The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-21 00:00:00

RELIEF.

Resolved, that it is the opinion of this Committee,-
1. That it appears to have been the practice of the An-
dover board of guardians to consider and deter mine upon
cases as stated in the relieving officer's books, without pre-
viously inquiring whether the applicant or any person on his
behalf be in waiting.
2. That when applicants baying made application to the
relieving ufficer have been admitted to the board, on its being
made known that they are present, it has ordinarily been
only on their objecting to the decision in the case; whereas
justice and humanity alike require that every applicant for
relief should have the opportunity, if in waiting, of making
a personal statement before his case be decided upon.
3. That the Andover board of guardians have adopted the
practice of leaving it to the relieving officer to communicate
their opinion to the applicant, a practice of which your Com-
mittee strongly disapprove, it being in their judgment no
less just to the pauper, than expedient, with a view of pre-
venting mistake or fraud, that the decision in each case should
be communicated to tha applicant, if in attendance, by the
presiding chairman, in the presence of the board.
4. That in this censure on the practice of the Andover
guardians, the Committee would not be understood as fa-
vouring a practice which may often lead to serious hardship,
of requiring all applicants to attend at the board.
5. That the free adinis,ion to the presence of the board of
applicants for relief wa; the more important in the Andover
Union, in which it has been proved that the relieving officer's
books have been very imperfectly kept ; columns which
should contain important particulars, e. g., the earnings of
the applicant, and the present cause of seeking relief, being
often left entirely blank.
6. That from instances brought under their notice, the
Committee believe that the board of guardians have, in
several cases of applications . for relief to them, left to the
relieving officer a large discretionary power as to adminis-
tering or withholding it. While they admit that, under
special circumstances, this may sometimes be necessary
(though whether such special circumstances existed in the
cases referred to, the defective state of the relieving officer's
book affords no evidence), the Committee think it right to
record the.r conviction of the impropriety and inexpediency,
under ordinary cases, of thus delegating to the relieving
officer the discretion which the law has vested in the board
of guardians.
7. That in regard to the non-allowance of partial relief to
the aged and partially disabled, a principle which appears to
have been generally acted upon in the Andover Union, the
Committee feel bound to express their apprehension, that, if
rigidly carried out, it may lead to various individual hard-
ships, without any equivalent amount of public advantage.
It is just to• add, that the boards of guardians have in this
respect only followed out the recommendations of the Poor-
law Commissioners in their annual reports and other publi-
cations, though no order has been issued by the Poor-law
Commissioners to that effect.

8. That on the application of an able-bodied man fur re-
lief, on account of sickness in his family, and also in some
in-tances where the applicant has been partially disabled,
the Andover board have required, as a condition upon which
such relief is made dependent, that he should perform a cer-
tain task of work at the workhouse, the amount of food to be
allowed to him not being supplied until such task is com-
pleted; and although, as stated by some witnesses to have
been the case, this practice may have been only adopted as
regards the able- bodied applicant, and where he is out of
work, and under circumstances, therefore, which, were it not
for the sickness in his family, would render admission to the
workhouse the only relief applicable in that union to the
case, still your Committee think that the annexing this con-
dition to the relief otherwise deemed necessary, and espe-
cially where parties are brought long distances from their
home-4, to execute the task imposed, is (except under sus-
picion of fraud or gross imposition) an unduly severe mode
of administering relief.
WORKHOUSE.
Resolved, that it is the opinion of this Committee-
1. That on the investigation which took place in Septem-
ber, 1815 (as hereinafter stated), before Mr. Parker, many
charges of gross immorality, and of fraudulent appropriation
of the workhouse stores, were brought forward against
Mr. M'Dougal, the then master of the workhouse, and were
deposed to en oath by many witnesses; that that investiga-
tion was brought to a close (under the circumstances parti-
cularly detailed in the papers and evidence printed here-
with) by Mr. M'Dougal's resignation of his office, no evi-
dence up to that time having been brought forward by
him in his defence against the greater part of the 'charges so
preferred.
2. That having reference as well to the necessarily great
extent and-variety of the subjects referred to them, as more
especially to their obvious incompetency to complete that
inquiry satisfactorily without the power of administering an
oath, the Committee have thought themselves justified in
forbearing to re-open the investigation referred to.
3. That the Committee at the same time think it right to
state that several of the witnesses examined in proof of the
charges of gross immorality on such previous investigation,
have given evidence before them, as well upon points which
did not come under inquiry in that investigation as upon
some matters which were then deposed to, and that the
evidence so given appears to your Committee entitled to
credit.

4. That this Committee is of opinion that Mr. M'Dougal's
conduct while master of the workhouse was marked by
undue severity ; that he was, on several occasions, once even
when reading prayers to the inmates, seen in a state of in-
toxication ' • that he was utterly deficient in many of the
qualities which are of essential importance in the difficult
position which he tilled, viz., fairness and impartiality, a due
sense of truth, a well-regulated temper, and proper habits of
self control. . _ _

