The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-17 00:00:00

of the
to ha•
satisti
,io-
gised excite+ fe gs he had manifested
)on the 9th, whereupon the visitors expressed them-
selves perfectly satisfied. The deceased, James
Andrews, was admitted to the workhouse on August
29, 1848, and sent to Tooting cn October 28, 184 S.
Janet Johnson, orphan, was admitted June 24, 1847, and
sent to Tooting, December 2, 1847. Bridget Quin was
admitted Sept,-mber 18, 1848, and sent to Tooting Sep-
tember 30, 1848; she had a mother in the house.
Michael Harper was admitted September 16, 1848, and
sent to Tooting September 30, 1848; he had a mother in
the house. Had notice of the outbreak of the cholera at
Tooting on the 2d of January from a man named Kelly,
who was a pauper belonging to Holborn, and had been
over to Drouet's. On the 3d had also a verbal commu-
nication to the same effect. Received on the 4th, the
first official communication on the subject, and the same
day a medical man went from the workhouse to Tooting
to ascertain the real state of matters.
Mr. Wynch, a member of the Holborn board of
guardian:., examined—Visited Tooting on the 9ib and
30th May last, with other guardians. Saw the bocs at
dinner on the 9th. Cut open 100 patutoei in their plates,
and found them black and diseased. Told Mr. I)rouet
they were unfit to eat; and he replied he had paid seven
pounds a ton for them. Told him ho ought to substitute
some other food in their place; but he made no reply.
Some of the rooms were unhealthy; the sleeping-rooms
were all very clean. The girls looked very well; but
the boys sickly, and very unhealthy. The Inspection
took place in the school-room. The visitors dill not ask
Mr. Drouet, and hip brother, and his schoolmaster, to
withdraw, in order that they might have a private ems-
mination of the children. Mr. Rebecle (one of his brother
guardians) asked the boys if they were dissatisfied with
the tood, or anything else; and forty of them held up
their hands, to show that they had mason to complain.
This witneks thkn detailed tho .altercation that ensued,
precisely as it appears in the report quoted by Wir.. James,
the clerk. Had heard Mr. Drauet say he could feed the
children better if he was paid more. He received from
Holborn 4s. 3d. per child. Did not know that he (wit-
ness) had any power as a guardian over the dietary or
clothing furnished to these children.
Richard Hall, Assistant Poor-law Commissioner, de-
posed—Had been inspector and superintendent of the
metropolitan district since 1843. In the discharge of his
duties was in the habit of inspecting Mr. Drouet's estab-
lishment at Tooting twice a year. Thought that estab-
lishment was not under the control of the Poor-law
Commissioners. Visited that establishment merely as
an informant to the Poor-law Commissioners. Knew of
no regulations having been ever issued by which estab-
lishments such as Mr. Drouet's could be governed. Be-
lieved the opinion of the Commissioners was, and ever
had been, that they had no power to make any orders
for such establishments. With the 15th and 49th of the
Poor-law Act before his mind, that was witness's own
opinion also.

The CORONER here remarked that it was very de-
sirable they should ascertain who was responsible, if
blame was ascribable for what occurred; and justice
could not be administered without that fact being dis-
covered. Ho wished to know Mr. Hall's construction
of the 15th and 49th sections of the Act of 1834;
and if he considered the Poor•law Commissioners
had nothing to do with Mr. Drouet's establishment, he
would have to ask why he had interfered with it at all.
It had come out in evidence that the board of guardians
had consulted the Commissioners before the children
were removed to Tooting; and that the Commissioners
had sanctioned their removal, subject to the approval of
Mr. Hall. He wished Mr. Hall to say whether Mr.
Drouet was or was not a contractor, within the meaning
of the Act.

Mr. Hall said that the first time these establishments
came under his notice with reference to the power of the
Commissioners to control them was in connexion with

