Joseph Rogers, M.D.: Reminiscences of a Workhouse Medical Officer

by Joseph Rogers

CHAPTER II. THE WESTMINSTER INFIRMARY.

About a twelvemonth after the Act was in operation I appealed, through the medical journals, to my brethren in the provinces as to the arrangements that had been made in their respective localities. A large number of letters from all parts of England and Wales were sent to me, and with the information thus furnished I prepared a paper which I called "Chaos," in which I turned into ridicule the arrangements that had been made, showing that the Department, faithful to its traditions, had made a complete mess of the administrative arrangements. This paper, read at the meeting of the British Medical Association at Sheffield, attracted a good deal of attention both in the medical and general Press. It materially acted in evolving order out of the chaos into which the subject had drifted, owing to the indifference and incompetence of those who had drafted the measure.

In the spring of 1872 I was informed that the alterations and enlargement of the old Workhouse of St. James's, commenced at the time when the Westminster Union was formed, were complete, and that Mr. French, who had been the medical officer of the workhouse and parish of St. James's for upwards of forty years, was about to retire on a superannuation allowance of £200 a year. I was told that the Chairman of the Board, a Mr. Bonthron, a Scotch baker living in Regent Street, had selected a fellow Scotchman, one Dr. S., as Mr. French's successor, and as Mr. Bonthron claimed to be omnipotent at the Board, this gentleman's appointment to the vacancy was considered to be certain. In the course of a few days I heard that a formidable opponent to Dr. S. had appeared in the person of Dr. M., who was also a Scotchman. In due course the election took place, when Dr. M. was elected. This resulted from a protest on the part of certain members of the Board who resented the predominance of Mr. Bonthron. When apprised of the result of the election, I remarked that Dr. M. could not take the office as he did not possess the necessary legal qualifications. On the following Saturday morning a member of the Board told me that a letter had been read at the meeting of the Guardians, held the previous evening, announcing that the election of Dr. M. was null and void, as he held no surgical qualifications. As his election had surprised all the Guardians, because it proved that the Chairman had not the influence he claimed, my informant advised me to apply for the office. At first I hesitated, but upon being urged again I assented. The same evening I called on Dr. M., told him of my intention, and asked him for the support of his friends. To my utter astonishment he told me he had made up his mind to try again. "Nonsense," I said; "how can you get a diploma from the College of Surgeons?" "Oh," he replied, "I have arranged all that; I have a splendid memory, and I remember all my anatomy and surgery." As I had every ground for the belief that he had never attended lectures on surgery, nor attended the surgical practice of an hospital, inasmuch as I had known him ever since he had come to London, I saw that, without collusion with some one in authority, it was impossible for it to be done; but, as he appeared determined, I left him. As soon as it was known that I seriously intended to compete for the appointment, testimonials in my favour were forwarded to me by several eminent physicians and surgeons, by Members of Parliament, among them one of a very flattering character from Mr. C. P. Villiers, M.P., the ex-President of the Poor Law Board, who strongly recommended me to the Board of Guardians, those lady visitors who had known me at the Strand, and others. Two days before the election took place I was surprised by a visit from Dr. M., who called to inform me that he had passed his examination at the College of Surgeons the night before, and now asked me to retire in his favour. On my declining to do as he wished, he said it was very hard I would not, as he had incurred an expense of upwards of £60 to get the diploma. Prior to the election my friends entered into a compact with his supporters to the effect that if I was in a minority on the show of hands my name was to be withdrawn, when they would support him, but if I was in the majority his friends would support me. This occurring, I was elected, to the great surprise of the Chairman, who looked on me as a dangerous person, seeing that I had taken an active part in bringing about the formation of the Union, whereby St. Anne's had been joined to St. James's, which had the effect of somewhat increasing his poor rate assessment in St. James's—for St. Anne's, a poor parish, had considerably improved its position by being put into union with St. James's, which was comparatively a rich one.

Having at this time received an invitation from the Irish Dispensary Medical Officers Association to address them at the College of Physicians in Dublin, I did so, when Sir Dominic Corrigan, Bart., M.P., was in the chair; and I afterwards spent a very pleasant week there, visiting the North and South Dublin Workhouses, the latter having 4,000 inmates, with a large staff of visiting physicians and surgeons, besides resident medical officers. It is one of the finest hospitals in Dublin, and the arrangements for the efficient treatment of the sick poor were in the highest degree creditable to the Irish Poor Law, now the Local Government Board.

I also visited the Richmond Lunatic Asylum, situated on the outskirts of Dublin, at that date under the superintendence of Dr. Lalor, who, I understand, was the first physician who introduced vocal and instrumental music as a means of relieving the insane. There I witnessed one of the most extraordinary sights it was ever my lot to see. I will give a sketch of the tableau. In the foreground sat a young lady discoursing most eloquent music on a harmonium, immediately behind her there stood some young Irish women, three or four of them, singularly beautiful, with music in their hands, accompanying her; behind them were older women, and then on to the old and weird, all joining most heartily in the performance. The fringe of this female gathering of nearly 100 performers were harmless imbeciles and idiots. I stood and listened some moments whilst this singular performance continued. I was so struck with the beauty of one of the Irish girls that I asked her history, when I was informed that her condition had been induced by a disappointment in a love affair. It was the old story of love followed by desertion, and she had been admitted some six months before in a state of maniacal excitement. She was too young and altogether too pretty to be an inmate of a lunatic asylum. Dr. Lalor also showed me a typical case, exhibiting the truth of the opinion I have long held, that of all the forms of insanity, none are so uncertain of having been really cured as those which have exhibited symptoms of homicidal or suicidal violence. The patient in question had been admitted when suffering with a homicidal tendency but had steadily improved, and his name was on the list of those to go before the Visiting Committee for discharge on probation, when a startling incident occurred. He had secreted one of the knives used in the asylum about his person, and he had, when unobserved, whittled away the thick, blunt portion used in the asylum, until he had given it a sharp cutting edge, from handle to point; when, raising his right leg up, he cut through the calf down to the bone, severing the muscle completely. This patient, Dr. Lalor told me, had been employed on various offices of trust, and that he was commonly considered to be completely cured, and altogether harmless. I obtained one of the old knives used in this asylum, had it copied, and, having got the sanction of the Board for getting several, used them all the time I was at the Westminster Union, in the male and female insane wards. The cutting edge was about two inches in length, but the rest of the knife was about the twelfth of an inch thick. It was impossible for lunatics to do any harm either to themselves or others with such knives.

On my return to London I was informed that my appointment to the Westminster Union had been confirmed by the Local Government Board.

A day or so before the 23rd of June an appointment was made by Mr. French for me to go over the House with him, and to have the establishment formally handed over to me. I went, accompanied by a young Irish physician, recently one of the resident surgeons of an Irish hospital, with whom I was in treaty to be my assistant. I had never been in this workhouse infirmary before. Shortly after my arrival Mr. French joined us, and, in company with the head nurse on the female side, we went through the female part of the establishment. The nurse was most elaborately "got up." We went on and examined each patient, a large number of whom were in the wards—in fact, although it was midsummer, the place was full. I noticed bed-cards over each patient's bed, but as I could not make out what was given to the patients, I asked what was being done for this and that case. To my astonishment Mr. French said, "Nothing; I do not believe in physic, and therefore do not give the people anything." Presently we entered a large ward where a woman, evidently in great pain, was lying in bed, writhing in apparent agony. After ascertaining the nature of the case, which was one of colicky diarrhœa, I asked, "Well, what do you here?" to which he replied, "Nurse, give her a glass of Number Two." With that, he pulled me into the centre of the ward, and giving me a friendly nudge of the ribs, laughingly said, "What do you imagine is Number Two? Why it is peppermint-water coloured; I never give any physic." Feeling by this time somewhat disgusted by these remarkable confessions, seeing that his stipend was £350 a year, out of which it was arranged by the Board that he should supply these medicines. I dropped his company, and went on examining the people independently. Mr. French speedily buttonholed my young companion, and went on looking at the patients with him. At last our visit came to an end, and on coming out of the male sick wards he shook me warmly by the hand and wished me the same happy official life as he had had. He had hardly got out of hearing when the young Irishman commenced to reproach me with having transferred Mr. French to him; saying, "I take it, sir, as a very unkind thing that you should have done so, as I was shocked at his boasting that he never did anything at all for these poor sick people."

The next day I entered on my duties. On taking my seat in the consulting-room the master brought in and laid before me a large volume, the Workhouse Medical Relief Book. I turned over the pages for the week, and noticed the names and extras ordered for the sick. I saw that ham, sausages, tripe, fish, eggs, were entered rather frequently. At last I said to the master, who was standing by, "You surely have not all these people on the sick list in the House! I did not see a third of this number when I went over the House yesterday." "Yes," he replied, "they are here;" on which I said, "Let everything remain as entered in the book until I can arrange to go over the establishment and see them all, which I will do this week." I then went through the sick and infirm wards. On going through the wards I ordered what in my judgment was necessary for the sick in the way of medicines, much to the astonishment of the head nurse, who stared at me in a half-dazed manner. There was one patient with a very foul and offensive ulcer, for whom I ordered a charcoal poultice: she came to me before I left the House to ask me "what I meant." I replied, "A charcoal poultice." She then said, "I never heard of such a thing before." I then asked her how long she had been there; she said eight years. The next day I had occasion to order a carrot poultice; I met with the same astonishment and ignorance of what was meant. At last she frankly stated that she was about to learn her duties, for nothing of the kind had ever been used by her before; and further, she said that as she never had any medicine to give the people, she had not troubled herself much about the patients; indeed, I learned on inquiry that she used to be in waiting to see the doctor each morning, and so soon as he was gone she considered her duties were over, and she returned to her own sitting-room till next day. I could never get her to give my medicines as directed. Apart from this indifference as to medicines, she was kind to the patients and respectful to me. On the male side I found a superintendent nurse who really knew her duties. She confirmed the statement voluntarily made by Mr. French, that no medicines were ever provided for the sick. She also said that the Guardians knew all about it, and that they treated it as a great joke. This was not correct as regards some of the Guardians, as I subsequently ascertained. It was known to the St. James's section of the Board, but repudiated by those of St. Anne's. Seeing that we had had a medical inspector and self-called medical adviser for five years, whose duty it was to visit this Workhouse infirmary, his failure to discover these omissions was in the highest degree remarkable; but then the system prevailed at the Local Government Board, and our Workhouse Infirmaries Association had utterly failed to alter it. The reason for all this was not far to seek.

On the day after, in company with a pauper inmate, told off to carry the Medical Relief Book, I went through the wards for the purpose of seeing the infirm men and women who were on extras. I found on the women's side that, as it was leave-day, many had gone out, and therefore drew the inference that if they were well enough to go out they could dispense with sausages, ham, tripe, eggs, &c., entered against their names, and could eat the ordinary infirm diet provided by Dr. Markham's diet table, which I saw hung up in the wards, which diet table had been drawn up from the form drafted by our Association some years before. It is curious that he claimed it to be his, without any reference to any one. Whilst going through the female wards some of the inmates returned drunk, one old woman very much so. She at once proceeded to ask me who I was, and what I was doing there. On my replying that I had come into the ward to see why she was on a diet of daily sausages, she tartly replied, pulling up her petticoats and showing both her legs, which she struck with her hands, "For these bad legs." I at once ran the pen through her name. She lived in the House years after that, but she ate no more sausages. I learned on inquiry that this fat old woman, who could go out and return drunk, had had sausages, nominally, as her dinner for two years. I write nominally because I learned afterwards that in the matter of diets an extensive system of exchange obtained throughout the House without any check or hindrance on the part of the officials. It took me the greater part of four days to see all the infirm people on extras, but the result was satisfactory, as it enabled me to put the establishment so far as the diets were concerned, on an economic basis. The clerk of the Board assured me at the time that I had caused a saving of some hundreds of pounds, a statement which I honestly believe was the truth.

It might be a matter of wonder how this could be, but having regard to the very large amount of extras purchased from day to day, none of which were supplied under contract, it can be well understood what an opportunity was given for large prices being charged for such extras, as practically no check existed on the cupidity of the tradesmen (selected by the master) who supplied these things. I do not state that such was the case here, but unless some good understanding existed between those who ordered and those who supplied, how is it possible that masters of workhouses, with their limited incomes, should succeed in leaving at their deaths so much money, as many of them do? I was informed that the old master who preceded Catch at the Strand Union had gone there after failing in business as a tradesman in Covent Garden, that he held office as master twelve years, and when he died that he left some £2,000.

