Overall a visit to Gressenhall in compassion to source C is a better way to learn about the living conditions and how Gressenhall became harsher.
The next source, which is, source D, diet instructions for able-bodied paupers of both sexes. Issued by the Poor Law Commission in 1836, shows the fugal diet that the paupers had. This source is reliable as it was written 1836, in the time of the workhouses. On my visit to Gressenhall I saw a mock up of a meal, which the paupers would have had, at location 5, which was the museum. The inmates' diet after 1836 was meagre and monotonous. Meals were eaten in silence in the dining hall. The ingredients were now purchased from contractors (the windmill having been sold and removed in 1837), apart from the vegetables obtained from the workhouse garden and the industrial farm. In 1856 the children's diet was improved, and towards the end of the 19th century that of the adults was as well, though without becoming anything other than minimal. The one culinary indulgence was on Christmas Day, when the inmates sat down to a special dinner of roast beef and plum pudding. Initially, the able-bodied men and the unmarried mothers were excluded, but later in the 19th century this particularly vindictive prohibition seems to have been dropped. On the whole I found that the source was the best was to learn about the diet that the paupers would have had, This is because the source was written in the times of the workhouses, so overall it was more reliable than the evidence I found about the diet at Gressenhall
The next source I will be looking at is source E. Source E is the regulations and men’s punishments in Gressenhall Workhouse, after 1834. This source shows that the paupers worked long hours in the workhouse. Half an hour after the workhouse bell was rung for rising, the Master or Matron performed a roll call in each section of the workhouse. The bell also announced meal breaks during which the rules required that "silence, order and decorum shall be maintained" although from 1842 the word "silence" was dropped. Communal prayers were read before breakfast and after supper every day and Divine Service performed every Sunday, Good Friday and Christmas Day. This source also shows that the paupers had a regulated life, and also the punishments, which the paupers endured. On my visit to Gressenhall at location 5, the museum, I found out a lot about this subject. Firstly I found out about the uniforms that they had to wear, which is not mentioned in the source. They had to wear workhouse dress, which was drab and unflattering. Unmarried mothers were still distinguished, if more subtly than before, by being made to wear a 'jacket' made of the same material as the other workhouse clothes. This practice, which earned them the nickname of 'jacket women', continued until 1866. Also in the mesuem I found out about the beds which the inmates had to sleep in, which also is not mentioned in the source. The furniture was a cheap wooden bed with a flock-filled sack as a mattress. Two or three blankets were provided, but pillows were considered an unnecessary luxury. Sheets were not provided. Most people shared a bed; the beds were arranged as in a barracks - two rows of bunks. In addition I found out about the types of work that the inmates had to do, which also is not mentioned in the source. 'Work' consisted of oakum-picking, stone-breaking, bone crushing, sack-making or driving the corn mill. Oakum is old rope, sometimes tarred or knotted. These ropes had to be unpicked inch by inch and a day's work would be to unravel 3 lbs. of rope. Inmates walking round on a tread wheel drove the corn mill. Women had to do domestic work: scrubbing floors that were already clear, polishing brasses, scrubbing table tops, black-leading kitchen ranges and so on. At location I also found information about the punishments that the paupers endured. This is mentioned in the source, by examples of punishments, which happened to people, for example a man named, William Smith was caught stealing cheese from the dining hall. His punishment was four hours daily in the punishment cell for two days. He was kept on bread and water for those two days. I also evidence of the punishment at location 3, the exercise yard, here I saw the bricked up window. This window was bricked up to make room for the punishment cell. Overall a visit to Gressenhall workhouse is more superior to the source. From a visit to Gressenhall you can find out a lot more about the workhouse life than you can from the source.
The next I will be looking at sources F and G. Source F and G are in opposition to the workhouse system. Sources F and G show the reasons to be against the workhouse system. This source does not give a view of the inmates. The author of source f, Richard Oastler, only gives has personal opinion of why he would not like to be in one of the many workhouses. He does not mention anything about the living and working conditions of the inmates. Next, source G, which is a critical drawing of workhouse life, drew by Pugin, an architect. This source does not show any thing about the living or working conditions of the inmate in a workhouse. This source only shows the aspects of what happens in a workhouse. The visit to Gressenhall neither gives views of inmates on this subject. From the visit I found out that the attitudes to poverty had changed and people realised that poverty was often not the fault of the individual. This also does not give me a view of the living or working conditions in the workhouse; it only shows people views on poverty and the poor.
