Blog module icon

Archives

Dec 24

Christmas Dinner at the Chester County Poorhouse

Posted on December 24, 2018 at 11:39 AM by Chester County Archives

PH37 Album 2 -289
Photograph of the Chester County Poorhouse by Max J. Mueller, 1889. Courtesy of the Chester County Historical Society 

The Chester County Home, or poorhouse, was located in West Bradford. It took in its first residents in 1800; before that the care of poor and infirm Chester Countians was the responsibility of individual townships and boroughs. In 1900 an insane asylum was opened within the Home’s complex of buildings. Residents of the poorhouse and asylum, if physically able, worked on the Home’s farm or in other aspects of the institution’s operations. (1)

Surviving records at the Chester County Archives provide general information on what the residents ate. Even more revealing is a detailed menu book for 1924-1926 recorded by the Directors of the Poor. Residents received three meals daily, with the mid-day dinner the largest. (2) However, not everyone at the Home or Insane Asylum was given the same food. The book lists separate menus for three categories of residents: indigent/non-working, working, and private patients (residents who were charged room and board). According to an April 24, 1924 Daily Local News article, the different menus were designed to provide more calories to working and private patients, who were described as “more active than the other patients.” (3) The article listed the carbohydrate, protein, and fat amounts in a week’s meals. Indigent residents who could not work were fed less and received a greater percentage of their calories from carbohydrates.

444
Image of the Chester County Home menu book (1924-1926) accompanied with a 1924 Daily Local News article

For example, here is the menu for December 29, 1925. Notice the omission of scrapple from the indigent non-workers’ breakfast. The private patients received butter for their bread at all three meals, working residents had butter at one meal, and indigent non-workers did not get butter at all that day.


Private Patients
Working Class
Indigent
 Breakfast  Breakfast  Breakfast
  • Oatmeal or [C]orn Flakes
  • Scrapple
  • Bread or Toast, Butter
  • Milk or Coffee
  • Oatmeal or [C]orn Flakes
  • Scrapple
  • Bread
  • Milk or Coffee
  • Oatmeal
  • Bread or Toast
  • Milk or Coffee
 Dinner  Dinner  Dinner
  • Beef
  • Potatoes
  • Tomatoes
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Tea
  • Beef
  • Potatoes
  • Tomatoes
  • Bread
  • Milk or Tea
  • Bread
  • Potatoes
  • Tomatoes
  • Bread
  • Milk or Tea
 Supper  Supper  Supper
  • Cold Meat
  • Fried Potatoes
  • Bread or Toast, Butter
  • Bread Pudding
  • Milk or Cocoa
  • Cold Meat
  • Fried Potatoes
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Cocoa
  • Bread or Toast
  • Bread Pudding
  • Leftovers
  • Milk or Cocoa

But perhaps there’s a more obvious explanation as to why the private patients generally received more food other than their level of activity—they were literally paying to be there and providing necessary funds to the Home. As it is likely that some private patients were unable to work, their additional food, such as more butter, may have been provided simply because they or their families were paying for it.  

Although most days there were notable differences between the meals the different “classes” of residents received, this was not true for Christmas dinner. While the breakfasts were markedly different, dinner was exactly the same. Christmas supper for everyone consisted of many more sweets than usual. 

Private Patients
Working Class
Indigent
 Breakfast  Breakfast Breakfast
  • Oatmeal or [C]orn Flakes
  • Fried Bacon
  • Fried Potatoes
  • Bread or Toast, Butter
  • Milk or Coffee
  • Oatmeal or [C]orn Flakes
  • Fried Bacon
  • Fried Potatoes
  • Bread
  • Milk or Coffee
  • Oatmeal or [C]orn Flakes
  • Bread or Toast
  • Milk or Coffee
 Dinner  Dinner Dinner 
  • Roast Chicken
  • Mashed Potatoes
  • String Beans
  • Celery
  • Cold Slaw
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Tea
  • Roast Chicken
  • Mashed Potatoes
  • String Beans
  • Celery
  • Cold Slaw
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Tea
  • Roast Chicken
  • Mashed Potatoes
  • String Beans
  • Celery
  • Cold Slaw
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Tea
 Supper  Supper Supper 
  • Stewed Prunes
  • Fruit Cake
  • Ice Cream
  • Oranges, Candy
  • Bread or Toast, Butter
  • Milk or Cocoa
  • Stewed Prunes
  • Fruit Cake
  • Ice Cream
  • Oranges, Candy
  • Bread and Butter
  • Milk or Cocoa
  • Stewed Prunes
  • Fruit Cake
  • Ice Cream
  • Oranges, Candy
  • Bread or Toast
  • Milk or Cocoa

Today Americans tend to associate certain foods with certain holidays, but what we view as traditional dishes were not necessarily on the table at the County Home. All three Christmas dinners documented in the menu book (1924-1926) featured roast chicken and mashed potatoes – not turkey, goose, or ham. And while Thanksgiving dinner at the poorhouse was more elaborate than other days, the main dish all three years was roast pork. The 4th of July, now known for picnics, was no different than other days. If you had been there in 1925, your Independence Day dinner would have been beef stew.

