The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-13 00:00:00

-., intimating their diseetisfaction. He muss: tell
the jury that after that visit there was a second visit peid
by a deputation to the establishment, and that di puta-
tion appeared to have been satisfied with what they saw
on that occasion. It would appear from the statement
of some of the boys whom he would call, that after the
visit of Messrs. Winch and Main some of the boys were
called to account by Mr. Drouett for the course they had
taken, and some of them were actually punish ed. That
was in the month of May, 1848. He would now pass
on to the period when the fearful eslamity fell on the
establishment. On the 28th of October in that year tr.e
child James Andrews was placed in that esteblish-
inent, and was at that time in a good state of health,
he (Mr. Chambers) believed, for a pauper child.
About this time, or shortly afterwards, Mr. Kite, the
surgeon, on visiting the establishment, found several of
the children were infected with the itch, and were not
separated from the rest, the consequence of which
would be, he reported, that the rest would be contami-
nated. Mr. Kite would state to the jury that the house
was badly ventilated, and that there was never sufficient
space appropriated to the children's sleeping
berths. He would also inform them that although there
were then the seeds of disorder visible in the establish-
ment, and also some of the premonitory symptoms of
cholera, Mr. Drouet took 200 other poor children from
the parish of St. Pancras into his house, notwithstand-
ing that the dormitories of the children were previously
over-crowded. Many of the children were infected with
cholera, and no doubt could be entertained that there
was a fearful calamity about to take place in the estab-
lishment. In fact, between the 29th of December and
the 13th of January 150 children died of that awful visi-
tation. On the 31st of December one David Kelly, a
pauper, who had two of his grand children in
the establishment at Tooting, called there to
see them, when he found that the younger of them
was infected with cholera. In consequence of an in-
timation given to Mr. Drouet and others by David Kelly,
inquiries began to be made respecting the appearance of
cholera in the establishment, and, on the sth of January,
Mr. Grainger, a medical gentleman of great eminence,
was sent to visit the plaee. He saw the way in which
the children were treated ; he looked at the building,
and made inquiries with reference to the children's food,
and their general treatment ; and Mr. Grainger came
to the conclusion that, unquestionably, the course of treat-
ment of the children in that establishment had conduced
to place them in such a situation with regard to their health,
that they were liable not only to be seriously but mortally
affected ifeholera should find its way into the establishment.
He found the establishment in a very bad state. There
was only one nurse to attend the children, and he re-
presented to Mr. Drouet, that, considering the awful
state of the children, he ought to engage three or four
additional nurses, and increase the accommodation of the
building.. In a few days afterwards Mr. Grainger called
again, but what was his surprise to find that, not only had
his recommendation been disregarded as to the increas-
ing the number of nurses, but some of the larger children
were performing the office of attendants on the sick, and
be, therefore, felt it his duty to make a representation to
the guardians of the Holborn Union, who immediately
had their children removed, and those that were ill were
very charitably admitted into the Royal Free Hospital,
where it was found that they were in a most lamentable
condition—that not only their dress, but the physical state
of their bodies had been neglected; but he need not
trouble the jury at any length on this part of the case, as
it would be fully explained by medical evidence. He
must now touch upon the nature of the dietary which
these children had been subjected to. It would appear
that it was the practice in Mr. Drouet's establishment to
cut a small loaf into 16 parts, while the potatoes which
had been served out to the children were generally in so
rotten a state that they not unfrequently went untouched
by the children. It would be proved by competent medi-
cal authorities, in fact, that the children had been literally
starved, and that when they were removed from the esta-
blishment they i xhibited the usual signs of starve tion, such
as swollen stomachs, thin legs, and pale features. With re-
gard to the state of the building itself, it would be proved
that in a sanitary point of view it was sadly defective, while
the mode of managing the dormitories was so defective
that the utensils used by the children at night were con-
verted in the day time to water vessels for cleansing the
floors, and the disease of which these poor children died
could be traced almost to the filthy state of one
of these articles of use. With regard to the
clothing of the children, it would be shown that
many of them when they entered the estab-
lishment were excellently well supplied with wearing
apparel, but when they were found in the deplorable con-
dition be had already adverted to, the clothes upon
their backs were not sufficient to keep them
warm and resist the effects of the atmosphere.
