The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-15 00:00:00

LAMBETH.

EXTRNME MORTALITY IN LAMBETH WORKHOVSE.
—Last evening, Mr. Edwards, a respectable inhabi•
tant and vestryman of the parish of Lambeth, waited
on Mr. Elliott, and requested his interposition as a
magistrate and ex officio guardian, to remedy the
evils existing in Lambeth workhouse, and which were
tolerated by the poor-law guardian, of the parish.
Mr. Edwards charged the poor-law guardians with
serious neglect of duty, in permitting, as they had
the night before, sixty men and seventy women to
enter the casual paupers' ward without being exa-
mined by a medical man, or even washed. These
unfortunate people were compelled to sleep in two
wards, scarcely capable of properly accommodating
one-half of the number that nightly crowded them,
and such was the nauseous state of the effluvia from
these places that the master of the workhouse himself
acknowledged they could not be approached. This,
however, was not all. By the negligence with which
he charged the guardians of admitting paupers
without medical examination or being properly
cleansed, disease was brought to and engendered in
the workhouse, and that at this very time the inmates
were dying at the rate of eighteen or nineteen a week
—a number far greater than that of any other period.
He (Mr. Edwards) hal communicated with the Poor-
law Commissioners on the subject ; but they had no
power in the matter, as they could not compel the
guardians to enlarge the workhouse; and finding this
to be the case, he had written to Lord John Russell.
He had also brought the matter before a meeting of
the vestry, when the Rev. Mr. Dalton was in the
chair, and the reply of one of the poor-law guardians
was, that if they allowed the casual paupers to be
examined by a surgeon, and cleansed before their
admission, they should have such an influx of
casaulties that the workhouse would be unable to hold
them. In conclusion, Mr. Edwards said he had
examined the books of the house, and found that the
deaths were not those of the aged and infirm ; on the
contrary, the average age was 35 ; that it was by
disease, and not the ordinary course of nature they
were carried off.

Mr. ELLIOTT said he should look carefully over the
rules and regulations of the Poor-law Commissioners,
and also request the attendance of the master of the
workhouse, with the view of some improvement.

IMPORTANT POST-OFFICE CASE.
RUGBY, TUURSDAY.—At the County Court held
here yesterday a great deal of interest was felt by a
very large assemblage to hear the case of Mr. Wratis-
law, solicitor, who brought actions against the Post-
master-General for the recovery of the sum of 2d.
overcharge on a foreign newspaper, and for the reco-
very of the value of another newspaper detained by the
General Post•office. •
Mr. Wratislaw pleaded his own case.
Mr. Hubbard, from the firm of Messrs. Harris and
Son, appeared on the part of the Postmaster- General,
together with Mr. Peacock, from that establishment.
Mr. Wratislaw stated, that being connected with!
the kingdom of Bohemia, he was in the habit of taking
the paper called the Prager Zeitung, the postage of
which paper, when single, was 2d.—that the cover is
marked abroad, when single, " one Prager Zeitung"
—the General Post-office mark it also one, and then
charge 2d. On the 2d of November last be received
this paper, although marked as single, charged 4d.
His clerk having paid this 4d., he sent it back to the
post-office, and had it opened in the presence of the
postmaster, and requested to have the extra 2d. re-
turned. This the postmaster declined, but directed
that the cover should be sent to the General Post-
office, who could order him to repay the 2d., and he
would then do so. By that morning's post he wrote
as follows :
" For the Secretary to the General Post-office,
Len don.
" Sir,—The Prague paper which was in this cover
was only a single paper, although charged double. I
have submitted the paper and cover to the post-office
here, and am directed to send the cover to you, and
you will be pleased to order the postmaster here to
return to me the extra postage of 2d.
" I am, Sir, yours, very obediently,
" W. F. WRATISLAW.

