The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1845-02-11 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

INIQUITOUS OPERATION OF THE AMENDED (!) NEW POOR-LAW.  The following startling case illustrative of the oppressive hearing of the union system upon the cuff. ring poor of England, was brought by Mr. Wakley before the at. tention of the House of Commons on Wednesday last. We quote it entire : " I will state what came under my own observation on Saturday last. It is not an unique rase—it is a general one. A labouring man of good charact?r, only 26 years of age, was in a state of extreme destitut'on. He lived in the parish of Ruislip. I understand that six weeks before he died he had been living at lurr, in Buckinghamshire. His wife was ill, and a small expense was incurred in their maintenance during about thr, e weeks, and they were thr-atened to be passed home as paupers. To avoid this the husband borrowed a horse and cart and removed his wife to the old workhouse. I saw the furniture in the room they had taken—it was not worth 2s. ; it was a scene of miserable destitution. The parochial authorities of her carted them from the place to the village of Ruislip, saying at the workhouse, . Here are the parties, I have carted them home to von.' They were then allowed to go to their lodgings. The poor rr,an being ill and out of work said at last to h's wife, ' You must go to the relieving-officer and ask for relief. I must have sustenance. I must have relief. or I shall die.' See what transpired in consequence of the s'ze of your unions. That woman, starved into a state of extreme feebleness, left her home and her husband without a farthing, and  _ secure so long as the poor are so unjustly treated ? Do you call this a system of Conservatism ? Is it not pregnant with danger to you every moment of your lives? Do you believe that the millions of England can be satisfied with this?" Can any thing be described more horrible than the torture thus inflict;;,d upon this devoted woman? A walk of 21 miles in the depth of winter—this would be a penance hard enough to submit to for the paltry dole of 35., to preserve. for a day or two only, the life of a dying husband. Yet this is not the worst. It requires us to look at the agonising details of the story, to enable us to gather the full amount of misery inflicted. First, we have the walk of five miles to the relieving officer; then, the sickening of the heart, when told that she must go to the doctor • next, the disappointment caused by the information that even lie could not relieve without visiting her cottage; then the " hope deferred," as she waited that visit by her sick husband's side ; the torturing effect of the doctor's " You are starving !" ac^.ompanied by the announcement that she most bear his certificate of this fact to the overseer at Hillingdeti—five miles and back again ; and after all ber labour and endurance, mental and bodily, this beneficent law only gave her an order upon a grocer at Ruislip. for just what articles its undeviating rules prescribed as necessary, for all sorts of eonstitutions, and under all sorts of emergencies! Who could have blamed this poor being if sl-e bad robbed on her journey, or had been hurried to the commission of suicide, as preferable to the continued endurance of fatigue and suffering beyond her woman's strength? Yet this law is supported by a Conservative admiuistiation !