These were the principal facts of the case, which he
could not conceal from himself was one of considerable
importance to the public, and he now came to the law
bearing upon the subject. Their Lordshios would tell
the jury that if Mr. Drouet, by his mode of treatment,
absolutely precluded the children from escaping from his
custody, and that by their not escaping they died of
a terrible disease, induced by neglect, he was guilty of
manslaughter, if not of murder. In this ease, like that
of the ill •usage of an apprentice, it was difficult to esta-
blish the malice of the master, but if the jury thought
the children died from wilful neglect on the part of the
defendant, for the sake of securing some pecuniary
gain, then a sufficient motive in malice would have been
made out to justify them of convicting the defendant of
the capital offence. The evidence, however, would place
beyond all doubt that he had been guilty of the minor
offence of manslaughter, and, therefore, leaving the law
of the case to be further explained and elucidated by
their Lordships, he should refrain from troubling them
further, and proceed at once to the examination of wit.
nesses.
William Robert James was then called and examined
by Mr. CLARKSON—He said he was clerk to the Hol-
born Workhouse. In consequence of the overcrowded
state of that workhouse the guardians entered into an
arrangement with the defendant, with the approval of
the Poor-law Commissioners, for boarding and lodging
the children of the Holborn Union. This was in 1847,
when he was requested by the guardians to procure an
asylum for the children, and knowing that Mr. Drouet
farmed the children, he sent for him, and after con •
versing with him on the subject he requested him to go
home and forward him a written communication of his
terms. In consequence of that conversation he received
a letter to the effect that the children he took under his
care were well attended to, and brought up to indus-
trious pursuits, and that his charge was 4s. 6d. a head
per week. In reply to that letter he wrote to Mr.
Drouet, stating that it was the opinion of the
guardians that, as their boys were industrious
and earned a good deal of money, they
thought 4s. per week would be a fair
price, but that, nevertheless, they agreed to his terms,
and about 90 of their boys would be placed under his
charge. In a few days afterwards Mr. Drouet attended
at the workhouse, and 81 boys were handed over to him,
whose ages varied from 12 to 15. They took care not
send out children under six years of age. In about a
fortnight afterwards some 30 more were sent, but he
must explain that a sort of debtor and creditor account
was kept, and as children went out their place was sup-
plied by others. He had understood from Mr. Drouet
himself, that his establishment could provide accommo-
dation for 1,200 children, but at the time in question,
October, 1847, he had only 800 in his custody.
Mr. Baron PLATT—Did you ever go over the building
or the wards? Witness said he did.
Mr. Baron PLATT—WeII, did you think the place
largo enough to accommodate 1,200 children? Witness
said he did.
Mr. Baron PLATT—Did the guardians never make
any stipulation in the arrangement about the dietary of
the children?
Witness replied that before the children were sent a
committee of the guardians inspected the establishment,
and satisfied themselves that it was properly managed in
all respects, including, of course, the dietary; and with
one of the communications made to the guardians at the
time by Mr. Drown, there was forwarded a printed copy
of a dietary table.
Mr. Baron PLATT—For 4s. 6d. a-week they were to
be supplied with food, clothing, and everything.
Witness—Everything. The deceased, Andrews, was
forwarded to the establishment in October last, and
he remained there until January in the present
year, when he was removed to the Royal Free
Hospital. It was the practice of the guardians
to nominate a committee monthly to attend to Mr.