" Rugby, Nov. 2, 1847."
Mr. Wratislaw stated that on the 6th of November
he received the usual printed acknowledgment from
Lieutenant-Colonel Maberly. On the 9th of No-
vember this single Prague Newspaper came with a
charge of ls. 2d. upon it, which he refused to pay,
and directed the postmaster to send it back by that
night's post to the General Post-office, Mr. Wratis-
law by that morning's post writing as follows
"To the Secretary of the General Post-office.
"Sir,—The Prague paper was this morning charged
ls. 2d. for postage, and of course I did not take it in.
It is marked with the figure I,' denoting it as a
single paper, and I have to request that you will be
pleased to direct this sort of over charge may not
in future be made, and that this paper may be
returned to me with the proper charge of 2d. I
should also be glad to have the 2d. overcharge in the
last paper complained of by me.—l have the honour
to be, Sir, yours most obediently,
" W. F. WRATISLAW.

" Rugby, Nov. 9, 1847."
On the 12th of November he received a second
printed acknowledgment as before, and also a letter
from Mr. Johnson, the Deputy Secretary to the Post-
office, returning the cover marked 2d., and requiring
the paper of the 2d November to be sent up. He
wrote in answer that the paper was not then in exist
ence, and he could not, therefore, comply with their
request ; that he had strictly followed the directions
of the Rugby postmaster, which was all the Post-
office required. Mr. Wratislaw, not receiving any
further notice of his applications, went to London on the
29th of November to see the Postmaster- General. On
going to his office the Secretary stated that his Lord•
ship could not be seen, but that the would see to any-
thing the same as his Lordship. Having explained the
case, the Secretary engaged to have these matters
looked to instantly, and that he should hear by the first
post. Having waited in vain for some notice of t'ds
application, he had brought these actions to see if a
sum unjustly paid under compulsion was not recover-
able, and if the Post-office could detain a newspaper at
their pleasure. Mr.Wratislawhaving established his case
by the testimony of his clerk, and the several letters
and papers, Mr. Hubbard put in several acts of Par-
liament, and also the decision in the action against
Lord Despencer for the loss of a letter with money in it.
This, Mr. Wratislaw contended,did not apply to his case.
If the money so lost had been traced to the hands of
the Postmaster- General, that action would have been
sustained. In this case he had notice before the extra
2d. was paid over to any other person, the Rugby
postmaster admitted the receipt, and if it got into any
other hands it was through his Lordship's default.
The JUDGE said the laws of England supposed
there was no cause of complaint but what the law
redressed. In this case there was an admitted wrong,
and he was afraid no redress, as he felt bound by the
case against Lord Le Despencer, and must direct a
nonsuit, at the same time he must say that it would
have been more creditable to the Post-office authori-
ties to have returned this admitted overcharge, than
to have put the plaintiff to the unnecessary expenses
they had done.
Mr. Wratislaw, in the next case, as to the news-
paper, stated that he must bow to the decision of the
Court, and be nonsuited • at the same time he must
complain of the gross negligence of the General Post-
office, as they had notice in sufficient time to have
looked over for the paper charged ls. 2d., and to
have found out which of the clerks had played the
trick of striking out the charge of 2d. and putting
over it ls. 2d., and they ought to have done so, as
such things were very discreditable to the Post-
office, and exceedingly annoying to individuals ; that
as the Post-office had taken these legal objections, it
was his determination to bring the case before both
Houses of Parliament.
We need scarcely add to the above a reflection that
must occur to every one who reads this extraordinary
trial, that the conduct of the Post-office authorities in
sheltering themselves under a legal precedent is most
disreputable, and that great crecit is due to
Mr. Wratislaw for the public spirit he evinced in
bringing the matter before a court of justice, and thus
exposing a case of gross individual wrong.

The contractors on the railway between Stamford
and Oakham have received orders to expedite their
work, the directors at length beginning to find that delay
is very unprofitable, as well as unpalatable to the share-
holders and the public. Mr. Moore, one of the sub-
contractors, was last week in want of a thousand hands
to complete his portion of the line, near Luffenham. It
is now said that efforts will be made to have the line
ready for opening throughout by the 14th of February.
—Stamford Mercury.
We are enabled to state, that Mr. Alderman Salo-
mons has consented to preside at the ensuing public
meeting of the Jewish Association for the Removal of
Civil and Religious Disabilities, a deputation consisting
of Messrs. J. Mitchell, PreEident, John Mottram, and
Henry Emanuel (Honorary Secretary), having waited
on the worthy Alderman by appointment on Tuesday
la st.—Jew ish Chronicle.