when satisfied they went on their way. They had had nearly three hours liberty and had walked many miles when their escort was strengthened suddenly by the arrival of Supt Cooke of Staple Hill with [4 other policemen] and three of the attendants. Supt Cooke at once called on the men to surrender and return to the Home, but they refused, declaring that under no conditions would they be taken back. The superintendent explained that there was only one alternative, and that was they must be locked up in the police station. The reply was that they would rather do that than return to the Home, and this being agreed upon they submitted to being taken by way of Downend to Staple Hill Station, where their presence was a severe tax upon its four cells.
The aftercare is described in an annual report:
For each monthly meeting of the House Committee a report is prepared, showing the names of all cases due for discharge during the succeeding month, with the person or association responsible for their aftercare, and for sending reports to the Reformatory. Each case discharged is provided with a change of decent clothing, given 5/-, and placed on the train at Bristol, provided they do not belong to that City, with their fare paid, and arrangements are made for them to be met at their arriving station by the person undertaking their aftercare.
All gratuity money due to inmates on their discharge is paid through the person undertaking the aftercare at the rate of 5/- per week, provided they continue to live sober and respectable lives.
The maximum gratuity is [£4:11:3 for a male and £3:8:0 for a female serving 3 year sentence] and in the same ratio for shorter terms. ... In making our arrangements for the aftercare I first interview the inmate and find out his or her intentions, when the cases are willing to be advised by us, we try to get them situations away from their old associations and companions. ... Having fixed the place, we arrange for some person to befriend, supervise and report on the case; this work is now practically all done, either by the After Care Association, of which Mr A.J.S. Maddison, of 32 Charing Cross, London, is the Secretary; or by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, of which Mr. R.J.Parr, of Leicester Square, London, is the Director and Secretary. Mr Maddison, with his agents, is represented in every district to which we discharge, and takes charge of section II. cases. Mr. Parr undertakes the aftercare of section I. cases. A few cases have been discharged to the care for Police Court Missionaries, and a few have been taken up by private families