Drouet's establishment and report en the condition
of the children—the reports of these committees, from
December, 1847, to January, 1849, nitproseing satibllte-
Lion at the treatment of the children, and stating that
their food was good, and that they were in a clean and
healthy state. The last report was dated 4th January,
1849, and stated that at the period of the inspection the
cholera was raging dreadfully, and it recommended that
certain alterations and additions should be made to the
dietary, clothing, and bedding of the children. The re-
port of the 9th May, 1348, stated that the inspectors had
found the establishment in an unhealthy state, bad
smells pervaded the building, and upon it being put to
the boys whether they were satisfied with the treatment,
about 40 hands ware held up to indicate that they were
not, whereupon Mr. Drouet became very violent and
called the boys liars, threatening at the same time to
carry out a suggestion which had been made to him to
thrash them. The report of the 30th of May was,
on the other hand, favourable to Mr. Drouet,
the inspectors expressing themselves well pleased at the
state of the children and their treatment, and conveyed
to the board, on behalf of Mr. Drouet, the expression of
his regret that, at the previous visit of the monthly visit-
ing committee, ho had exhibited too much warmth in
his behaviour towards the children. On the Ist January
last, in consequence of a communication conveyed to
him by the master of the workhouse, he wrote a letter
to Mr. Drouet, and on the Wednesday following he re-
ceived a report in reply, which he laid before
the board that evening. Subsequently he saw
Mr. Drouet, but he did not learn from him how
many of the children were sick, but on the Thurs.
day morning Mr. Whitfield made a report to the
board, and, in consequence of that report, he was
sent down to Tooting with the proper authority to
re-
move the children. When he got down to Tooting he
found Mr. Drouet surrounded by medical men and

guardians of the other unions, and lie had not an oppor-
tunity of speaking to him. He, however, ascertained
that fifteen or sixteen of their children had been at-

- -
tacked with cholera. At that time there were
about 191 children of the Holborn Union in the
establishment, 25 of whom were too ill to be removed.
He took 155 of them away, amongst whom was the de-

---
ceased Andrews, who was conveyed to the Royal Free
Hospital, and died on the 6th of January. A report
from Mr. Drouet, dated the 30th of November,
was forwarded to him on the 3d December,
stating that four of their children were suffering
from a severe bowel complaint. Subsequently
another report was received from Mr. Drouet
calling attention to the forthcoming Christmas
treat of the children, adding that it was usual for his
parishes to allow him sixpence ahead for that purpose,
and stating that the children were getting better.

O,: c .tt;s. ex:...niu.a.iou by Sit. F. TuEs.tGEtt ibe wit
t h.s.t prt.vi ,z;s to this contr,tet with Mr. Drouet
he 114:1 Stoll the Tooting estaiilishmtAit. The dietary
supplied by Mr. Drouet was submitt,ll to the medical
officer of the Holborn Union. It was in some respects supe-
rior and in others inferior to that used in the workhouse.
In his opinion it was ample for all purposes. The boys
had repeated opportunities of complaining to the inspec-
tu committee if they had wished to do so. For his own
part he had only observed one little cause of complaint
against the management of the Tooting establishment,
and that rel.lted to some air gratings which had been
been stopihd up, but the cause of complaint was after-
wards removed. The children removed from Tooting
were those who were considered to be untouched with
cholera.
Ito-examined by Mr. M. CHAMBERS—The quanti-
ties in Mr. Drouet's dietary were in some respects
doubtful.
Mr. William Winch, one of the guardians of the Hol-
born Union, examined by Mr. CHAMBERS —On the 9th of
May I went down to Mr. Drouet's establishment, and
found the children at dinner. They had forms and
benches. I looked at the potatoes, and out of 200 I
could not find one good one. I told Mr. Drouet that I
thought he ought to change the diet. I went afterwards
over the whole of the establishment, and found
the new sleeping apartments badly constructed
and badly ventilated. I a+terwards saw the boys
in the school-room. Mr. Reding asked the boys of
Holborn Union if they had anything to complain of, and
told them it they had they were to hold up their hands.
About thirty then held up their hands. I thought them
very much altered in their appearance; they were lean
and haggard.
Sir F. THESIGER objected to the examination, on the
ground that the state of the other boys had nothing to
do with Andrews.
Mr. Baron PLATT—Why did the guardians not re-
move them at once when they were in such a state?
