The Express.
London, England, 1866-11-01 00:00:00

THE POOR-LAW BOARD AND THE
WORKHOUSES.

The resignation of the master of Lambeth work-
house suggest some pregnant questions as to the
real functions of the Poor-law Board. If it be true
that aged and feeble paupers have been treated with
brutal cruelty, that illegal imprisonment has been
a common occurrence, and that other irregularities
of an extremely specific character are virtually
proved, it is time to ask whether the resignation of
an official, and its acceptance by the guar-
dians, is deemed to preclude a proper inquiry by the
central authority. This would seem to be pre-
cisely the sort of case in which Mae Poor-law
Board should step in for the protection of the
public. We know that the open investigations at
Paddington, Rotherhithe, and the Strand Union
resulted in a series of horrifying disclosures.
The allegations against Lambeth are even more
serious; but though the metropolitan inspectors are
said to have paid a private visit to its workhouse,
and the master is known to have subsequently re-
signed, we hear nothing of the official verdict, so
that the practical upshot is a feeble whitewashing
of the guardians. It is unnecessary to recapitulate
the horrors vouched for by different inmates of this
workhouse. It is sufficient to say that if true the per-
son directly responsible should suffercondign punish-
ment; and that if false the guardians should eagerly
proclaim his and their own innocence. Anything
like shuffling or hushing up should be made im-
possible by the Poor-law Board • and its officials
may rely that a case of this grave cha-
racter will not escape the attention of par-
liament, and that a smoothing-over policy is
certain to defeat itself. But unfortunately there
is too much reason to fear that a demure avoidance
of scandal rather than a zealous extirpation of evil
is the desideratum aimed at. We hear on good
authority that before the case of another metropo-
litan workhouse was investigated, the guardians
received an official hint that it would be expedient
to confine their attention to the precise scandal
already before the public, and that anything like
a general exposure of other flagrant ills was greatly
to be deprecated. If it be remembered that
the official insjx.,ct.,r conducting an inquiry
into workhouse abuses combines the functions
of judge and jury; that ho examines witnesses;
sums up evidence and passes the verdict, after-
wards put forward in the name of the Poor-law
B etrd ; it will be seen that complete publicity is
one main safe;uard for the manner and spirit in i
which these investigations are conducted. The :
gin.rdians are in each case the people really on
th•fir trial, and it is not encouraging to be told
tjiat a covert understanding obtains between the
defendants and thcir judge. It is moreover but
too certain that if the Poor-law Board and the
local authorities choose to coalesce in what
they may deem their common interest,
oeither the paupers who suffer, nor the
who advocate their cause,
ha-.-e the faintest chance of redress. It is
to be presumed that the Sick Poor Associa-
tion will not allow the Lambeth scandal to be
'mitred out by a private inquiry, and that we
shall learn more of the causes which led up to
the workhouse master's resignation. It is to par-
Patient, however, that the public will look for
complete explanations, and the name of Lambeth
stands bracketted with that of Shoreditch as cases
is which the must brutal conduct has been alleged,
and where the action of the Poor-law Board has
been an actual or partial condonation of the
e:Tence.

Turning to other metropolitan workhouses,
it is satisfactory to state that many minor
improvements have been effected. Pending the
report of the scientific committee recently ap-
pointed to inquire into the ventilation of the sick
wards, and upon the amount of cubic space neces-
sary, ,g,sal has been done by the transfer of chil-
dren and imbeciles from the workhouses to schools
and asylums ; and in sevorrd other particulars
lan-lable efforts are pereebtible to make the best of
the materials at the disposal of the officials.
But excellent as these endeavours are, they
are signit;cant of the " patchwork " Mr.
Hardy faithfully promised to avoid. The
public will not b.: satisfied with the removal of a
few abuses if the liability to abuse remains in full
force ; and as " the law is sufficient for its pm--
pose." it seems incredible that a timid desire to
avoid scandal ;cid conciliate guardians should be
allowed in any case to thwart the claims of justice
and humanity. _ _ . •