I found on inspection of the specially infirm, paralytic, and wholly infirm, that the women were located in wards 16, 17, and 18, and on inquiry discovered that there were no conveniences whatever for the instantaneous removal of excreta, and yet this condition of things had not been discovered by the Government Inspectors or by the medical advisers, or if it had been no steps had been taken to alter it.

On my first visit to these wards I noticed some black patches in the corners of the compartments, which stood out very distinctly from the recently whitewashed ceiling and walls. Noticing some days after that these patches had increased in size, I asked the nurse what it was due to, when she quietly said, "Those are bugs." So soon as I could I saw the master, and told him of it, and asked him to see to it. He did not say he would or he would not, he only laughed. Finding some days after that nothing had been done, I again saw him in his office, when I told him that I must insist on those bugs being removed. The labour master was present, who remarked, "Well, doctor, as you make such a fuss about the bugs I will see to it for you" (evidently regarding the matter in the light of a personal favour); and the bugs were swept down into a dustpan by hundreds and put into the fire and burnt. This was told me by an eye-witness, who was present whilst it was being done.

I do not wish it supposed that the master was harsh or cruel; quite the reverse, he was very kind to the inmates. But he had lived long enough in the service of the Poor Law not to be fully aware that no good would accrue to him or his by too much zeal in the performance of his duty. He calmly let things slide; consequently there was more drunkenness on liberty days than could be possibly imagined, and was unchecked, and although I repeatedly begged that the names of all persons who were on my sick list who had been allowed to go out should be reported to me if they came home drunk, I never could get my wishes attended to, though occasionally it happened that I discovered the circumstance, especially when an accident occurred.

I was not wholly unprepared for this laxity of discipline, as some few days before entering on my duties I met the ex-chaplain of the Strand Workhouse, who, whilst congratulating me on my return to the Poor Law service, said, "You will have a great deal to meet with at St. James's. I have taken the duty there for the chaplain occasionally, and the scenes of drunkenness and quarrelling among the inmates on their return home on liberty days, which I have witnessed, exceeds anything you can imagine." One of the most terrible exhibitions of this kind I ever witnessed was on the first Christmas Day after my appointment. The subject having previously been brought under the attention of the Board, an order was issued that for the future this indiscriminate permission to the inmates to leave the house on Christmas Day should be stopped. It will hardly be believed that on the next Christmas Day the Chairman took upon himself, most presumptuously, to go to the House and give permission for them to again go out. The scene that occurred that night was the most disgraceful that ever happened in the history of a workhouse. Several of the drunken inmates on their return home fought like demons. I and my assistant were engaged for some time in dealing with the injuries that were caused. I must state that I never saw the master so justly indignant as he was at the impertinent interference of this Chairman, in setting his authority and that of the Board at defiance in the way he had done.

Finding that no dietary for the sick and infirm had been adopted at the House, I at once drew up a form which continued in force until ill-health caused my resignation. It was similar to that which I had introduced at the Strand several years before. There was one diet for which I claim especial credit. It was framed with the view of dealing with capricious appetites or severe sickness. It was called Number Five, or ad. lib., and consisted of either eggs, fish, a chop, beef-tea, or arrowroot, or anything else of the same value. It was enjoined that the nurse should at 8 a.m. ask what these special sick would take for dinner. When she had ascertained the wishes of the patient, a statement on a diet-sheet showing how many of each description of diet would be required was sent down to the kitchen. At the end of the week the cook handed to the master's clerk the number of each diets she had supplied, who then proceeded to distribute these among all those who were on ad. lib. diet. It might appear on the master's side of the Medical Relief Book that A or B had had a chop daily, whilst in reality the dinner might, by this arrangement, have been changed every day. This plan of dealing with capricious appetites has since been adopted in several workhouses.

Although five years had passed away since the Metropolitan Poor Law Act had become law, no attempt had been made to carry out the dispensary clauses until after my election, and one of the first things I had to do was to put the dispensary in order. I had been taught a lesson in economic prescribing whilst at the Strand, and therefore was enabled to speedily arrange for a pharmacopœia. I also drew up a formula for the supply of large bottles of simple medicines, which were placed in charge of the nurses, for administration in trivial ailments so common among the aged poor. I also introduced bed pulleys, to enable the sick to assist themselves in rising, or in getting in or out of bed. I also ordered small shawls for the aged women and woollen jackets for the men—a great comfort to those who were suffering from consumption or bronchitis, the principal affections I had to encounter.

I have stated that although it was midsummer the House was full of sick people, which arose partly on account of the sickness that prevailed in the worst part of St. Anne's and similarly in that of St. James's, and also to the fact that the Chairman had opposed the transfer of any of the sick to the Sick Asylum Hospital, at Highgate, to which the Westminster Union, in conjunction with the Strand, St. Giles's, and St. Pancras, was affiliated. He had opposed the junction of the two parishes on personal grounds, and being beaten, had, in conjunction with his party, obstructed the removal of the acutely sick.

As medical officer I did not object to this, for as the sick wards were extremely good and were all that I had desired to carry out when I initiated the Workhouse infirmary movement, I simply complied with the wishes of the majority of the Guardians not to send any one away. I had held office some weeks when, in the autumn of the year, I encountered Dr. Drydges in Regent Street. This gentleman, who had acted temporarily whilst Dr. Markham was ill, had about this time been permanently appointed to be Metropolitan Inspector, Dr. Markham having resigned. He came up to me and said, "I was coming to the Westminster Union to learn why it was you did not comply with the law, and send your acute sick away." "Oh," I replied, "that is soon explained; it is because the majority of the Board will not let me." "Indeed," he said; "you must do your duty, even if the Board object to it." To which I replied, "I did that at the Strand, and your Secretary called on me to resign because I was not sufficiently respectful to the Guardians. I shall comply with the wishes of the Guardians now, and not with that of the Local Government Board, as they would throw me over." To which he rather angrily replied, "You speak to me like that, when I am an Inspector, and you only a Workhouse medical officer?" To which I answered, "And who, pray, made you a Poor Law Inspector. Why, if it had not been for me and my initiation, neither you nor Dr. Markham would ever have been Inspectors." "Oh," he replied, "I did not know you had had anything to do with it." "I think," I said, "if you will trouble yourself to inquire you will find what I state to be correct." When I broke down in 1886, and he had to call and see me, he was then most kind and sympathetic, and I take this opportunity of stating as much.

This refusal on the part of the majority of the Board, led on by this Chairman, to allow me to send suitable cases of sickness to the Asylum Hospital, was in the highest degree absurd, seeing that the ratepayers of the Union had to pay their proportion of all expenses at the Asylum Hospital, and for the beds to which the Union were entitled; and although this Workhouse infirmary was a perfect paradise in comparison with the den at the Strand, still the House had not been arranged on the principle that all the sick should be retained in it. My nursing staff was insufficient to enable me effectually to deal with the great number of sick persons there at the time of my entrance on my duties. One illustration will suffice. There was a man in an infirm ward who had been under Mr. French some five or six years. He did not belong to Westminster, he was kept there because he alleged he was so ill that he could not bear the fatigue of journeying some sixty miles in the country. He was a healthy-looking man about forty years of age. He always lay in bed with his knees drawn up, and constantly asserted that he could not stand nor walk, nor put his legs down. He complained piteously of his sufferings. I exhausted every conceivable treatment, but all without the least apparent benefit, as he never owned to being any better for my attention to him. This went on for two years, until I began to get suspicious of him. One day an inmate of the ward, who had recovered and left the House, called on me at my private residence. On seeing me he said, "I have called to thank you for your kindness to me, and also to tell you that you have been deceived by that man Webster, who you have done so much for. He is an impostor. He can walk as well as I can, and, what is more, does walk about." "Nonsense," I replied; "he says he cannot get out of bed, and the nurses confirm it." "Well," he continued, "he takes very good care never to allow them to see him get out of bed, he takes his constitutional walk about the wards between 2 and 4 a.m., when the lights are down, and most of the inmates asleep." "But, surely," I said, "the night nurse must have seen him, and if so she would report it to me!" "Oh," he replied, "she hardly ever comes into the ward during the night, she is generally in her own room fast asleep—she gets herself called when she is wanted." I made some further inquiries, and finding that there was evidence of deception, I sent him to the Asylum Hospital with a letter to the superintendent medical officer, giving his history, and telling him of my suspicions, and asking that he might be carefully watched by reliable persons. He came back in a fortnight, having been found out. He was immediately transferred to his settlement, where doubtless he recommenced the game of deception, having found it answer so well.

It may be here said, If you had not confidence in your nurses, why did you not get rid of them? For the simple reason that I had no power to do so. They were not selected by me, but by the Guardians, and therefore were not my officers, but the Board's. I once reported the night nurse on the male side (the woman who had allowed the malingerer to deceive me) for drunkenness, but I had so much trouble to get rid of her that I was not induced to repeat the experiment, added to which I was most grossly insulted by the master for bringing this woman's conduct before the Guardians.

In my opinion the medical officer should select and discharge all the nurses—of course, reason for this latter action being shown. I should have discharged several at the Westminster Union for neglect of duty and for general incompetence if I had had the power. Simple complaint would be attended by no beneficial result, as it would be a hundred to one that the nurse would be supported in her misconduct by some member of the Board, whose protege she might be. On mentioning this to an ex-workhouse medical officer, he told me that on having occasion to represent the conduct of the resident midwife, who claimed and exercised the right to go out on every Sunday for several hours, leaving the wards wholly unattended on every such occasion except by pauper helps, the only action taken by the Board as a return for it, at the instance of the midwife's friend, was the adoption of a resolution that a return should be prepared and laid on the Board-room table, showing the occasions when the medical officer went out and the length of time he was out, &c., &c. Of course he found out that he had achieved worse than nothing by his effort to check this abuse. This circumstance occurred in one of the largest of our metropolitan workhouse infirmaries.

When first I entered on my duties at the Westminster Union the chaplain there was a very energetic little man named Duval. I do not remember his Christian name, for the reason that he was known and spoken of as Claude Duval, and for a long while I supposed him to possess no other. At last I discovered that the name had been given him in joke, and that he was in no way connected with the celebrated highwayman. He most assuredly did not convey the idea that he had any brigand blood in his veins. He was extremely attentive to his duties, and deserved and had gained the respect of all the inmates and officers.

Frequently he organized entertainments for the aged and infirm. These were held in the dining-hall, which on all such occasions was crowded to excess. After I had held office about a year he desired me to provide an entertainment, which I did on several occasions, and my efforts met with much success. In the carrying out of these entertainments, which were musical and recitative, I had the assistance of my nephew, Mr. Julian Rogers, and his wife, who brought with them vocalists of a high order, who contributed much to the pleasure of the inmates. These entertainments were highly appreciated by the inmates, and were frequently attended by members of the Board, and by some of the ratepayers living in the neighbourhood. Now and then I used to read extracts suitable for penny readings. On two occasions my efforts took a higher form, when I gave a lecture on the "Ear and Hearing," and on "Sight and the Eye." The preparation of these lectures and the diagrams to illustrate them was a work of considerable trouble and some anxiety, but the signal success achieved on both occasions amply repaid me for any trouble occasioned. To show the appreciation of my audience for a joke, I will relate an incident that occurred during the delivery of my lecture on "Sight and the Eye." I was describing the function of the iris, or coloured portion of the eye, as an involuntary movable veil, which regulated the amount of light which should be admitted to the eye, and said that in order to make the veil complete it was covered behind with a black pigment, so as to exclude all light except that which passed through the pupil. I then told them that in certain animals this pigment was wanting, and not only there but in the skin generally, and instanced the white mouse, ferret, &c., and showed that all these animals had red eyes and always blinked and winked when exposed to a strong light. I then passed on to state that this condition was sometimes found in man, where again the winking and blinking was noticeable as well as the whiteness of the skin and hair, from the absence of this dark pigment, hence the name of "albinos" applied to those thus afflicted. I then went on to state that recently we had a notable example of this in the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who suffered from this infirmity, and that his dread of light was so extreme that he had attempted actually to put a tax on matches. This joke was followed by a positive scream of delight from visitors and inmates—showing that Mr. Lowe's fiscal effort to increase the revenue was known to them all. At the conclusion of the night's proceedings, Miss Augusta Clifford, who was present, came up and said she should repeat my story of Mr. Lowe and the match tax wherever she went. At the next meeting of the Board, several of the Guardians having been present on the occasion referred to, it was moved and seconded and carried unanimously, that a vote of thanks should be given to Dr. Rogers for the entertainment provided by him, and for the highly interesting and instructive lecture which he had delivered.