Sources H and I are for the workhouse system. These sources are biased as the ratepayers would have written these, and the ratepayers would of wanted the paupers to go in the workhouse because it would not of cost them as must as it would when they were paying for the outdoor relief. These sources also do not mention anything about the living and working conditions of the inmates in the workhouses. These sources mainly give figures of how much money has been saved due the workhouse system. From my visit I did not find anything linking to this, except a drama that was shown. This drama also just gave person views. Overall from these four sources neither a visit to Gressenhall or the sources are useful. This is because they do not mention anything about the living and working conditions in the workhouses after the Poor Law Amendment Act.
The next source I am looking is source J. This source, from the minute book of the board of guardians of Gressenhall workhouse, 1841 is telling us about education. This source is thanking a married couple on teaching over one hundred orphans. This source does not give much information about the education at the workhouses. On my visit to Gressenhall at location 2, which was the infirmary yard. Here I saw evidence of an extension to provide a larger schoolroom for the boys. This was extended in 1836. The workhouse schools at Gressenhall were large, and, by the standards of the time, progressive. Overall I think that a visit to Gressenahll is the best was to learn about education. This is because you can see the classrooms first hand, unlike the sources.
Source k, records of the County Lunatic Asylum written in July 1863. From this source you can tell that the living conditions in Gressenhall workhouse was not very nice. You can tell this by the senstance ‘…and was brought up surrounded by the moral effuvia (filth) of the workhouse, a place unfavourable to any advance of life.’ From this you can tell that the workhouse was a dirty place to live in. The horror of conditions in some workhouses came to public attention in 1845 when inmates at Andover workhouse were discovered to have been fighting over scraps of decaying meat on the bones they were meant to be crushing. The living conditions of the workhouses were deplorable. Overall in my opinion I think that you can learn about the same amount from the source and a visit to Gressenhall workhouse.
The final source I will be looking at is source L. This source is a drawing of Oliver Twist asking for more, this picture appeared in the Charles Dickens’ novel. This source shows the poor diet in which the workhouse provided. Furthermore this shows segregation. It shows segregation, as there are only male children in the illustration. The poor diet, contaminated water supplies, and unhygienic and overcrowded conditions led to illness and disease. The most common of these being measles, opthalmia, small pox, dysentery, scarlet and typhus fever, and cholera. On the other hand my visit to Gressenhall workhouse also provided information on these two subjects. At Gressenhall I saw a mock up of a meal, which would have been served at Gressenhall. From this source I cannot get any information on poor diet except Oliver Twist is obviously hungry and asking for more food. Whereas on my visit the mock up of the meal shows what variety and type of food was served to the inmates. Also at my visit to Gressenhall I could observe the segregation walls, and see where each group of pauper were kept in. Overall comparing source L and my visit, a visit to Gressenhall is the best way to gain knowledge about the living conditions in the workhouse.
In conclusion both the sources and the visit to Gressenhall are informative but also they have their limitations. For example, the sources are selective and have little information on emotions of the inmates. This is because the paupers have left no written documents about their experiences. This may be because a lot of the paupers were illiterate. As for the visit to Gressenhall, it cannot give details of the life inside Gressenhall workhouse as sources E and H can for example. On the other hand the sources and the visit help me to gain more knowledge of Gressenhall’s working and living conditions. On the whole it appears that a visit to Gressenhall is the greatest way to learn about the living and working conditions in this workhouse. This is because visiting Gressenhall supplies you with a lot more information, for example from the museum. Unlike the visit, the sources do not contain a lot of information; the information, which they contain, is mainly based of one or two subjects. Whereas the information I found at Gressenhall is a lot more varied. Overall visiting Gressenhall taught myself further information about living and working conditions at the workhouse than the sources could.