Tl,e proi,os;il to raise the salaries of workhouse
chaplains, awl to give them a seat at their parish
board, is open to several objections. These gentle-
Inca have hitherto been simgulary backwar,l
in advocating the paii:)er's cause, and have
in sane cases proved tinnuselves tho mere
matares of the guardians. The teno!...i-
tioa to rob rcl:ef to the taqular attendaot
at eloir,•11. and to seo in the disent,:r's poverty a
ri.4l:t.-..1! • ou:!isinnent for . chism, is one not to be
etreCti there are
mast unions in whici• a citapl.:in would have to be
cre:ttsol, or in which, as is more probable, the
guannui3 refuso to apiwint r.r3. Lanca•hiro
unions and 11 chaplains ; and Yorkshire
vaii;,ns and 26 chaplains ; so that the suggested
" sex: at the hoard.' would have an cxtt....lm.dy
lim:tod application so far as those provinc,s are
T!io evils patent to is all are ti!o
ro nu: b:,.hali••ll.'artil or virzial
and, without niulervaluing what is Lein;; dote and
attempted, it seems obvious that we are as far as
ever from any comprehensive and satisfactory
change.

Drama.

ILWMARKET.

A four-act version cf Octave Feuillet's comedy
La Teetatioa, written by Mr. John Oxenford, an-1 called
A Dao!tir.l,4 Frirwl, was produced at this theatre last ;
nig with a strong cast of characters, and compete sue-
vest. In all attempts to transfer those French comedies
to tlb English stage which deal with or daily with
adultery, many characters and incidents have to be
weakened, duelling has to be cut out, and the whole piece
has to be reduced to amt kvel of ,leceinty or propriety'
demand:l as much by audiences as by the Lord Cham'itr-
lain. The moral of A Ilinger,us Friend, if i: has a moral, is
that when two people are joined together in holy matri-
mony whose tempers arc incompatible—to use the lw-
gc of the Divorce Court—the woman can hardly be ex--
1,-ited to adhere b the proprieties. Mr. Oxenford Las
t..ken care to keep his heroine out of actual mischief, and
to make the " daric,,erous frieml " rather an interesting and
suffering parson than a heartless seducer of the common
French type. Except in one scene in the third act,
where the • agony is heaped up, there is little to
oqeml the wholesome prejudices of an English :iudieuce, or
to take the comedy out of that list of dramas which may
be played before boarding schools.

The piece has some ele,..:ant landscape and boudoir
scenery, and the names of the scenic artists--Messri.
o.C•eauor and Morris—are put in the playbill in larger
type then the name of the author or adapter. In add:-
tion to this we are tell that the furniture and appoint-
ments are Mr. Foster, the machinery by Mr. Oliver Wales,
the lressas by Mr. May and Miss Cherry, and the gas de-
partment by Mr. J. llce)e. There is no reason why these
acknowledgm-mts, if they go so far, should end here.
Why should tieline be drawn at the gas department, whils
the wig dcpartment, the aping, oranges, nod ginger-beer
deptrtment, an.l a score of other departments, are left
pi,h.g without mention? Mr. Iluckstone is not the only
man.Lger who Ells his programmes with these imperfect
details,

REMOVAL 01' TIiC COMPANY OF THE LATE
STANDARD THEATRE.—WO understand that by an arrange-
ment with the Great Lasteni Railway Company, who now
ho' l the City of London Theatre, Bishopsg.te-street, by
o' puralisse for railway improvements, Mr. Douglass
vr.l: 'Aunty be enabled to remove his company to the City
of London Theatre, and he expects to re-open the latter
in time for the production of a Christmas pantomime,
which gives employment to so many persons. The occupa-
tion of the City of London Theatre, however, can be only
temporary, as the imildiug will be taken down in a few
months to make room fur the branch railway constructing
between Tottenham and the City. It is satisfactory to
that a bodyof more than 200 employa will he enabled
resume their several employments as artistes and work-
so soon, but it is understood that Mr. Douglass will
have to refurnish the City of London Theatre, as the
de of the scenery and other appliances of the stage of
latter were removed and sold late:y on Mr. Ne'son
disposing of the building to the railway company.