I found in the sick and infirm wards several of my old acquaintances of the Strand, who were chargeable to St. Anne's, and had been transferred to this House when the Union was formed, among them a woman by the name of Maria Hall. She had gone into the Strand several years before I left; her friends at first paid for her maintenance. She was an epileptic—and something beside. When I knew her in the Strand she professed an inability to talk, except unintelligible gibberish. She was very artful; she claimed to be a deeply religious character, and contrived to take in the benevolent lady visitors to a considerable extent. She continually showed me letters she had received, and books that had been given her by ladies, and would ask me to share with her the grapes, cakes, and sweetmeats sent her by her dupes. This went on for several years, altogether about twenty. She always posed and was spoken of as "poor Maria"—in fact, she was the pet of the nurse and of the ward. At last it came to my knowledge that she presumed on her condition to be exacting and troublesome. Finding that remonstrance was unavailing, I reluctantly ordered her removal to the insane ward. It was attended with the best result, for, finding that she was at last sternly dealt with, she threw off the mask she had worn for twenty years and talked as distinctly and clearly as any healthy person. She had traded for years on her alleged infirmity. It was true she was an epileptic, and eventually died from that form of disease; but she had been the most persistent cheat I had ever met with.

On the male side I found a poor fellow who had also been transferred from the Strand, where I had known him when he was first admitted there. He was paralyzed all down on one side. He was the most patient, honest fellow I had ever seen. After I had been in office some years Sir Charles Trevelyan came to call on me respecting a public movement that we were both engaged in. Finding I was at the infirmary, he came round to the House and was shown into my room. I asked him to go over the wards with me. He did so. I introduced the poor paralytic to him as an honest, patient, and grateful poor man. Sir Charles asked him how long he had been afflicted, and he answered, "Some twenty years." Then I said, "This poor fellow cannot get downstairs; he has not seen the streets for all these years, but he is always happy and cheerful." Sir Charles kindly left with me £1 to pay his cab fare, so that he might have the chance of seeing them once again. As I had to send two people with him each time the £1 soon went. His enjoyment of this treat in his daily dull, routine life was, I was informed, most pleasing to witness.

There were several other very interesting persons I found on both sides of the ward. One was an old man who was said to be eighty-eight years old. On my morning visit he was always standing on the staircase smoking. He had lived many years in Australia, and his long white hair and beard, which reached to his waist, conjoined with a florid complexion and bright blue eyes, caused me to consider him one of the handsomest old men I had ever seen. One day I took two young ladies over the infirmary. We found the old man in his usual place. I jocularly introduced him to them as the Adonis of the House. The old man was terribly offended. As we walked away I heard him muttering aloud, "That's a pretty name to call a man—'Donis indeed!" He did not forgive me for a long while. I wonder what he thought the epithet really was intended to signify.

I also found in the male infirm ward an old French physician whom I had known by sight for a great many years when he was practising his profession in Soho. He was a tall, fine man when I first knew him. He always used to wear a very singular-looking broad-brimmed hat. He was in all externals a very gentlemanly-looking person. I had missed him for a long time, and was surprised and hurt to think that he should have drifted to a workhouse infirmary. On inquiring into the cause of his becoming an inmate of the House, for I always thought he was well-to-do, as he dressed exceedingly well, I learned that he had lived with a lady who was an employé at a French milliner's in Regent Street, that she was much younger than he was, and that he had given to her all his money, which she, in preparation for possible consequences, had put in the Funds, but in her own name only. Unfortunately for him she was taken suddenly ill, and being ignorant of English courts made no disposition of the property, simply telling him, on her deathbed, where it was. When she was dead, he found to his dismay that the money could not be obtained, as he could not establish any legal claim of ownership. Grief at the loss of his mistress and of all his money caused the complete break-down of the poor fellow, and he had come into the House utterly crushed. He was a very interesting old man, being the only son of a French noble family. His mother and father were both executed during the Reign of Terror, and when the family property was confiscated he was but a youth. When he grew up he studied medicine, and in the year 1802 entered Napoleon's army as a regimental surgeon. After serving with his regiment in Germany, Italy, and Austria, he was attached to the Army of England, as it was called, which was stationed on the heights of Boulogne. He was there some time. Suddenly an announcement came that the encampment would be broken up, and that the army would go to Russia. He traversed the whole of Europe, taking part in the various engagements on the road to Moscow, which he saw in flames. He was in the memorable retreat, and returned to France without a scratch. On the return from Elba he rejoined his old regiment, and, as its surgeon, fought against the English at Waterloo. After the peace his regiment was disbanded, and as the old soldiers of the empire were very much at a discount he elected to come to England, where he lived since 1816. He died at the age of ninety-five, retaining his faculties to the last. After his death I raised a fund to bury him, by writing a letter to The Times, in which I gave his history, heading my letter, "A Relic of the Grand Armée," and asking any friends of the first Napoleon to help me in burying him in some other place than a pauper's grave. My appeal having brought me £25, the Empress Eugenie being one of the subscribers, he was buried at the Catholic Cemetery at Kensal Green. There were two seamstresses who lived in Gilbert Street, Oxford Street, who were his countrywomen and his sole visitors, with the exception of the Catholic priest of the French chapel in Leicester Square. I asked them and the priest to accompany me to the funeral, which I attended as chief mourner. On our arrival at the mortuary chapel, the coffin was placed on a raised bier with three others. Presently two lads, wearing long black cloaks which reached to the ground, came from the altar. When they arrived at the spot where the coffin was resting, one lad suddenly produced from under his cloak a censer containing fire and proceeded to incense the quartette. How he ever carried the fiery thing without setting fire to himself was to me a wonder. He was immediately followed by the other lad, who, taking just as rapidly from under his cloak a vessel like a whitewash-pot, proceeded with a brush to throw holy water on the coffins. This being completed, the coffin was put on a truck and we hurried away as fast as we could go through the miry ground for a long distance to the grave. On reaching it, down went my two lady companions on their knees in the clay. My respect for the deceased did not carry me so far as that, especially as it was raining hard and the ground was a mere bog. Presently the acolyte produced his whitewash-pot and brush, and I was courteously asked to sprinkle the poor fellow's coffin with holy water, which I did. This having been also done by my companions, I was amused by a little girl about fourteen, who, suddenly taking the brush and pot from one of the young women, went to work sprinkling in grand style, and, what was rather alarming, let me in for more than I had expected. On our return journey the priest asked me to attend service in the Catholic Chapel, in Leicester Square, on the next Sunday. This I did. He was a very gentlemanly person. He thanked me very much for the little service I was enabled to render to the poor old French doctor, whom I missed very much, as it was my habit to sit beside the old man's bed and hear him fight his battles o'er again.

The opposition to the removal of the sick to the Asylum Hospital at Highgate continuing, and plausible ground for some action having been shown in the fact of that establishment being so far away, a move on the part of the Department became necessary. The old Workhouse in Cleveland Street being no longer wanted by the Strand Board (as they had built a new House at Edmonton), it was proposed to pull down and rebuild an additional Asylum Hospital upon the site. The vestry of St. James's, instigated by the Chairman of the Board, gave a determined opposition to the proposition. But for once the Department was firm and the hospital was built. At first the four Unions were associated in its use and management, but after a time its use for the reception of acute cases was limited to the St. Giles's, and St. George's, Bloomsbury, the Strand, and Westminster Unions. The Chairman having for a time retired from the Board, his place was filled by a fresh Chairman, and no obstacle being made to my utilization of Cleveland Street Asylum, suitable cases were transferred there, to the relief of the Westminster House, which, through the resistance of the Board, had become inconveniently full. The new Chairman was a very weak man, who was neither by his financial position or general intelligence justified in aspiring to hold such an office. It is possible that if he had devoted the time he spent at the Board and at the Sick Asylum to his private business he might have delayed, and possibly have staved off, his eventual bankruptcy and ultimate death in the Asylum Hospital in Cleveland Street, to the building of which he gave the most determined opposition. His successor as Chairman was a surgeon in Soho, who was a man of very fair attainments, and during the time he occupied the chair the business of the Board was carried on with remarkable success. I received from him the most generous support, and during his tenure of office my official life was hardly chequered by a single cloud.

I have spoken of the clerk of the Board as having expressed a favourable opinion of the economy I had effected on my first entrance on my duties. The clerk had occupied a similar position at St. Martin's prior to its amalgamation with the Strand Union. As I never went near the clerk of that Union after the discovery of his perfidy in making, in conjunction with Catch, a false charge against me, I was often at a loss to know to whom I could go when any difficulty cropped up. Having had an introduction to this clerk, I frequently called and consulted him; consequently I was not surprised when, through the loss of his office, as the result of St. Martin's being joined to the remaining parishes of the old Strand Union, he was without employment, that he should call on me and invoke my good offices in favour of his being appointed to a similar position in the Westminster Union—the gentleman who had filled the office and that of vestry clerk for St. James's having elected to continue in the latter office only, and not to combine therewith any appointment under the Poor Law. Having some influence in St. Anne's at that time, and being also known in St. James's, I gave him my support, with the result that he was elected clerk to the Board. He never exhibited gratitude for my doing this; indeed, on the contrary, he was distinctly hostile to me during the first few years after my appointment, more especially in all matters relating to lunatics, the truth being that he had a sympathy with all those who were alleged to be of unsound mind, arising, I consider, from the fact that he had a consciousness of not being quite right himself. During the two-and-twenty years I knew him I never saw him half-a-dozen times with a shirt on. I do not state that he never wore one, it was simply never visible; what did duty for it was a sheet of more or less crumpled whitey-brown paper. His clothes were as torn and ragged as those of the most poverty-stricken casual—his shoes down at heel, and the legs of his seedy-looking black trousers hanging in rags. He always complained of being so very poor through the strain put upon him in having to support some needy relatives. His condition and poverty-stricken appearance were often the subject of conversation and commiseration: "Poor fellow," it used to be said, "he has had a great deal of trouble, and is very poor." It was therefore a matter of great astonishment to find, after his death, which took place somewhat suddenly, that he was possessed of several thousand pounds. He died without making any will, and there was a legal struggle among distant relations as to who should secure his very considerable belongings. I have frequently noticed on the part of eccentric people this disbelief in and morbid sympathy with lunatics, and believe it to arise from a species of innate consciousness of mental deficiency, and a fear lest they also should be incarcerated.

One morning, some time before his death, he came to me in my room and showed me a letter he had received from the military Commandant of Devonport Barracks Hospital, which was to the effect that they had a young soldier under treatment for lunacy, who, in his attestation when enlisting, had stated that he belonged to St. James's, London, and that the authorities determined to send him up to us. The clerk said to me, "That does not show that he belongs here, as there are several St. James's in London; I shall write and refuse to take him until his settlement has been determined." But he reckoned without his host, for when did the military ever recognize the civil power? The same evening I was requested to go to the insane ward, where I found the young soldier, and the attendant informed me that he had been brought by a corporal and left in the ward, and that the corporal said that he should call the next day for the hospital clothes. The attendant also stated that when brought in the man's hands were tied together behind his back. I could make nothing of the poor fellow, as no history was brought with him, and he would not speak. As he appeared to be very exhausted I ordered him some milk, beef-tea, and wine, and desired that when the corporal called the next day he should be detained, so that I might learn something about the patient, but when asked to stay and explain, the corporal would not stop.

