Unusual entry in the census

While looking through the 1851 census returns for Amersham Workhouse I found an entry for a 23 year old woman with ‘Prostitute’ listed as her occupation. Perhaps this is more reflective of the way she was viewed by the enumerator than how she viewed herself, but it is remarkable nonetheless.

Clearly it’s not surprising that there would have been women working as prostitutes at this time, in a town of this size, but such listings in the census are very unusual. I’ve read through thousands of census entries in the past and not encountered a single one before.

According to an article entitled ‘The Case of the Missing Prostitutes in Late 19th Century London‘, in the 1881 census there were only 78 women in the entire of London, and just 23 in all of Manchester, whose occupation was either prostitute or some euphemism for it, so it is probably unsurprising I’d not encountered one before

I’ll be keeping an eye out as I go through the rest of the census data to see if our 23 year old still has the same profession by the next census. It seems more likely that she will either change profession or move to a more lucrative location, as judging by her presence in the workhouse it is not paying enough to keep her from destitution.

Alternatively, she could have been in there for medical reasons. Many people used the workhouse infirmary where they could not afford doctors fees. It was not uncommon for women to opt to give birth in the workhouse where there were facilities and staff on hand to assist. As both pregnancy and contracting communicable diseases would have been a hazard of the job, it’s certainly a strong possibility that that was the reason for her presence there.

It appears she was simply a single woman, entering the workhouse on her own. Whether pregnant or not, the judgement of her occupation may simply have been imposed on her by the enumerator, who in this case was the governor of the workhouse. Perhaps the circumstances of her admission gave the governor reason to suspect her occupation, or perhaps it was bias on his part.

It’s possible that further census information, or correspondence from the Poor Law Union for Amersham held at the National Archives will bring up some additional information, if so, I’ll add it in when I find it.