the City of London Union, which kept adult paupers at
Marlborough House, Peckham, and at another institu-
tion at Stepney-green. Rules were issued by the Com-
missioners for the city of London in 1842, but they had
ultimately withdrawn them again, and they re-
mained without control up to the present time. The
Commissioners had come to the conclusion that
they could not issue valid rules for the regulation
of such institutions as that of Mr. Drouet
at Tooting, and that of Mr. Aubyn at Norwood. The
Commissioners might, although possessed of no direct
control over these establishments, have certainly issued
an order prohibiting the guardians from sending the
children to Mr. Drouet's, or they might have seat a pe-
remptory order, requiring the guardians to withdraw
them thence after they had been already farmed out;
but either of these courses would have been a very strong
measure. Neither Mr. Drouet nor anybody else under
him were poor-law officers; and he (Mr. Hall) had
never heard the question mooted of issuing regulations
for such contracts for farming out the children. The
last inspection witness had made of Mr. Drouet's esta-
blishment was on the 16th of November last, when he
was accompanied by Mr. Tuffnell, the Queen's inspector
of schools. Understood from Mr. Drouet on that occa-
sion, that he was about to receive more children into his
asylum, and that he had increased his accommodation
since witness was last there. Witness told him he
thought the establishment would not admit the num-
' ber contemplated. Thought it advisable that Mr.
Drouet should receive pecuniary assistance from the pub-
lic funds, and be placed upon the same looting as Mr.
Aubyn had been for several years past. Represented to
the president of the CommisOen, that the necommodation
of 'Air. Drouet's buildings, and the number of his
teachers for educating the children, and instructing them
in different trades, were insufficient ; and that it would
be advantageous to make him a grant from the public
funds, as, by that means, he would be ready to submit to
any terms and stipulations that might be imposed upon
him as accompanying such a grant of money. At his
inspection of Mr. Drouet's asylum he went over the
whole of the establishment, particularly the school-
rooms. Came to a determination ns to the number of
additional teachers which were required. Mentioned it
to Mr. Drouet, who was quite favourable to the improve-
ment in consideration of the proposed grant from Go-
vernment. Mr. Drouet was to pay 601. towards the
further sum that was necessary ; and they calculated
that the Government would pay 2501. Two boys',
and two girls' teachers, and one infants' teacher were
the additional teachers to be engaged ; and these were
the arrangements (for they did not amount to an order,
which the Commissioners would have the power to en-
force):—not more than 400 boys for the large school;
160 girls for the senior girls' school; 120 for the junior
girls' school; nor more than 250 for the infant school—
not more than these numbers, respectively, were to be
taught together in the schools at the same time. Nothing
was said about ventilation, and no calculation was made
as to the space to be allotted for each child. Tholight
the room too hot and too crowded on the 16th of
November, and mentioned it to Mr. Drouet. Saw the
dormitories, and found the children sleeping three in
a bed. Expostulated with Mr. Drouet on this evil,
reminding him that in the establishment under the
control of the Commissioners the children were not
allowed to sleep more than two in a bed. Mr. Drouet
said he would turn his attention to that subject, and
he afterwards informed witnessed that he had in-
creased the beds, and then allowed two only to sleep
together. By reason of the grant previously alluded to,
no additional power was given to the Commissioners in
point of law; they had merely a recommendatory power.
Had visited Mr. Drouet's on the 14th of December, 1847.
Found 1,065 inmates in the asylum then, and that it could
receive 1,100 altogether. Tho schools were full, and
very few were sick—there was one case of influenza, and
a few of measles. Never called the children privately to
him. Had had it represented to him that Mr. Drouet
u❑fairly kept the girls up late doing needlework for his
own profit. Asked the girls then if it was true, and
they all de❑ied it. Asked the same question of some of
them after they had left Mr. Drouet's and returned to
their unions, and the answers he received did not bear
out the representations that had been made to him re-
specting Mr. Drouet's conduct. Never compared: Mr.
Drouet's dietary with that of other houses or unions.
Scales were kept in every workhouse, and every pauper
could call upon the master to weigh out his rations, and
see if they gave him the allowance allotted him by the
rules. Considered Mr. Drouet's dietary a fair
one, and could find no fault with it if the

. - ....- ... --
quantities were carried out where they were
fixed, and if an adequate allowance were made
where the amounts were not specified. Went to Toot-
P_Dts•oseugeste't(i).
ing after the cholera had broken out. Hall the arrange-
ments had been properly carried out, and proper care
had been taken to divide the children with regard t,o
schools and workshops, witness considered that the
establishment would have accommodated all the
1,370
children that were in it when the cholera . e oitt.
Had official authority to visit and recdompuetaa at any
ev©r could be to the
.isnaoeds_mnana,d
placem , po wherelver to poraduepre ra
at
tisiuldchrenizirteu
tlioodrii.gsteaos,_ but
re as un-
ntpa
establishments t the
e e°Cr-19'W
satisfactory to them coroner.
remedy' the evil b '
y
WCoimtnmesissswioinsehris, ttohareastmtathhreeykse
• •ct schools, but such a strong feeling
had been created agatus that plan that it wasobliged
abandoned.
establishing
be dirsiwtroirth, potato 1
and it had been ODCO attemptedt
to
Counter.
Is64plied Mr.
ll (John Bose ,
Borough-mark
• et, e
street,
Drouet with potatoes, at Tooting,
years; but never had done so by, for the last eighteen
months ago was charging Mr. D ... contract. About two
per ton. rouet from 6/. to 61. ioe.
Henry Boulding, foreman to Mr. Thos. Wilkinson,
baker, Tooting, depose d—
to attend hero through His master, who was unable
establiAhment with ugh illness, supplied Mr. Drouet's
bread. The quality was a portion of
house-flour, with
a portion of No. 2. Sold exactly the
same quality in the shop to private customers. Mr.
Drouet's
contracts lasted for six months, and the price
was 14s. Od. per cwt., or about 61d. per loaf. It was all
weighed at Mr. Drouet's establishment on delivery.
Jonathan
Gain,
butcher, Kennington-common, exa-
mined—Had supplied Mr. Drouet with meat, by con-
tract, for the last three years. Had to supply him with
the best meat, but not the primest parts.
Samuel Bowyer, corn dealer and mealman, Upper
Ground-street, Lambeth, examined Supplies Mr.
Drouet with flour and split-peas, but not by contract.
Had done so fur some years. Did not think he supplied
Mr. Drouet with all he had. Sometimes supplied him
with twenty and sometimes with twenty-five sacks of
flour at a time. The quality was No. 2. Supplied Lim
with from five to ten quarters of split-peas, of the best
quality, at a time.
The summoning officer here stated that Messrs. Tru-
man, Hanbury, and Co. were the brewers who supplied
Mr. Drouet's establishment. He (the officer) had four
children to produce as witnesses, who had slept with the
deceased up to the time of the latter's taking ill.
The CORONER then observed to the jury that he
thought they had now arrived at a stage when they could
very well adjourn again, without detriment to the see
quency of the inquiry.
The jury, shortly before half-past five o'clock, ad-
journed till ten o'clock on Friday morning next.