On visiting the man on the next morning I found that he had taken nothing, and as he would not open his mouth, speak to me, nor do anything, I sent for the stomach-pump and some of the strongest of the pauper inmates, that he might be fed by artificial means. It took four to take him out of bed, secure him in a chair, and to assist me to get his mouth open, when I made the dreadful discovery that all his teeth had recently been broken away in the forcible efforts that had been made to feed him. After a most desperate struggle I administered some beef-tea, arrowroot, and wine. This had to be repeated for two or three days, until the necessary certificates were ready, which enabled me to send him away to Hanwell. I was so disgusted with the barbarous manner in which the young man had been treated, that I wrote an indignant letter to the military authorities at Devonport, complaining of his treatment, and their neglect in sending the poor fellow to the Workhouse without affording any history of his case. The reply was a cool denial of the truth of my statement, and an assertion that he took his food readily and without artificial feeding. I sent this letter to the medical superintendent of Hanwell, and asked for his opinion, when he replied that the man had been forcibly fed for some time, and that his teeth had been destroyed in doing so. I then wrote an account of the case and sent it to Dr. Lush, M.P. for Salisbury, and asked him to see the Minister for War on the subject, and in the House to ask the question I had drafted.

A few days after Dr. Lush replied, telling me that he had seen the Minister, who read the statement, and said he thought that it was a very shocking story, but he hoped that I would not press for an official inquiry, as it would ruin the officers inculpated, and promised that he would send out to all military hospitals such an instructional letter as would prevent the occurrence of such things in future. Dr. Lush also added, "I have promised not to press the matter, especially as the Minister for War did not hesitate to tell me that he entirely believed your statement," and continuing, said, "I know, Rogers, you do not want to ruin anybody, and if the matter is made public there will be a dreadful row, and the whole blame will be thrown on the doctor." I reluctantly assented to this view, and the matter dropped.

The poor fellow was afterwards proved not to belong to St. James's, Westminster, but to some parish in the East End. He did not remain chargeable to any parish very long, as he died soon after at Hanwell. Dr. Raynor, when I appealed to him for his opinion, stated that if I had not written at the time of his admission and explained how I had become possessed of the man, he should have felt it his duty to have made a special representation to the Commissioners in Lunacy as to the condition he was in on admission, and the barbarous usage he had received.

When at the Strand I was required to give the certificate in lunacy and attend before the magistrates in its support, and was paid a fee for my trouble; when appointed to the Westminster Union it was arranged that my salary should include all extra fees, particularly because the magistrates at Great Marlborough Street, contrary to the statute, required two certificates. The Guardians being unwilling to pay the fees of two medical men, the medical man called upon to give the second certificate was paid. As this appointment was dependent on the caprice of the Board, it frequently happened that the other medical man, who was aware of the feeling of certain of the Guardians, would refuse to endorse my opinion, but I always succeeded in getting my way in the end. One medical man who held this office for some time was constantly striving to secure favour by giving the most unaccountable certificates as to the condition of the lunatic submitted to him. I had the satisfaction of getting rid of him at last, but not until he had given me and the officers of the House a great deal of unnecessary trouble and annoyance. In addition to this, the magistrates at Great Marlborough Street, forgetting altogether that when two certificates were presented their duty became simply a ministerial one, would frequently decline to certify for removal of undeniably insane persons, and direct the return to the House for further observation. No magistrate was more original in this way than Mr. Newton, of Miss Cass notoriety. Over and over again Mr. Newton has set up his expression of opinion in opposition to my certificate and that of the extern, but after giving unnecessary trouble and delaying the removal of the patient, thereby diminishing her or his chance of recovery, he would eventually be obliged to affix his signature to the certificate. To such an extent did this action prevail, and so much were the officers worried by this magistrate, that it became a custom on the part of the removal officer to send and inquire what magistrate would be on the bench, and if he found it was Mr. Newton, to take the case on the next day when he was not there.

As I am on the subject of lunacy, and as I believe that much mischief has ensued from the laity assuming that persons are improperly confined in asylums, I will relate one or two instances of ill results that have followed from treating insane persons as responsible for their conduct when a very small amount of consideration of their actions would show that they were of unsound mind. Upon one occasion, on going into the male insane ward, a tall, decent-looking man, turned round and looked at me. His aspect instantly told me that he was of unsound mind. To my inquiry where he came from the attendant replied, "I do not know, sir; all I do know is that his wife brought him here yesterday and left him". I spoke to the poor fellow, and was perfectly convinced that he was insane. I directed the attendant to go for the wife. On my return from the wards to the consulting-room I found a decent-looking little woman waiting my arrival. To my inquiry what she wanted, she said, "You sent for me." "Oh," I replied, "you are the wife of that poor fellow over the way in the insane ward—how long has he been out of his mind, and where have you brought him from?" To my astonishment she burst into tears, at the same time saying, "He came out of prison yesterday, sir." "Out of prison," I replied; "why, how could he have got into a prison? That poor man has, to my certain knowledge, been a lunatic for a long while." She immediately said, "Yes, sir, I have known it for nearly a twelvemonth, but no one but you has ever said so before." I told her to compose herself and tell me his history, when she stated as follows: "We have been married about five years, and a better husband no woman could have had, but about a twelvemonth ago he complained of his head, and could not sleep or work as he had done. I did my best to cheer him up, and told him to struggle against the feeling and all would come right. His occupation was that of a coat-maker for one of the best West End master tailors. One afternoon, some months ago, he threw down a coat he was making, saying he could not go on with it, he must go out, which he did. About an hour afterwards a policeman came to tell me my husband was in Vine Street Police Station, and that he had been taken up for stealing. I hurried there, when I heard that, walking along Little Pulteney Street, he came opposite a poulterer's shop, when, suddenly springing on the show-board, he clambered up by the hooks till he reached the top, and, taking off a hare, he put it over his shoulder, and jumping down some ten feet, he stood there. The proprietor gave him into custody. The next day he was taken before Mr. Knox, who committed him for a term of six weeks' imprisonment and hard labour, it being his first offence.

"Whilst he was in prison I had to part with many of my things to keep my children. On his discharge I met him at the prison gate, and saw he was worse. I did my best to cheer him up, and told him if he would not do anything of the kind again I would do all I could for him. On his reaching home I said that I had been compelled to part with some of our things, and that, therefore, he must go to work at once. The same day I went to one of our employers, a master tailor in Maddox Street, and asked for some work. A dress coat was given me to make up. My husband went to work at it, but he did it so badly that when he took it to the shop the master refused to pay him, and gave it him back again. During the conversation my poor husband took off a pair of black dress trousers from a hook, and put them under his arm. He had not long left the shop when it was discovered, and one of the shopmen, running after him, caught him with the property. He was again given into custody, and taken before Mr. Knox, who committed him for trial. At his trial at Clerkenwell Sessions shortly after, he was found guilty, and evidence of a previous conviction having been given, he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment and hard labour. That his time was up yesterday morning, that she had met him at the prison gate, and seeing that he was much worse she had brought him straight to the Workhouse, so that he might be kept out of further mischief." She followed it up by saying (with a burst of tears), "You are the only gentleman who has ever said that he was not right in his head, but I have known of it for months past."

I stood utterly astonished that so gross a miscarriage of justice should have been perpetrated; that a man evidently so bereft of the knowledge of right and wrong should have been punished as a criminal. After inquiring where she lived, and also for some references, I told her if my inquiries bore out what she had stated, I would publicly expose the treatment her husband had been subjected to. I made inquiry the same afternoon, and found that both the husband and wife had borne a most excellent character up to the time of his first arrest. The next morning, so soon as my official duties were over, I went to Great Marlborough Street Police Court, and asked to see Mr. Knox. I related the story to the magistrate. When I had finished it he was very much affected, and expressed his regret that such a dreadful thing should have occurred. He also went on to state that they had so many people brought before them, and it was all done in such a hurried way, that without special attention was drawn to a case, and if the facts were not disputed, and if no one appeared for a prisoner, a decision was come to at once. He further said, "I remember the poor fellow being brought before me perfectly. I do not think that it is desirable that this story should be made public; it can do no good. Send the wife to me and I will give her a present from the poor-box."

When leaving the court the jailor followed me, and said, "I am pleased you have been here. I saw that poor fellow was out of his mind on each occasion when he was brought before the magistrate." On reaching the street I met Mr. W. J. Fraser, Guardian, and now the Chairman of the Board, to whom I told the circumstances. Mr. Fraser was very much shocked at the treatment this poor lunatic had received, and that Mr. Knox had desired that no publicity should be given to the case, and replied, "Give it every publicity you can." That same evening I wrote to the editor of The Times the particulars of the case, and, as the poor husband's condition was irremediable, I pleaded that monies should be sent me to enable me to put the wife into some way of earning her livelihood. The letter duly appeared, and caused a great deal of sensation, many subsequent letters from gentlemen interested in the question of lunacy being published. As a result the sum of £85 was subscribed for the wife, and was sent to me.

It was a puzzle to me to know what to do with the money, which was not enough to buy a chandler's shop and stock it. I decided to set the woman up in business as a laundress at Battersea. I went there, took a suitable cottage, and guaranteed the rent for six months. Then I went to a firm in Holborn and purchased the laundry plant, which, under the special circumstances of the case, was sold to me at a reduced rate. I got a forewoman whom I borrowed from one of my patients in a large way of business as a laundress, and started her by inducing people to patronize her. I could do all this, but I could not make the poor woman a laundress, and after a few months' trial she came and asked me to let her dispose of the business and plant that she might go to her friends in the country. I assented, for I had discovered that she was a business failure. She sold off everything, went away, and I have never heard of her since. Her poor husband did not long survive, and without doubt his death was hastened by prison life and the treatment he had received there. He died at Hanwell of general paralysis of the insane.

It would prove instructive if it could be ascertained how many poor creatures have been similarly taken into custody, convicted, imprisoned, and after spending more or less time in prison discharged with their mental condition hopelessly shattered from the treatment received. Some years since I went over the Naval Hospital at Yarmouth, for those who had become insane whilst in the service. There were several men of magnificent physique, who were stricken with the same kind of mental infirmity as that which had caused the death of my unfortunate patient. I inquired of the courteous medical superintendent whether he had any history of these men. He said yes. I asked whether the first evidence of their mental ailment was not the exhibition of some departure from discipline or of theft, or some other action which was totally at variance with their previous conduct. He informed me that their records showed that such was the case.

Woful results have followed the action of judges and police magistrates in dealing with numbers of their fellow-creatures as criminals when they rather required a nurse and skilful attention than the rough services of a prison warder. But then this deplorable condition of things will continue so long as such scant consideration is shown to the actions of the poor, who, being without means, cannot command the services either of barristers or solicitors.

It was during the reign of the Chairman of the Board who subsequently died in Cleveland Street Asylum, that one of the most extraordinary cases of lunacy I ever witnessed came under notice—extraordinary in one sense only, viz., in the manifest determination of certain officials to prevent me from sending to the asylum one of the most artful and yet hopeless lunatics I ever encountered.

Originally she had been admitted as a woman of unsound mind. I examined her at the time, and at once filled in a certificate that she was a case for removal to an asylum. She was not, however, sent away, as the clerk intervened, and at the next meeting of the Board he showed that the woman was the wife of the parish broker, who was a man of means and quite able to keep his wife in a private asylum, whereupon it was ordered that the husband should take her out. After her return home her husband asked me to see her; he could not live with her, her conduct was in every way so objectionable. I saw her again, certified that she was of unsound mind, and she was sent to St. Luke's, and her husband paid £1 a week for her maintenance therein. Getting tired of this, for he was a most penurious person, he took her out. Sometime after he was taken ill and died, leaving upwards of £4,000. Dying intestate, his property was divided between two brothers and the widow, her share, the third, being upwards of £1,500. The solicitor who wound up the estate, recognizing her mental condition, tried to induce her to let him invest the money in some security, but she refused. She would have her money paid over to her absolutely. This was in November. By the middle of the following August the money was all gone. She had squandered it all away; and having by her habits, which were to the last degree objectionable, caused her ejection from one lodging after another, the relieving officer was again called in, and removed this wretched woman to the Workhouse insane ward. She brought with her a large amount of property which was not convertible into cash. Now, it may be asked, How was the large sum of £1,500 got rid of in but little over eight months? The explanation is a sad one. The first thing this poor woman did was to buy some £24 worth of plants in pots, which were taken to a furnished room she had hired in Gerrard Street, Soho. She never attempted to attend to them in any way, and, therefore, in a very short time they were all dead. She then sent to a well-known drapery business in Regent Street to buy some clothes. Before she left the shop the person in the department she went to had induced her to buy some £300 worth of personal clothing, which was all sent to this single room in Gerrard Street. She also went to a pianoforte manufacturer in Regent Street, and purchased a sixty guinea piano, at the same time being absolutely ignorant of music; and if any one had taken much trouble they must have recognized by her appearance her mental deficiency. About two months after she first purchased at this draper's shop, the shopwoman who had sold her £300 worth of clothing, called on her in Gerrard Street, and, although this room contained the dead flowers and unopened boxes of the first purchase, she induced her to buy £250 worth more, thus making a total of £550 expended by a poor insane woman. The Rector of St. Anne's, Soho, informed me that she regularly attended the sacrament, and always put £1 in the plate in new gold. What made the conduct of the shopkeeper of the firm in Regent Street the more inexcusable was that at the time she called on her the woman was in such a state, in consequence of her dirty habits, as to be plainly insane, and this compelled the landlady shortly afterwards to insist on her leaving the house, as all the other lodgers complained. When she was first admitted to the Workhouse her habits were so repulsive that she was an intolerable nuisance to the other inmates and nurses, for she was alive with parasites.