Mr. CHAMBERS —I don't appear for the guardians,
and I apprehend, however culpaple the other parties may
be, that does not relieve the prisoner of responsibility.
My Lord, I appear for the public.
Mr. Baron PLATT—You appear for the beadle; and
I must say again that the guardians ought to have
taken away the children when they were seen to be in
such a state.
Mr. CHAMBERS considered that he was entitled to show
that negligence existed before Andrews was sent there.
Mr. Baron PLATT—The guardians were the respon-
sible parties
Mr. CHAMBERS—The prisoner is responsible on his
contract.
Mr. Baron PLATT—Yes; upon his contract, but there
was a dietary, and it was the duty of the guardians to
see that it was carried out.
Sir F. THESIGER briefly replied, and
Mr. Baron PLATT said, in the present state of the case,
it was impossible to allow this evidence to be given. The
present inquiry related to the death of a boy in October
last, and how could evidence with reference to a trans-
ac:ion in May have anything possibly to do with it,
unless some connexion was shown?
Mr. CHAMBERS —I will show the connexion.
Mr. Baron PLATT—Then call your witnesses. I can-
not hear another observation from you. Sir Frederick
Thesiger has replied, and I have decided that the evi-
dence cannot be received.
A little boy named Sheen was then called. He said
he was a poor boy belonging to the Holborn Union, and
had been in Mr. Drouet's establishment at Tooting three
times. He remembered the last time he was there be-
fore he left in 'January last. He slept in a bed—
Sir FREDERICK. THESIGER again objected to this
evidence.
Mr. BARON PLATT said that the witness ought to be
examined only with reference to the treatment of
Andrews.
After some discussion,
Richard Woodson was called. He said he was a boy
belonging to the Holborn Union. and remembered the
deceased Andrews. He did not sleep in the same room
with him at Mr. Droll, t's. He went there about three
months before last Christmas, and Andrews came after
that. About two or three days before they Came away,
they both slept in the same room over the surgery.
Andrews slept with his brother and another
boy. There were about twelve beds in it, and
three slept in each bed. Andrews was ill when he came
to the room, Andrews, himself, and other boys came
together in a van to London, and Andrews felt sick ou
the way. He (witnes) was quite well when he went to
Tooting.
Cross-examined by Sir F. THESIGER—Andrews told
me he felt sick. The van was a closed one, and it was
a very cold night.
The Court here adjourned for twenty minutes.
On the re-assembling of the Court,
William Derbyshire, a lad, was called and examined
by Mr. CLARKSON—He was one of the boys sent to
Tooting. He knew the two Andrewses. He slept in the
same bed with them a short time. He did not know
how many beds were in the room. The bedroom WSS
net on the attic floor, nor did he know whether there
were six beds in the room. He remembered James An-
drews being taken ill when he was removed from the
room. He was sleeping in the same bed with
him, but he did not know where he was
taken to.: There was a place called the
Sick Ward,
but he did not know whether he was taken there. He
did not return to the same bed again. He remembered
his coming to London ; but he did not know where he
had slept the night before.
By the COURT—He came up to the Free Hospital in
a van. The van was full, and James Andrews came up
in the big boy's van,
William Macdougal, another lad, examined by Mr.
CHAMBERS—He was fourteen years old, and came up
in
months the van.
James He was at Tooting between eight and nine
. Andrews was in the sam with
him; he sat on his knee. He said he felt aice kvan , and ap-,
peared very He was at Mr. Drouet's all the
time
Andrews was there. The little ones was not along with
the big ones.
By the COURT—IIe was a big one.
Examination continued—Andrews was one of the
little boys. He never saw him in bed. The little
boys were dressed in the same way as the big ones.
When they went their clothes were taken from them,
and kept till they went away again. The clothes sup-
plied to them in return kept them warm. Out of
school hours they went into a yard, but they could not
go in doors. Sometimes the little boys came in, but not
often. They had their supper about six o'clock, and
then went to bed. The big boys and little ones went
into a separate hall to sup. They had different clothes
on a Sunday to what they had on the week-day, which
were much warmer.