While early 20th-century holiday food traditions of more affluent families are well-documented in magazines and cookbooks, the Chester County Home menu book offers a rare glimpse into the meals of those who, whether due to poverty, illness, or disability, could not care or provide for themselves.

Sources:


1) Click here for an overview of the Chester County Home.

2) Menu Book 1924-1926, Chester County Directors of the Poor, Chester County Archives and Records Services, West Chester, PA.

3) "Food of a Week at County Home." (West Chester, PA) Daily Local News, April 24, 1924. Clipping found in Menu Book 1924-1926.
Nov 29

The Chester County War Aid Association

Posted on November 29, 2018 at 8:41 AM by Chester County Archives

WWI--Parade
Returning soldiers parade near Market and Church Streets in West Chester, 1919. Image from the Chester County Historical Society. 

From his location near the frontlines in France, Spring City native Christie Collopy was thinking of his Chester County home. In a letter dated August 14, 1918, Collopy wrote to the Chester County War Aid Association (CCWAA) and thanked them for sending the local newspaper. “Things are pretty hard at the present time over here.”  He wrote. “So when a letter or paper comes it makes you forget the fighting for a while.” (1

Collopy did not think very highly of his German counterparts. They were “not very hard fighters…are afraid of us and all want to be taken prisoner, or at least quit.” Collopy was a U.S. Marine and a local hero to the folks in Chester County.  He single-handedly eliminated a German machine gun nest, and for his bravery, he received the Croix de Guerre by the French government and the Distinguished Service Cross by the United States government. (2) 


Collopy news article
On July 3, 1918, the New York Herald included a brief mention of Collopy's act of bravery. 

Similar heroic stories fill the papers of the CCWAA housed at the Chester County Archives. The CCWAA was a relief organization that started in December 1917 to support the Chester County soldiers and nurses serving in WWI.  The collection consists of cards, correspondence, an account book of items sent to soldiers and nurses overseas, and miscellaneous WWI reference materials and clippings collected by secretary, Isabel Darlington. (3)

During the war, the CCWWA collected tobacco, knitted sweaters and wristlets, helmets, mirrors, combs, comfort bags, and local newspapers to send to those serving in Europe. The CCWAA even commissioned local companies to knit sweaters while other knit goods were made by local women who volunteered their time.  On occasion, a soldier in a hot climate mistakenly received a sweater and returned it with good humor suggesting that it be sent to a man in cooler places. 

WWI Coatesville Stockings
Women from Coatesville show off the stockings they knitted to send oversees, circa 1918. Image from the Chester County Historical Society

One such example was Clifford Golder of West Chester. A CCWAA member asked Golder if he would like a pair of wool garments in which he replied, “I am on the front now and we carry very few extra clothes.” In return, Golder sent a piece of an aviation balloon that a German soldier shot down. (4)

This collection captures the impact that WWI had on Chester County and the ability of local residents to rally around a patriotic cause. However, not all the stories are cheerful, as some capture the grim realities of war. 

Many in the County wrote Darlington and pleaded for any information about their loved ones overseas. The parents of Luke J. Crosby asked about the whereabouts of their son after local newspapers listed their son as missing in action. Darlington forwarded the letter to the Adjutant General’s office, and on December 9, 1918, the concerned parents were informed that “[Luke] has been reported missing in action since October 21st, 1918.” (5) To further complicate matters, volunteers at the CCWAA mistakenly wrote “Killed in Action” on Crosby’s soldier card. No matter where the Crosby parents looked, they were always answered with bad news.

CrosbyID
Luke J. Crosby's card filed by the CCWAA. Volunteers incorrectly wrote that Crosby had been MIA than KIA. They corrected the false information. 