I considered the treatment this poor creature had received at the hands of the proprietors of the drapery establishment so abominable that it merited exposure, and with that view I called on a gentleman connected with the Press, and asked him to take the matter up. He declined, as it was not within the province of his journal. At the same time he gave me an introduction to the editor of Truth, who he said would do so. On going home I drew up a history of the case, and sent it in a letter marked private to the editor, enclosing the letter of introduction, and asking that he would grant me an interview, when we might arrange for publishing my statements without my name appearing. I received no answer from the editor, but a day or two afterwards I was told that my statement had been published in extenso in Truth. A day or two after that the Chairman, who lived nearly opposite the draper's shop, called on me and stated that he was deputed by the firm to inform me that if I did not at once write to the editor of Truth and disavow the letter and story an action for libel would be commenced against me without delay. My answer was as follows: "Go back to this firm and say that I did not give any authority for the story to appear as it has done, but as it is all absolutely true I shall decline to withdraw or modify a single syllable." I certainly did write to the editor and complained of the way in which he had published the story, and told him of the threat which had been made of prosecuting me. The only result was that an annotation appeared in the next week's issue which, under the guise of an explanation, made the scandalous story a great deal worse. The firm did not prosecute me or the editor of Truth.

It would be imagined by my readers that there would have been no difficulty in getting this poor woman sent to an asylum, but I never had greater trouble in my life, owing to the action of Mr. Newton, the police magistrate at Great Marlborough Street. Five times during the five months that she was detained in the insane ward, where her habits were most disgusting and highly objectionable to the other inmates and to the nurses, I certified for her removal. On each occasion she was sent back by this magistrate. Hearing that he was gone for a holiday, I, for the sixth time, filled in a certificate and went with her and my out-door colleague to the police office. To my surprise I found the Chairman of the Board and two of his friends, members of the Board, in attendance to give evidence in this woman's favour. The clerk had found out what I was doing, and had sent word to them. At the hearing before the magistrate they attempted to interrupt me in my evidence, but they were very properly put down by the magistrate. He at once countersigned the certificate and she was removed. But my troubles were not at an end. The trio sent to the Commissioners in Lunacy an intimation that I had unjustifiably sent a sane woman to Hanwell Asylum. Upon this coming to my knowledge I went there to see her, when the medical superintendent of the female side informed me that a special letter had been sent from the Lunacy Commissioners requiring him, at the end of three weeks, to send a detailed account of the case to them. He said, "I never met with such a case. I was sure from your certificate she must be insane, but she pulled herself together so wonderfully and was so well conducted that I had come to the conclusion that you must be mistaken, when suddenly she broke down, and her insanity became apparent, and I have reported in that sense to the Commissioners in Lunacy." This story illustrates the utter absurdity of the provision in the Lord Chancellor's Bill committing the examination of these cases to a county court judge, police magistrate, or Justice of the Peace, who cannot possibly understand anything about the varied phases which insanity presents. The district medical officer who jointly filled in the certificate with me was deprived of his office, and a more manageable person was elected by the Board in his stead—that person I have before referred to in the earlier part of this narrative as giving me so much needless trouble.

Some three years ago I had occasion to go to Hanwell. Whilst there I asked whether the woman was still in the asylum. On learning that she was I expressed a desire to see her, when the superintendent medical officer gave directions that she should be brought down. Immediately on seeing me she sprung upon me, and, before I was able to defend myself, pinioned me in her arms, at the same time imploring that I would take her away with me. It took three able-bodied women to release me from her grasp. Should I ever go to Hanwell again I will keep clear of her. I have had quite enough of her. She is a hopelessly incurable lunatic. As she gets older she will become more and more demented, and will be eventually removed to some imbecile establishment.

The female insane ward at the Westminster Union was always full, and when a noisy or dangerous lunatic was sent in, and whilst the necessary steps were being taken to get them away, the harmless patients had anything but a pleasant time of it. But then the comfort of these people was never at any time considered by those members of the Board who considered themselves authorities in lunacy. Fortunately they could not state that my action arose from the desire to get a fee, as I was never paid one, but they did say that I sent them away as I did not want to attend to them.

We had on several occasions very amusing cases of lunacy. One of the most so was a Welshman, who, until he lost his reason, had been a very respectable journeyman tailor. I was asked to see him by a member of the Vestry in whose house he lodged, and who gave him a most excellent character for honesty and industry. He had saved money, and was exceptionally respectable in his appearance and conduct. On being shown into his room he rose and received me with much politeness. I noticed a quantity of ladies' underclothing on the table, and evidently intended for some small woman, as the various things were all on the same diminutive scale. On asking what it all meant he said, "Oh, that is for the lady I am about to marry. I have just purchased a complete set of ladies' underclothing as a present for my future bride." "Indeed," I said, "is it usual for the gentleman to buy his future wife's underclothing?" "Well," he replied, "perhaps not, but I am a very particular person, and my wife must dress as a lady." "Just so," I said, "but how have you managed to get all these things so exactly arranged as to size?" To which he replied, "You see, I am accustomed to measure people, and I have taken my dear little girl's size exactly." I then took up a pair of some two dozen of kid gloves, with the remark, "You have bought her some good gloves, at any rate." "Do you think so?" he said. "Do oblige me by taking a pair away with you; they may suit one of your daughters." As his insanity was undoubted, I suggested his removal to the insane ward. This was carried out. On seeing me next day in the House he spoke rapturously of the ward he was in, and of his companions, all of whom he had invited to his wedding. They would have been sorry-looking persons to have made part of a company at a marriage-feast!

I was so amused at this poor fellow's delusions that next day I took one of my young lady relatives to see him. On my asking the attendant to bring him out into the yard, he came. At first he looked dazed, but, seeing a young lady, he ran towards her, and, peeping under her bonnet, he looked up and said, "She is devilishly like Mary Jane," this being the only name he had for his imaginary future wife. My young companion was so tickled that she burst into a hearty laugh in which the poor fellow joined. Subsequently he was sent to Hanwell. On visiting the asylum some months afterwards I asked to see him, when he was sent for. On entering the room he recognized me instantly, and expressed his gratification at my calling to see him. His delusions were as marked as ever. As I had gone there on other business I resumed my conversation with Dr. Raynor, and forgot our Welsh friend altogether. Presently we both went out into the yard, when, to our astonishment, we found that he had gone out, and would have escaped altogether if he had not luckily been observed and taken back to his ward. Poor fellow! Some time after he was removed to Wales, where he was settled, and he ultimately died of general paralysis, and so the contemplated wedding was adjourned sine die. The underclothing, gloves, silk stockings, &c., were all sold to help pay for his maintenance. I never saw such a genial and absolutely happy lunatic. He lived in the company of his imaginary Mary Jane. It must not, however, be imagined that all are so light-hearted as this Welshman. I have encountered homicidal lunatics, and have personally experienced what some are capable of, having sometimes sustained severe assaults from incautiously going too near them.

Early in 1872 the present Chairman of the Westminster Union, W. J. Fraser, Esq., solicitor, asked me to visit the Rev. H. Watson, ex-master of Stockwell Grammar School, who was then located in Horsemonger Lane Gaol on the charge of killing his wife. I did so, and after an interview which lasted an hour, came away and wrote a report that in my judgment he was of unsound mind. I formed that opinion from the levity of his manner, his self-exaltation, his total indifference to his fate, the absence of all regret for what he had done, and the absolute want of any feeling on the subject. He was lost in the belief that his services in the education of youth precluded the possibility of any punishment for his deed. At the Old Bailey, as I was about being called upon to give evidence, the counsel who defended him, the late Sergeant Parry, called me over to tell me that they had decided not to call me as a witness, but only just to support the views of the others. He said, "We think you may be a dangerous witness." After asking me a few questions he said, "You can stand down." But I was not to stand down, for the prosecuting counsel, Mr. Poland, immediately proceeded to severely cross-examine me. But to all his questions I had my reply ready, and after some half hour's trial of questions and answers I managed to get out all the points on which I relied to prove Watson's mental unsoundness. When I got down Dr. Blandford said, "You have done well; you have convinced the judge;" which was shown in his summing up and in his after action at the Home Office.

Whilst under cross-examination I spoke of his enormous self-exaltation, &c., giving instances, whereupon Mr. Poland said, in a professional tone of voice, "Oh, you consider that is a sign of insanity, do you?" "Well," I said, "seeing he was only a schoolmaster, I do." Whereupon Watson, who was listening attentively to my evidence, wrote on a piece of paper and gave it to Mr. Fraser for presentation to his counsel. He had written, "What does this d——d fellow mean by calling me 'only a schoolmaster'?" After his conviction and sentence he was removed to Horsemonger Lane Gaol. When Mr. Fraser went to see him next day the only thing he complained of was my having spoken of him as only a schoolmaster. He had nothing to say about his conviction and fate; as regards that he was absolutely indifferent. There was a terrible row in the Press about this man, and the doctors were all condemned for their efforts to prove that his mind was unhinged. It was therefore some comfort to me when, in going down the street in which I then lived some few days after, I saw Lord Elliot, the son of the Earl of St. Germains. On meeting me he crossed over the road, came up to me, and holding out his hand and taking mine he said, "I see you have been figuring at the Old Bailey." "Yes, my lord," I replied; "I hope, however, you do not think I have done wrong in giving the evidence I did?" "Oh no," he said; "I have just come from the Home Office, and have met there the Lord Chief Justice (Cockburn) and Mr. Justice Byles, who have both advised the Home Secretary that they consider that the plea of insanity was, in their judgment, fully sustained: at any rate, he will not be hanged." His sentence was commuted to penal servitude for life. Poor old Watson was sent to Parkhurst Prison. Some years after the governor and surgeon informed me that he preserved the same callous and indifferent manner which I had described at his trial. His only complaint was that he could not get the particular copy of the Greek Testament he wanted, and he never to the last referred to or expressed any regret for the act he had committed.[1]

After I had been at the Workhouse some two years I was requested by the Board to go down and take temporary charge of the Union school at Wandsworth Common. It would appear that there had been a quarrel between the superintendent matron and the medical officer, and an official inquiry having been held by a Poor Law Inspector he had reported that he could not decide which was in the wrong; he would advise the Board to call on all three to resign at the end of the following Midsummer quarter.