5. That the Committee cannot refrain from directing
special attention to the case of Hannah Joyce; she appears
to have been presumed by Mr. and Mrs. Iq'Dougal- to have
been guilty of child murder, not only without evidence, but
against the verdict of the coroner's jury, and to have been
treated by them, in consequence, with great cruelty. It has
been further proved, that on the day of the inquest on the
body of her child she was threatened by Mrs. M'Dougal with
being compelled to sleep in the dead-house, where that body
was then lying; and having been confined, apart from the
other women, in the night-time, she was forced by Mr.
BPDougal to carry the body of her own childalp the High-
street of Andover to the grave; moreover, on the occasion of
her leaving the workhouse, some days afterwards, Mrs.
11 I.‘Dougal directed some of the female inmates to take pans,
plates, &c., and make as much noise as they could, on the
ground of her presumed guilt. It also appears that this
latter proceeding took place at the time when the guardians
were assembled in the board room, and that some of the
guardians, at least, were aware of what was going on ; but
no inquiry appears to have been instituted by the board, nor
any censure passed in consequence of the outrage which had
been committed.
6. That as a farther proof of the ill-regulated state of the
workhouse, your Committee refer to the fact that
commitments took place to the gaol of Andover during
for offences against the rules and discipline of the work-
house, a state of things which they believe could not have
existed had the workhouse been properly managed. That
they cannot omit farther to state, that it has been proved
thaton numerous ocraisions individuals were taken from the
workhouse to the borough gaol of Andover, by the direc-
tions of Mr. M'Dougal, and were subsequently discharged
therefrom without, on either occasion, being taken before a
justice of the peace.
7. That without going further in this place into details,
for which they refer to the evidence and papers printed here-
with, the Committee feel bound, upon the evidence given
before them, to express their conviction of the utter unfit-
ness of Mr. M'Dougal and his wife for the situations of mas-
ter and matron, which they respectively held from December,
1836, to December, 1845, and they have therefore learned
with much astonisment that his influence with the board
has been far greater than that which should properly
belong to his office, and the confidence reposed in him seems
to have been unqualified.
8. That the Committee feel called upon further to express
their opinion that no such misgovernment of the workhouse
could have taken place, had the visiting Committee acted re-
gularly and duty in the discharge of their important duties,
as defined in the workhouse rules laid down by the Poor-law
Commissioners (Article 56), and carefully recorded the re-
sults of their observations and inquiries for the weekly in-
formation of the Board.
9. That the Committee believe it to be one of the most im-
portant duties of the Visiting Committee to ascertain from
inmates whether any ground exists for just complaint; to
inquire into such complaints when preferred, and so to
discharge this part of their functions, that the inmates
may entertain a just confidence in the fairness of those
under whose charge they are placed; but your Committee
fear that in the Andover workhouse this important duty
of the visiting Luardians has not been satisfactorily per-
formed.
10. That the bad administration of the Andover work-
house, and the rigour with which the board of guardians,
generally acting in accordance with the frequently published
views of the Poor-law Commissioners, have carried out the
law, have often been the means of inducing labourers to
accept reduced wages in order to avoid the workhouse.
11. That the system, as pursued at the Andover board, of
granting gratuities to the master for boys and girls placed
out to service, without requiring any proper voucher for the
accuracy of the master's statement, was very reprehensible.
WORKHOUSE DIETARY.
Resolved, that it is the opinion of this Committee,-
1. That in the month of February, 1836, several forms of
dietary were sent down by the Poor-law Commissioners, of
which one, marked No. 3, was selected by the board of
guardians for adoption in the workhouse, and sanctioned by
the Commissioners, and has been in use from that time until
December, 1845.
2. That in their second annual report, published in 1837,
the Poor-law Com Missioners published six forms of dietary
as actually in use in workhouses, but that No. 3, of such
forms differs in several respects from form No. 3, as sanc-
tioned at Andover, and is in fact a superior dietary.
3. That your Committee have not received any evidence
in answer to their inquiries which can enable them to ex-
plain satisfactorily this admitted discrepancy, and that in the
absence of any such explanation they must infer that the
improvement made in the form No. 3, between its transmis-
sion to the Andover Union, and its publication in the second
annual report, was owing to its being judged insufficient by
the Poor. law Commissioners; they cannot in any case re-
frain from expressing their surprise that the improved die-
tary, as printed iu the second annual report, was never spe-
cially communicated to the Andover board.
4. That from the evidence taken before the Committee, and
Committee believe, that from the forma-
from the circumstance that the board of guardians, on the
in quantity at least, too low, and more
recommendation of, and in concurrence with the Poor-law
Commissioners, have lately thought it advisable to adopt a
forma-
tion of the ttaluenitobneuntil the last autumn, the general dietary of
1845, the medical officers of the union, Mr.
the atl?wance of bread was insufficient;
and they find that this dietary was often further diminished
particularlytlieNvorlthoug
workhouse dietary to maintain the
by the dishonesty of the master. It is right, however, to
Ir. Payne, gave evidence on oath in favour
add that on the first inquiry held by Mr. Parker, on the
of the
of the
toelfasluAwffivacgtiluedsnteity
inmates in health. But it has been proved before the Com-
mittee that some of the inmates of the workhouse were in the
habit dewing raw pOtatoes and grain and refuse food which
had been thrown to the hogs and fowls.
5. That it has been proved that during the continuance of
that dietary, and while Mr. M'Dougal was master of the
workhouse, instances occurred in which inmates of the
workhouse, employed in bone crushing, eat the marrow re-
maining in the fresh bones which they were set to break.
6. That-although the practice of bone-crushing at the An-
, doyer workhouse roin C'Peatl94 ih the 37%; 1841, luicl the