That changed on December 21, 1918, when they received a follow-up letter from the Adjutant General stating, “I am happy to inform you that a cable received in this office from abroad states that Private Luke J. Crosby, Company I, 111th Infantry, previously reported missing in action since October 21st, 1918, is now reported as having returned to duty November 18, 1918.” (6)

002
The reverse of Luke J. Crosby's card where CCWAA volunteers pasted newspaper clippings about the Chester County soldier.

Updates from the battlefield were slow to reach the concerned families of Chester County, but soldiers too were often left in the dark. In May 1919, Louis Slawter of the 113th Engineers stationed in France wrote to Darlington. 

“In a recent letter from my sister, I was informed you sent me a cablegram of my father’s death. This I wish to thank you for although it never reached me and I knew nothing of my loss until the second week of April.” 

Slawter lamented on the unfortunate news. 

“We have to lose our dear ones sometime in life and it comes to me harder than one could imagine on account of my being so far from home and the way in which it happened. I have tried to bear it all as best I could though it was very hard.” (7)

Slawter obit clipping
The obituary for William Slawter, the father of Louis Slawter, published in the Delaware County Daily Times on August 21, 1918. 

After the war, the CCWAA helped returning veterans find employment as well as aid the injured. Darlington sent a welcome letter and questionnaire to each returning veteran inquiring about their need for a job, physical ability to work, and job skills. Through the generosity of Ms. Pierre S. du Pont, a Reconstruction Center equipped with 48 beds was established at Longwood on May 12, 1919 for sick or wounded soldiers. Upon admission a man could stay at the Reconstruction Center or visit as needed. The Center functioned until 1921.  

This unique collection of CCWAA papers has been processed, indexed, and made accessible to the public. It captures the history of WWI from both the perspective of service members on the front lines as well local residents back on the home front. The war proved to be one of history’s darkest moments, but the CCWAA responded with charity and patriotism. This collection humanizes the WWI experience and connects Chester County to the broader history of this important event.  

Sources:

1) Christie Collopy to Isabel Darlington, August 14, 1918. 
2) "Bravery of Officers Cited," New York Herald, July 3, 1918.
 
3) The Chester County War Aid Association Papers.
4) Clifford Golder to Isabel Darlington, August 1918.
5) U.S. Adjutant General Office to Thomas Butler, December 9, 1918.

6) U.S. Adjutant General Office to Thomas Butler, December 21, 1918.
7) Louis Slawter to Isabel Darlington, May 4, 1919. 
Oct 30

The Story of Mary Otley

Posted on October 30, 2018 at 10:00 AM by Chester County Archives

Otley Ghost
Stereograph produced circa 1860. Courtesy of the Chester County Historical Society.

Every year when the calendar turns to October and the Halloween season begins, the local legend of Mary Moll Otley resurfaces. Around the 1770s—the popular tale goes—a seven-year-old Goshen Township girl named Ashbridge began acting very strangely. The young girl appeared “demented” and her only means of communication was the repetition of the barely intelligible phrase molotley, molotley, molotley.” For the residents of Goshen Township, this was clear evidence that the widow Mary Moll Otley bewitched the innocent child.

J. Smith Furthey and Gilbert Cope’s 1881 book, History of Chester County, narrated the Otley tale in their familiar style that often relied on older accounts with undocumented sources. According to their version, the local constable James Gibbons went to arrest the elder Otley on the charge of performing witchcraft. While Gibbons made the arrest, other residents stayed behind to draw Otley’s image on a board. They then “fired at it with pieces of silver (for lead would not hurt a witch).” While in the presence of the accused witch, Gibbons monitored her behavior and appearance. If she expressed pain or unease, then the constable would have strong evidence of witchcraft. (1

Futhey and Cope’s book continued with equally ridiculous claims like the idea that Gibbons made Otley walk across salt. Their version also alleged that the local residents escorted Otley to a nearby mill where they weighed her against the Bible. “For it was held,” Futhey and Cope stated, “that a Holy Bible would always outweigh a witch.” Perhaps the most extreme torment the local community subjected Otley to was having her draw blood and pray for the “bewitched” seven-year-old girl. (2

This local legend remained popular throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, reappearing in various publications like an 1899 edition of the local Westonian Monthly Magazine for Friends. (3) But what primary source evidence did these histories utilize? Many histories produced during this period relied on word of mouth and local lore. Until the twentieth century, methodological, evidence-backed history proved scarce, especially for local history.
 