The medical officer, Dr. Noel, who, strange to say, had been a schoolfellow of mine nearly fifty years before, at once sent in his resignation. I took over the duty at the end of April, and had charge of the schools nine weeks. It was a very pleasant excuse for an outing, and as the Common at that time was not much built upon and the gorse was in full bloom, it made for me a very agreeable change. At the Midsummer quarter a new medical officer was appointed, and my temporary appointment came to an end. There was extremely little sickness during the time I had charge of the establishment, and I therefore came to the conclusion that the only possible explanation of the quarrelling was because they had so very little to do. My successor was appointed on the distinct understanding that in the event of any serious illness occurring he was to send for me. His neglect to do this led, some five years afterwards, to his being called on to resign, and to my being put again in control of the schools and retention of the office for eight months. The occasion for my being sent down the second time was a serious outbreak of ophthalmia which had taken place, one-half of the school, about sixty children, being more or less affected with it. I could not afford the time or undergo the fatigue to go there every day, so on my return home I made a report to the Board that on condition that the Board gave me full powers to act as I thought best I would root out the epidemic. This was assented to, whereupon I brought back forty-eight of the worst cases to the Workhouse, and isolated them in the large wards at the top of the main building. I also brought with me the nurse and assistant school-mistress. I told the Board that some of the cases were so very bad that I must be allowed to call in an ophthalmic surgeon to aid me in my treatment. This was also assented to. I also arranged that the children should go for a run in the park every day, weather permitting. I considered the dietary of the children, and, finding it to be wholly insufficient, I amended it. I adopted a similar course at the school. Fortunately for the children the Chairman of the Board, a medical man, supported me in all I advised and did. I had the children's hospital at the school whitewashed and painted green and varnished, the walls stopped and covered with neatly-framed engravings kindly sent me by the proprietors of The Graphic. At the end of eight months I gave up the appointment, leaving the children perfectly well, except in a few cases where irretrievable mischief had taken place ere I was called in. Much of my success was due to the Chairman of the Board, the late Mr. Henry Cooper, of Soho, who throughout gave me the most generous and unfaltering support. Many of these poor children would have hopelessly gone blind if it had not happened that at the period of the epidemic the Board fortunately possessed an intelligent and public spirited Chairman. Not a very long time afterwards he was taken ill, and after lingering some time died, to be succeeded by another person who, most unluckily for the welfare of the House, had again been returned as a member of the Board and elected the Chairman.

About some two years after my appointment a woman, extremely ill, was brought from Vine Street Police Station. She was an unfortunate, as it is called, who had been taken ill in the cell. Repeated requests from her for attendance met with no attention. At last, her condition appearing desperate even to the constables, the divisional surgeon was sent for, who directed that she should at once be removed to the Workhouse. She was brought in on a stretcher, and I was summoned to attend her without delay. I found that she was dying, and not a long while afterwards she succumbed. A coroner's inquiry taking place I made a post mortem, when I found that she had died from the rupture on an aneurism of the abdominal aorta, which, giving way in the loins, had slowly infiltrated the tissues until, a vent being found, the whole thing gave way. There is no doubt that this rupture had been precipitated by the violence attending her arrest. The verdict, under the direction of the coroner, led to a censure of the police for their inhumanity and indifference. The ultimate result was to immensely add to my troubles, as will hereafter be shown.

Just at this time the old and sagacious surgeon of the division died, and his place was sought after by several medical men living in the neighbourhood of the two police stations in St. James's, some of whom were men of acknowledged position. The gift of the appointment was vested in the Chief Surgeon of Police, Mr. Timothy Holmes, of St. George's Hospital. He gave the office to one of his old pupils who at the time was non-resident, but who at once took a house in Jermyn Street. It was not very long before I experienced the result of the change. Case after case was sent into the House from the two stations with certificates that the persons were ill when they were undeniably and plainly drunk. At first I complained of this to the inspectors, but it led to no result. I then wrote to the Commissioners of Police, complaining of the annoyance. I got only an official reply. At last the nuisance became so great, for we were always called to these police cases sent in from the station in the small hours of the morning, that I again wrote to the Commissioners and requested an interview. This was granted. I took with me my assistant who had been principally called out of bed to attend to these cases, sometimes only to dress a wound which the police surgeon was too indolent to do himself although he was paid a fee for each visit. On arrival we stated our complaint, but, although the Commissioners listened to us attentively, not much benefit accrued. It is true they stated that an inquiry should be made and instructions given and that more care should be exhibited. Some time after this I happened to be at the gate when a constable brought a perfectly drunken woman, who, he said, had fallen down in a fit. I said, "Why, she is only drunk and incapable; take her away to the station;" and turning to the master I said, "Do not admit her." An entertainment was being held that evening which I had assisted to get up, and I went on into the dining-hall. About an hour afterwards the master came to me and said, "They have brought that woman back with a certificate from the doctor that she is dangerously ill." I went to see her. She was only a shade more under the influence of liquor than she was before, but, not caring to contest the subject any further, I directed that she should be sent to the receiving ward and put to bed. The next morning on seeing her she had got over the drunkenness, and she owned to me that she had been only drunk the night before. On going to my room I directed that a special messenger should take a letter from me to the station, telling the inspector on duty that the woman that had been sent in the night before alleged to be ill, had confessed to having been only drunk, and requesting him to send a constable and take her away. The constable came. In the after-part of the day, a constable of that division called at my house and said that Mr. Newton requested that I should attend the police court the next morning. I went, when I found the woman there and the divisional surgeon. The magistrate, before hearing a word from me, proceeded to inveigh against me for my action in the matter, and peremptorily ordered me to admit the woman at once. The divisional surgeon also jumped up and protested against my refusal to admit the woman, and stated, to my astonishment, that she had heart disease, and that she was a confirmed epileptic. I mildly replied that she was suffering under nothing of the kind, but Mr. Newton told me to leave the court. The woman did not come into the Workhouse until the evening, and she was then under the influence of drink.

On my return to the Workhouse I told the master what had occurred, and also asked him if he knew where she came from. "Oh," he said, "the receiving wards woman informs me that she belongs to Whitechapel Union, whose clothes she is wearing." I then asked him to write to the master of the Whitechapel Union and ask him what he knew of her. In less than twenty-four hours the reply came. It was to the effect that she was one of the most abandoned characters ever in their House; that she did not suffer from fits, though she often assumed to have one; that she never went out except to return drunk; that she had no heart disease, but was a hale, hearty woman; that on the day she went out, wearing the House clothes, it was after three months' detention, she having returned on the last occasion drunk and disorderly.

Having received this report, I sent it to Mr. Newton. At the same time I protested against his having sent for me to attend his court, and for the remarks he had made to me on the faith of the opinion expressed by a person of very little experience, and further informed him that I should continue to protest against the use of the wards of the Workhouse as a receptacle for merely drunken men and women, and should advise the master accordingly.

The annoyance still continuing, I made a point of sending for the police each morning after every drunken admission. Then a new antagonistic element was imported in the shape of a letter to the Local Government Board from Mr. Timothy Holmes, containing a complaint against me for the trouble I was giving the police authorities in objecting to the reception of sick people from the station to the Workhouse. The letter having been sent to me to answer, I forwarded to the Local Government Board the names of some sixty persons brought in by the police under the certificate of the divisional surgeon, and showed that two-thirds of the entire number were proved to be only drunk and incapable, and that the rest were, in the majority of instances, very trivial cases of illness. The nuisance after this was very much diminished.

It may be asked, What are the police to do with persons who allege that they are ill? Are these complaints to be disregarded? Certainly not. But I contend that reasonable care should be taken by police surgeons, before they send cases of alleged illness to a workhouse infirmary; for it must be remembered that they are paid a fee for each visit and examination. To go, therefore, to the station, make a cursory examination, and then write a certificate that the person is seriously ill and must be removed without delay, or in the case of a simply cut head send it at once away to the infirmary for the workhouse surgeon to get out of bed and dress it, is, in my judgment, an entirely unsatisfactory procedure, especially as the latter is paid no special fee, be his trouble ever so great. There was nothing in all my duty as a workhouse medical officer, which irritated me more than these police cases. I remember on one occasion a superintendent of police said to me, "I hold that if after our surgeon makes these mistakes he were to forfeit his fee, which should be paid to you, you would not have many then."

Sometimes the police brought cases of interest. On one occasion two Italian children were admitted. One was a boy of nine, clean and well nourished, the other was a little fellow of about five, wonderfully emaciated, and bearing about his little lean body evidence of recent ill-usage. The parents, who were Italian Jews, had been taken into custody for maltreating this child, and had been remanded. He was dreadfully dirty. I had him weighed and found that he was much lighter than he should have been, regard being had to his age. He was ravenous; but he had to be fed with care so as to prevent mischief. His parents had been remanded for a week, and a good-natured constable of the C Division who had intervened and got the parents arrested came and asked me to attend at the re-examination. Before taking the child to the court I again weighed him, and found he had gained three pounds. After some four remands at each of which I was enabled to show he had gained in weight, the parents were committed for trial. I attended as a witness at the Old Bailey when the trial came on, and the parents were convicted and sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour. The poor little fellow was brought back to our House, whilst the elder brother was sent to the school.

Foreseeing what was probably in store for this unhappy child, if he ever passed into the hands of his unnatural parents, I wrote to The Times paper, and pointed out what would be the inevitable fate of this boy when his parents came out of prison and claimed possession of him, and pointed out that, as the Italian Consul had found counsel for the defence of the parents at the trial, I trusted that they would find some means whereby the child might be secured against further ill-treatment. On the same day that the letter appeared, I received a letter from the Consul asking me to call on him, which I did, when he told me that he would bring the case under the attention of the King of Italy. Some three weeks after I received a communication stating that the King had resolved to take the child, and bring him up at the cost of the State, as a ward of the Italian Government. Some ten days afterwards a tailor came and measured him for clothing, and a messenger from the Italian Consul having given an undertaking to the Board, he was taken away and I saw him no more. If alive he must be now some eighteen years old. I write "if alive," for the poor little fellow had a singular deformity. He had no abdominal muscles; what did duty for them was a dull, parchment-like-looking structure, stretched across the abdomen. One could make out without much difficulty the various abdominal organs. I had never seen anything like it before. Strange to relate, just at this time a young lady from Natal was sent over to me with a request from her parents that I would ask some expert to see her. On her arrival I found that she had exactly the same infirmity. The late Dr. Alfred Meadows, who saw her with me, would not believe my statement at all until he had himself seen and examined her. Her mother was very anxious to know whether she might be permitted to marry the gentleman to whom she was engaged. We gave a guarded opinion on the subject, and she returned to Natal, and was married, and has two or three children. I therefore trust that the little Jew Italian boy has also survived. I have never heard anything of him since he left the Poland Street Workhouse.

One morning in 1877, shortly after I had left the House, the attendant came round to my residence, and informed me of the almost sudden death of the master, who was at my official visit half an hour before apparently in good health. He had never been partial to me, as my system of management clashed considerably with the stereotyped arrangements that had prevailed in the House prior to my appointment, and I very much question whether he ever approved of my having caused almost everything consumed in the House to be supplied under contract. He did not openly quarrel with me, but contented himself with passive resistance; and if I complained of any order not being carried out, he always excused himself by saying, Did you give an order for this, that, and the other? all the time knowing full well, that I had given the order. A striking instance of this obstructiveness occurred in the first autumn and winter after I took office. I had asked the Board's permission that some jackets should be supplied for the sick men and some shawls for the women, which they might wear when sitting up in bed to keep their chests and shoulders warm. This application was made to the Board of Guardians early in October, and was at once acceded to. Week after week went by, and in spite of repeated requests made by me, either to the master or matron, no notice was taken beyond the same answer which was always given when the one or the other thought fit to reply at all, "Oh, I have given the order for the material and for the shawls, but the contractor is so negligent, he has not sent us in the goods."

In the early part of January I received a letter from Dr. Mouatt, Poor Law Inspector, stating that he had been instructed by the Local Government Board to go over the House and see how many persons could be described as fit to be sent away to the Sick Asylum, and, as he wished me to accompany him, he desired to know what day would suit me best. In reply I fixed the next Sunday, and as I did not wish the master to accompany us, for I knew he would report all that took place to the Board, I wrote in that sense to Dr. Mouatt. Dr. Mouatt came on the following Sunday morning. I had told the master he was coming, and, just as I expected, he stayed away from chapel, in order to go with us. Dr. Mouatt promptly said, "As this is a purely medical visit, master, we can dispense with your company." He coloured up and looked very much put out, but he had to comply. As I went through the wards I told the Inspector that I had asked the Board three months before to let me have some shawls for the women and jackets for the men, that the Board had given an order for them, but neither the master nor matron had supplied them, and that I felt satisfied they did not intend to do so, to which he quietly said, "I will soon alter that." At the same time I urged on him the necessity of so referring to the subject, as not to make them think I had said anything about it, but that the necessity for them had occurred to him, "For," I said, "if you do, they will make it the subject of an open quarrel." It was humbling to do this, but I knew what these people would do.