Cross-examined by Sir F. THESIGER—When the
came to the Free Hospital they had a supper of bread and cheese, but little Andrews did not eat the supper.
Those who were well were put to bed early. Andrews
was put in the same room with him. No doctor attended
them that night.
Joseph Andrew; the brother of the deceased, examined
by Mr. CLARKSON—Ho was eight years of age, and
had been at Tooting. He slept with his brother and
Derbyshire in the same bed. There were about a dozen
beds in the same room.
(The trial was proceeding when our report left.)

NEW COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)
The grand jury, having concluded their labours, en-
tered the court with a number of true bills, two of whieli
were against John Cutts fur forgery, who is at presest
out on bail for 20,0001.
THE CONDUCT OF THE POLICE.--The foreman said he
was requested, on the part of the jury, to express their
entire satisfaction with the conduct of those members of
the police force who had been called before them. Th•
C6urt was aware that a great number bad been sum-
moned before them, and they felt that they had ac-
quitted themselves with a great degree of intelligence
and bad given their evidence in a most satisfactory way.
The RECORDER said he had great pleasure in dis-
charging them after the performance of their duties
which must have' :been very arduous, they having ad-
vanced into flit) fifth day of the session, and the
Court could bear testimony to the diligence and atten-
tion which they had shown throughout their laboura.
With regard to the police it was always extremely gra-
tifying-,to•hear from the grand jury their good opinion
of tke conduct of that body, who had always much in
their power and upon whom in a great degree depended
the due execution of the law. The Court looked strictly
to the conduct of the police and entirely concurred in
the sentiment exprec‘ed by the jury; those who had
the management of that large body were always very
diligent in removing improper persons from it.
The grand jury were then discharged.

THE LONDON INDISPUTABLE LIFE POLICY COM-
PANY.—'We would earnestly invite the public attention
to the novel feature in the principle of life assurance,
disclosed by " The London Indisputable Life Policy
Company," whose advertisement will be found in
another column. For the first time, we believe, in the
annals of insurance, policies are declared to be inde-
feasible and indisputable. Whenever the assurance has
once been effected no further question can arise. There
can be no danger of that vexatious and protracted litigation that has pruved ruinous to many families, whose parent
had fondly supposed that he had fully provided for their
future provision. All.inquiries must be made in the first
instance. The investigation will take place before the
policies are issued from the office. There can be no
carelessness or laxity, or the least possible chance of
defeating claims, that could never have arisen if duo
care had been exercised before the insurance was ef-
fected.

The soiree given to the English party at the Hotel
des Princes last night went off admirably. A'oout 400
persons were present. Many of the French were in the
uniform of the National Guard. The orchestra of
Strauss attended, and played " God save the Queen,"
which was loudly applauded by the French. The " Mar-
sellaise" was then called for byithe English. A speech:to
the English was delivered by M. Combier; and
.Mr-
Lloyd, in the uniform of the Warwickshire Yeomanry,
addressed the French. The cries of " Vive la Fre,ncel"
on one side, and " Viva l'Angleterre I" on the other, were
loud and hearty. Refreshments, consisting of sand-
wiches and pastry of every kind, and of champagne with-
out limit, were provided. The party remained till a late
hour in the morning. The Arabic saloon of the hotel,
which bas been fitted up with great splendour by M.
Privat, the proprietor, whose kind and liberal attentioi
to the guests was the subject of general eulogium, was
crowded. When the company broke up, the English
said, " Adieu!" but the French cried, "No, no, au re-
voir!"—Galignani of Wednesday.
THE ENGLISH IN PARIS.—Previous to the visit of
the English to the Opera Comique on Wednesday even-
ing, it was proposed by one of the body that each person
should take with him to the theatre a large bouquet of
catnmelias to throw on the stage as a tribute to the ac-
tresses. The proposition was, however, abandoned on
the advice of Mr. John Warton, of Stratton-street, Pic-
cadilly, that SOO bouquets thrown on the stage would
totally prevent the continuation of the performance.