Historians today, however, must defend every assertion with evidence. In a more recent book, Douglas Harper contextualizes the Otley witch story using the records at the Chester County Archives. Harper uses the local tax assessments and pauper records to delegitimize the story and, as he notes, belief in witchcraft generally subsided as the eighteenth century progressed. “It is extremely unlikely,” Harper asserts, “that such hysteria could have broken out in Goshen as late as 1780.” Although less secular compared to today’s standards, people in the late eighteenth century would have avoided mass hysteria over witchcraft. (4

Despite this age-old tale, Goshen Township almost certainly evaded a Salem-like witch hunt in the mid-1700s. Although no record will definitively prove or disprove whether or not Otley practiced witchcraft, the records at the Chester County Archives can provide circumstantial evidence against the story. Nearly every account begins with Mary Otley bewitching the seven-year-old daughter of Joshua Ashbridge. Perhaps the most important clue lies with the relationship between these two families—the Otleys and Ashbridges. 

20181016_091919
This 1754 entry by the Goshen Township Overseer of the Poor calls Jonas Otlay a "Blind poorman."
 
The Otleys were a poor family that regularly required assistance from neighbors. The Ashbridges, on the other hand, owned various mills in the township’s southeast section. Before 1799, Chester County did not have a poorhouse to aid struggling families. Rather, each township assigned an Overseer of the Poor to ensure the poor received necessary help. In 1753, Goshen Township’s Overseer of the Poor reimbursed George Ashbridge for aiding Jonas Otley, a “blind poorman.” (5) The Otleys continued to receive help from neighbors including in 1762, when Joshua Ashbridge, the then Overseer of the Poor, “paid Tho Hoopes for the firewood he gave Mary Otley.” (6

The two families clearly knew each other, but perhaps the relationship was strained in 1765, when George Ashbridge, along with two others, “…did beat wound and evilly treat other Harms to the said Mary Otley….” (7) Although the specifics of the case remain unknown, the fact that George Ashbridge injured Mary Otley indicates animosity between the two sides. Not only did Ashbridge maliciously injury Otley, but he was publically humiliated as he was tried in front of the Chester County Court of Quarter Sessions. Just imagine the local gossip happening around town as the poor Mary Otley testified against the prosperous mill owner. 

Mary Otley’s lifelong poverty along with the trial against Ashbridge certainly harmed her reputation, but interestingly enough the records at the Chester County Archives connect Otley to an even darker event. In May 1744, the County Commissioners paid a William Jones twenty shillings for “the examination of Ann & Mary Otley concerning murdering Ann Otley’s child.” (8) Murder was a capital offense and tried by the provincial government, therefore the Chester County records do not include details concerning the trial. Furthermore, based on the wording of the entry, we do not know whether Mary Otley was charged directly with murdering Ann’s child or just assisting and/or concealing the murder. Because she was not hanged, however, we can conclude she was acquitted of her crime or perhaps even pardoned. (9) Despite the apparent acquittal, her involvement in the case probably followed her throughout life and subjected her to local taunts. 

Otley8

1744 Commissioners' Minutes.

A woman, whose life was defined by poverty and misfortune, came to be known as a witch. Instead of being an object of the community’s support, her life became the fodder for local gossip. Maybe it was her implication in the murder case that tarnished her name, or the grinding poverty of the eighteenth century that embittered her to her neighbors. Or perhaps she earned the enmity of the Ashbridge family by charging George Ashbridge with assault. Whatever the cause, Mary Otley was certainly not a witch, just a casualty of local lore. Over the centuries, tales like this become enshrined in the local community, but no matter how esteemed or how well-documented they may be, no story should ever escape questioning.

Sources:

1) John Futhey Smith and Gilbert Cope, History of Chester County Pennsylvania, with Genealogical and Biographical Sketches, (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & CO., 1881), 412-414.

2) Ibid, 414.

3) “Witchcraft at Westtown,” The Westonian: A Monthly Magazine for Friends 5, (1899): 23-25.

4) Douglas R. Harper, West Chester to 1865: That Elegant & Notorious Place, (West Chester, PA: Chester County Historical Society, 1999), 74-79.

5) Goshen Township Account Book, 1718-1869. Chester County Historical Society.

6) Goshen Township Account Book, 1718-1869. Chester County Historical Society.

7) Court of Quarter Sessions Papers, August 1765, pg. 36-38, Chester County Archives.


8) Commissioners' Minutes, April 1744, pg. 40, Chester County Archives.

9) The Pennsylvania Gazette did not mention anything regarding the case, and G.S. Rowe argues that during this period, there were more accusations of infanticide than actual verdicts. See, G.S. Rowe, "Infanticide, Its Judicial Resolution, and Criminal Code Revision in Early Pennsylvania,  Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 135, no. 2 (June 1991): 200-232.