At the conclusion of our examination, which lasted nearly three hours, we returned to my room, where the master promptly joined us. On seeing him Dr. Mouatt asked that the matron should be sent for. On her arrival he addressed them both as follows: "I have been over the sick wards and have seen all the sick that should be sent away and taken the number; this I shall report to the Local Government Board. I see that your House is kept clean and in good order, but there is one thing I notice which must at once be altered, and that is, the large number of patients sitting up in bed without anything over their shoulders. I have called Dr. Rogers' attention to it, and he tells me that the Board gave an order three months ago for jackets and shawls to be provided, but that they have never been supplied." Both immediately began to throw the blame on the contractor, but he cut them short by stating, "That excuse, master and matron, will not do for me; you know as well as I do you could have got them if you had chosen. I shall report the omission to supply them to the Board of Guardians and also to the Local Government Board." On hearing this they were dreadfully put out, and expressed an earnest hope that, as it was not their fault, he would not be so severe. "Well," he said, "I shall request the medical officer to report to me when they are supplied, and if every person needing them is not furnished with them before the end of the week, I shall carry out what I have said." By the following Wednesday all my patients were provided with them. At his death the master left some £4,000, notwithstanding he had a large and expensive family. After his decease I learned that he had signed a quantity of blank orders for my attendance, and had given them to the porter with the instructions that if any person was admitted who either looked ill or complained of being so, he was at once to send for me. His death led to the diminution of second calls by at least two-thirds. He was nearly always out in the after-part of the day. For several weeks after his death the duties of master were performed by the labour master. At last the Board advertised for a master and matron, the appointment of matron having come to an end when the late master died. As the Guardians were fully alive to the bad discipline which had prevailed for so many years, they resolved to appoint two officers who should more strictly exercise their authority. The choice of the Board fell upon Mr. John Bliss, a corporal-major of the Life Guards, and a Miss Heatley, lately assistant matron of the Manchester Workhouse. Both of these officers were strict disciplinarians, and something besides, as the sequel will show. For the first two or three years, indeed, during the whole Chairmanship of Mr. Cooper, the surgeon, they were kept in their places and behaved fairly well, but unfortunately for them, for the inmates, and the Board, Mr. Cooper was taken ill and died, and another Chairman being elected, serious results soon followed, for this Chairman was always in the House, and when so was constantly closeted with the master and matron in their rooms. Speedily after that the master began to dispute my orders, and the matron did the same, and as the Chairman again began to obstruct my sending the acutely sick inmates away to the Sick Asylum, the House became full of sick people, who were detained in it through the restrictions put in my way. At last the obstruction to the performance of my duty, by both master and matron, became almost unbearable, especially as Mr. Bliss thought fit to accompany his refusals by telling me to go to h—l, and sundry other coarse and blasphemous expressions; and to such an extent was it carried, that I felt I could not put up with it. To complain to the Board would have been perfectly futile, the majority would most assuredly have gone against me. At last the loud-mouthed, coarse, and outrageous blasphemy of the master quite appalled me; and this, coupled with his refusal to obey my orders and his general interference with me in my treatment of the sick, by deriding my judgment and by openly stating that I did not know my profession, caused me to speak to Mr. Fraser, a Guardian, in reference to the annoyance I was being daily subjected to. He advised that I should go to the Local Government Board and confer with the Poor Law Inspector. I did so, but got very little encouragement by my action. Some time after, in a letter to the Department, I did not hesitate to refer to it, and state as much. One result, however, accrued from this visit, which I foresaw was in the near future imminent, and I accordingly took steps forthwith to get some influence in the House of Commons so as to secure a proper inquiry. On my return I again saw Mr. Fraser, and told him of the way I had been treated. Just about this time this Guardian came into collision with Mr. Bliss. It happened in this way: there was a lady living on Wandsworth Common, the wife of the chaplain of a public institution, and, being very benevolent, she had constantly visited the Union school, and had interested herself in the future welfare of the girls. A girl she was much interested in had gone to a situation some months before, and, not being kindly treated, had left and returned to the Workhouse, when she wrote to this lady, who at once came up to the House to see her and some other girl. The master refused to allow her to do so, whereupon she went round to Soho Square and saw Mr. Fraser, whom she had known as a Guardian, and told how she had been treated, whereupon he wrote to the master, stating who the lady was, and asking him to allow her to see the girls. The master read the letter and replied, with a coarse oath, "I have already told you you shall not see the girls, and you shall not." On reporting this conduct to Mr. Fraser, he was much incensed, and at the next meeting of the Board brought the master's behaviour before the Guardians. To his astonishment, the majority of the Guardians absolutely howled him down. Mr. Fraser then formulated a series of charges against Mr. Bliss, among them his constant refusal to obey my orders, his swearing and generally violent treatment of the inmates, and moved that these charges should be sent to the Local Government Board, and an inquiry into the master's conduct asked for. This proposition was rejected, but, at the suggestion of the Chairman, it was resolved that the Board would conduct an inquiry themselves. This was done evidently with the intention that the whole matter as against the master should be quashed. The inquiry was held, and I was ordered by the Board to attend. At the inquiry by the Guardians the Chairman presided, and proceeded to ask questions; but finding he was no match for the solicitor, Baron H. de Worms, an ex-officio guardian, put in an appearance and conducted the inquiry for them, and as I declined to recognize his or the Board's right to put questions to me, the Baron threatened to report my behaviour to the Local Government Board. I said to him, however, that if it were a regular legal inquiry, conducted by a properly constituted authority, I would answer on oath, and prove all the charges I had ever made against the master and matron. One of my charges was that I had discovered that my Medical Relief Book had been tampered with, and that entries for wines and spirits, neither ordered by me or given to the sick, had been placed against certain names. When this was gone into by the Baron the master's clerk was sent for and insolently denied the allegation.

The Guardians completely exonerated the master and matron, his clerk, and all concerned with them; but the matter did not end there. During the progress of this so-called inquiry the matron brought before the Guardians eight of the very worst characters in the House, in order to depose to her and the master's continuous kindness and consideration to all the inmates, and that Mr. Bliss never swore at all. After they had given their evidence they were entertained by the matron in the store-room, a hot supper and brandy-and-water being provided. As she knew I was keeping a sharp look-out on my books to prevent any additional frauds, the next morning she was at her wits' end to make up the deficiency in the brandy, but at last she managed it by adding some water; but in her hurry she forgot to add clean water. She put what she wanted to increase the quantity into a jug which had contained milk, and so gave a cloudy appearance to the whole of it. On my arrival at the House I was informed of the entertainment that had been given to these witnesses to character, and on going into the women's sick ward, the head nurse showed me the brandy which had been tampered with, and I was further told by her that the brandy given out on the male side had the same appearance—indeed, that the nurse on that side had just called her attention to it. I directed that she should carry it down into my room. On going through to the male side, I requested the nurse to show me her brandy. At first she objected to do so, but on my insisting she reluctantly did so, when I took it away. On reaching my room I sent for a large bottle and mixed it all together and sealed down the cork. I then wrote to the contractors, Messrs. Hedges and Butler, of Regent Street, and asked them to examine it and write me word whether the brandy sent was the same as that supplied by them under the contract. It was taken by one of the officers. In the course of an hour he came back with the brandy and a statement from the firm proving that it had been lowered by the addition of so much water, and that the water that had been used was not clean. I then wrote to the Board giving the history now related, and enclosed Messrs. Hedges and Butler's certificate. I wrapped all up together in a piece of brown paper and addressed it to the Board of Guardians. I called the clerk into my room and having in his presence sealed up the parcel, I requested him to take charge of it and not to let it go out of his hands until the Board met. I then ordered a fresh supply for my sick. I had hardly left the House when the Chairman came, and, going to the clerk, demanded to see the parcel. The clerk gave it to him, when he immediately broke it open and read my letter and the spirit-merchant's certificate. Of course his supporters passed over this abominable transaction when the subject was brought before the Board, and the matron was not even censured; at least, so I was told.

There was, however, a Nemesis. Just as they were rejoicing at the success of their proceedings a letter was on its way to the clerk from the Local Government Board, stating that, in consequence of certain information having been sent to the Department, an official inquiry into the master's management of the House had been determined on, and that Mr. Robert Hedley had been directed to hold it. I immediately went down to the House of Commons, saw some Members, and begged that they would see Sir Charles Dilke, who was then the President, and ask him to send some other Inspector instead. A day or so afterwards I heard that as his name had been mentioned it could not be changed, but that another Inspector, Mr. Taylor, a barrister-at-law, would be appointed with him in the inquiry.

In due course the inquiry took place, Mr. Robert Hedley presiding, Mr. Taylor sitting on his right, Mr. Fraser, the solicitor, one of the Guardians, on the left. Mr. Fraser conducted the proceedings against the master, who was defended by Mr. Ricketts. The proceedings lasted several days. During the progress of the inquiry Mr. Hedley rendered no assistance whatever, and if it had not been for the conscientious conduct of Mr. Taylor, not one-half of the evidence which was given would have been brought out. Nearly all the evidence which was tendered was voluntary—that is, inmates and officers came forward to testify to Mr. Bliss's continual refusal to comply with my orders, to his swearing at me and the inmates, and his general harshness and positive cruelty to many of them. When the master's clerk was examined, he swore that he had never made false entries in my Medical Relief Book; but when my attendant, who had assisted in making up the book, gave evidence and stated that he had seen him make them, his tone altered, and eventually he confessed to sixty-three fraudulent entries of wines and spirits, amounting in the whole to a very considerable quantity of stimulants, presumably supplied to my sick but in reality consumed by other people. When called as a witness, I deposed to the continued refusal of Mr. Bliss to comply with my orders, as to his swearing at me and at others, and to the fact that he derided my judgment, and had intimated to the sick inmates under my charge his disbelief in my knowledge of my profession, &c.

When Bliss was called on for his defence he contented himself with giving a general denial to everything that had been given in evidence against him. At last Mr. Hedley said that he should close the inquiry. I do not know whether at that time he had communicated to Mr. Bliss that he intended to report in his favour, but I had a suspicion of it, as no one could possibly be in better spirits than Mr. Bliss was that day, and it was clear from Mr. Hedley's manner and Mr. Bliss's familiarity with the Inspector what his decision would be.

I was therefore not surprised on going down to the House some three weeks after to make some inquiries that certain Members, whose names I am precluded even now from mentioning, informed me confidentially that it had oozed out that Mr. Hedley and the other Inspector had recommended to the President that Mr. Bliss should be allowed to remain as master. On my expressing my astonishment at such a monstrous decision, I was informed that, to a great extent, the President was powerless in such matters—that, having appointed an Inspector to conduct an inquiry, he was by the rules of the Department bound by his decision, and that if he made a report in favour of the individual into whose management he was deputed to inquire, and reported favourably or the reverse of that, the President was compelled to accept it, however much he felt that the evidence did not support the view taken by the Inspectors.

I lay stress upon this assumption that Inspectors cannot by any possibility err in their judgment, or be guilty of favouritism in their conduct of such inquiries, because ere long, if we are to have County Government Boards, the obligations of these Inspectors will be largely increased, and if the official inquiries of the future are to be conducted by men such as I have had experience of, Heaven help the unfortunate officials whose actions are being inquired into, unless there are some special reasons why they should be officially befriended, such as evidently held good in Mr. John Bliss's case.

Having regard to the fate that always attends crooked courses, I am very much disposed to think that a different line would have been followed could it have been foreseen that Mr. Bliss would have acted as he did three weeks after the inquiry was ended, when a woman was brought in a cab so very ill that I decided to send her away forthwith to the Asylum Hospital; but, as she was blue in the face from difficulty of breathing and from general exhaustion, I told the receiving wards woman to come into my room, and then gave her a written order for some brandy and beef-tea to be given to the woman before she went away. I addressed the order to the matron. Shortly afterwards the nurse came back and told me that this woman had refused to supply what I had ordered. I then said, "Take the order to the master." After a minute or so she returned, telling me that the master would see me d——d before the woman should have it. I then left the House, and on the next day heard that, exhausted as she was, the woman was taken to Cleveland Street without anything being given to her. That morning I wrote to the medical superintendent of the Sick Asylum, and asked him to let me have a copy of any remarks he had made on her admission (of course, stating the refusal of both master and matron to give her anything at all before she left the Westminster Workhouse). His reply bore out the view I had formed of her condition, and he further said that if I had not written to him he should have made a special report to the managers showing her exhausted condition when admitted. A copy of this letter and a formal complaint against the matron and Bliss for their refusal to give the poor woman anything, was sent to the Board of Guardians, who simply ignored it. I also sent a similar statement to the Local Government Board, but no acknowledgment of its ever having been received was sent to me. Knowing what I do, from many years' experience, what this Department is, I very much regret that I did not send this complaint under cover (privately) to Sir Charles Dilke. It is a curious fact that, although the suppression of my statement at the Local Government Board, and the refusal of the Chairman and his party to make any inquiry into my complaint caused Mr. Bliss to keep his appointment a twelvemonth longer, yet this refusal, having been subsequently conclusively proved, ultimately led to his being called on to resign his appointment, as will be shown hereafter, after the Chairman had in the interval been ejected from office by an overwhelming vote of the indignant ratepayers.

No report of the inquiry having been forwarded to the Board, the Chairman, after the lapse of about three months, caused a letter to be written to the Local Government Board asking that the result of the inquiry should be forwarded. The President sent a copy of the evidence given on oath to the Guardians, thinking that after the Board had read it through they would surely concur with him in thinking that Mr. Bliss was not a fit person to remain as master. But he reckoned wrongly. Sir Charles Dilke did not know the Chairman. This man simply induced his dozen followers to utterly ignore all the evidence, and to assert that it proved nothing.

Meeting one of these Guardians in the House two or three mornings after, he came up to me, and, in a loud tone of voice, he said, "I have been reading your disgraceful evidence against our master." To which I quietly replied, "It was given on oath, and every word of it is true;" when, in a towering passion, he said, "You have disgraced yourself, I tell you; you have disgraced yourself:" and then, before I could reply to this outburst of vulgar vituperation, he went on to say, "I see the Local Government Board have directed us to pay you five guineas for your attending to give evidence: I am the Chairman of the Board, and not one penny shall you ever be paid for your disgraceful evidence." Had this outburst been indulged in some few years before I cannot answer for the form which my resentment would have taken; but I kept my temper, as I knew no credit could accrue from any squabble with this man. The cheque was subsequently paid. The Chairman was far too wise to enter into a struggle with the Local Government Board over such a matter.

At the next meeting of the Board of Guardians he, or one of his followers, moved that a letter be written to the Local Government Board, stating that they had considered the evidence and were of opinion that it in no way affected the character of their master, and requesting that the Board should forthwith send its opinion of the evidence and what charges they considered proved, whereupon there was forwarded to them a list of thirteen charges which the Local Government Board held had been proved against Bliss. It is probable that if the Chairman and the majority had remained quiet, these serious charges against the master would never have seen the light. As it happened, the publication of them gave the opponents of Mr. Bliss the opportunity of conclusively showing up the action of the Board. The letter of the Local Government Board, containing particulars of the charges proved, was as follows—

"Local Government Board,
"Whitehall,
"August 28, 1883.

"Sir,—I am directed by the Local Government Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th inst. respecting the decision communicated to the Guardians of the Westminster Union in the letter which we addressed to them by the Board on the 18th ult. upon the charges preferred against Mr. Bliss, the master of the Workhouse, and recently investigated by their Inspectors, Mr. Hedley and Mr. Taylor.

"The Board direct me to state, in reply, that the charges to which they referred in that letter were the following—

"That Mr. Bliss twice threw water from a bucket over an inmate named Ellen Coleman.

"That he kicked a woman named Ann Lane on the back of the thigh [she was sixty-eight years old], the bruise caused thereby was about four inches across.

"That he kicked a boy named James Daley twice on the back [he was about thirteen years old, and was a very good boy].

"That he was in the habit of swearing, and of using expressions of an objectionable character when irritated.

"That he had exercised no supervision as regards the entries in his portion of the Workhouse Medical Relief Book.

"That he had not entered in the Provision Accounts as absent inmates who were in fact absent on leave from the Workhouse.

"That he had contravened the Board's regulations by placing Caroline Barber, aged sixty-four years, upon bread and water.

"That there had been undue delay in the registration of four births in the Workhouse.

"That in the cases of two females, named Caroline Clegg and Elizabeth Jacob, who died in the Workhouse, he did not take sufficient care to give notice of their decease to their respective relatives.

"That through want of due care, a mistake was made as to a body sent for burial.

"That he allowed Elizabeth Farquharson to leave the Workhouse for four days to go to work, and that he charged in his accounts rations for her during that period.

"That his behaviour towards Mrs. Casher, on her visiting the Workhouse to see two girls in whom she was interested, was discourteous; and that he used very improper language to Emily Brown on her visiting the Workhouse to see her husband, an inmate [who was on his deathbed].

"I am, Sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"(Signed) C. N. Dalton,
"Assistant Secretary."

I have been informed that the reading of the above letter was received by the Chairman and his followers with much exasperation, which exhibited itself in threats of vengeance against all those, whether inmates or officers, who had given evidence against the master. One of the first to feel the wrath of the Chairman was Thomas Bailey, a man seventy years of age, who was discharged from his employment in aiding me and the master in keeping the Medical Officer's Relief Book, which he had done for nearly twenty years, because of his wickedness in bringing under my notice the fraudulent entries made in my portion of the Medical Book by the master's clerk at the instance of the matron, an irregularity which it is reasonable to suppose could only have been condoned by the majority of the Board on the supposition that some of them had helped to get rid of what had been falsely entered against the names of my sick patients.

Although this fraud had been clearly proved, no attention had been drawn to it in the report, but a mere misty reference was made to the subject in the fifth charge proved.

Here let me observe that I believe this inquiry would have been absolutely nugatory of any beneficial results if it had been conducted without an assessor being present, and, considering the bearing and physique of the two Inspectors, it seems to me that the assessor modified his own judgment, which would have been entirely adverse to Mr. Bliss, in deference to the manifest wish of the Inspector to screen an old soldier from the proved charges of blasphemy and unmanly violence to an aged woman and a small boy, for which two latter offences Mr. Bliss would have been taken before a magistrate and severely punished if the miserable victims had had the necessary means.

The Chairman thought, in flouting the Local Government Board by his protection of his friend the master, that he would triumph; but at that time he was wholly unaware of what was in store for him and the party he had so long led.

The Inspector was not, indeed, an acceptable person to all Boards of Guardians, as the following letter from the Holborn Board indicates—

"February 28, 1884.

"Re Stanton. Official Inquiry.

"My Lords and Gentlemen,—I am directed by the Guardians of the Poor of the Holborn Union to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 26th inst., stating that you have instructed your Inspector, Mr. Hedley, to hold an inquiry into the charges preferred against Mr. Stanton, and that Mr. Hedley will give the Guardians due notice of the time and place in which he intends holding the inquiry, and to inform you that the following Resolution was passed upon your communication being submitted to the Guardians, viz.—

"'That the clerk write to the Local Government Board and inform them that the Guardians are of opinion that an official should be appointed to conduct the inquiry who has not already expressed an opinion on the subject, which Mr. Hedley has publicly done, and that if the Local Government Board adhere to the appointment of Mr. Hedley to hold the inquiry, the Guardians must decline to take part therein.'

"I am further directed to inform you that this Resolution was carried with only one dissentient at the Board last evening.

"I have the honour to be,
"My Lords and Gentlemen,
"Your obedient servant,
"James W. Hill, Clerk.

"The Local Government Board."

I do not know whether it was at the meeting of the Board when the decision of the Department was first read, or on the occasion when the Guardians heard their clerk read out the list of charges which the Department considered were proved against Mr. Bliss, but it is certain that the Chairman rose in his seat and moved that I be called on to resign my appointment forthwith. Of course it was carried, and the clerk was directed to forward me a copy of the resolution. I briefly acknowledged its receipt. I understood that at this time this person was much put out at my not at once complying with his request, and threatened all sorts of vengeance on me. He was so ignorant that, in his rage, he forgot that he could not so summarily get rid of me, and therefore I waited patiently for his next move; indeed, I applied for and took my usual autumn holiday. At this time there appeared in The Standard daily newspaper an article commenting on the evidence given at the official inquiry, on the charges found to be proved, and the conduct of the Chairman and his docile followers.

It was republished and sent to every ratepayer in both parishes. And here I may be allowed to call attention to the fact, that in the reforms which I have tried to secure, I have had the assistance of papers of all parties. The article was as follows—

"Westminster Union. The Local Government Board, the Guardians of the Poor, and J. D. Bliss, Master of the Workhouse, Poland Street.

"Defend the poor and fatherless; see that such as are in need and necessity have right."—Psalm lxxxii. 3.

"The Local Government Board, in an official communication to the Guardians of the Westminster Union, say they have 'entertained very great doubt whether, consistently with their public duty,' they could 'properly allow' the present master of the Poland Street Workhouse to retain his post. It is likely that the public will go all the way with the Local Government Board, and even a little further. The Board, having instituted a long and searching inquiry into sundry charges brought against the master, have arrived at the conclusion that several of the accusations have been established. They told the Guardians so much as this some little time back; but these authorities wished to know more precisely what were the charges considered to be proved. It is fortunate that these gentlemen were so far disposed to challenge the conclusions arrived at by the central power, for the answer they received puts the public in possession of some notable facts which otherwise might have remained in obscurity. We now learn that the demonstrated delinquencies of this Workhouse master include such peccadilloes as twice emptying a bucket of water over an inmate named Ellen Coleman, and kicking a woman named Ann Lane, as well as a boy named James Daley, the latter twice. He also contravened the Board's regulations by placing an old woman upon bread and water. There might be some economy in this, but it was more than counterbalanced by an awkward habit in which the master indulged, of charging rations for paupers absent on leave. Another irregularity consisted in a 'mistake as to a body sent for burial,' coupled with which we hear of 'undue delay in the registration of four births.' Then there was confusion in the Medical Relief Books, and a neglect to give notice when people were dead. To all this must be added a 'habit of swearing and using expressions of an objectionable character when irritated.' This model master of a Workhouse is further proved to have been discourteous to the wife of a clergyman, and to have 'used very improper language to Emily Brown,' a poor woman who came to see her husband. For all this he is master of the Workhouse still, and, as he retains 'the confidence of the Guardians,' the Local Government Board 'refrain from adopting the extreme course of requiring his resignation.' But, at the same time, this redoubtable official is warned that if any further complaints are substantiated against him he will be most certainly asked, with all due politeness, to relinquish his responsible office. There is, for the moment, nothing more to be done, except, perhaps, for the Guardians to present him with a testimonial."—Extracted from "The Standard," September 14, 1883.

(It should be clearly understood that this inquiry was instituted by a minority of the Board, who have steadily voted for Mr. Bliss's resignation.)

On my return to town I found that the Board generally had also gone away, but the Chairman had given notice that when the Guardians met in September he should move that I be suspended from my office; which in due course he did, and, having a passive majority, carried it. This did not alarm me at all. It was not then as it was some years ago. There was a new Secretary at the Local Government Board, who was the worthy successor of a most estimable father, the late Hugh Owen. Added to this I had several friends in the House of Commons, and most assuredly Sir Charles Dilke was not prejudiced against me. Besides this, the Chairman could not get up a case against me. So, being aware that it would take some weeks before any decision could be come to, as the head officials at the Central Department would be certainly out of town, and that it was a task beyond the intelligence of the Chairman to draft an indictment, I again went into the country.

So soon as it became known that this Chairman had moved my suspension simply for having resented the conduct of Bliss in cursing and swearing at me, and disobeying my orders for the sick, numerous friends wrote to me, and the medical journals vied with each other in denouncing the conduct of this Board, and called on my professional brethren to rally round me as I had been called on to resign, and was now suspended for interfering with Bliss in his treatment of my sick poor. The action of the Chairman and his supporters turned to my advantage, and eventually led to his and their complete and signal expulsion from office.

Among other annotations and leading articles which appeared at this date, I will here insert one from The Lancet, bearing date October 27, 1883—

"The Suspension of Dr. Rogers.

"The suspension of Dr. Rogers from his duties by the Guardians of the Westminster Union because of his honest testimony in an inquiry into the conduct of the master, is an event of very great consequence. It is impossible that the Local Government Board can sanction the action of the Board, or disregard the memorial signed by fifty-four of the most respectable inhabitants of St. Anne's, including the rector, the Catholic priest, &c.; and another, signed by ninety-four of the ratepayers of St. James's. Dr. Rogers is a representative man. He represents not only the Poor Law medical service, but the independence of the members of that service, and no greater misfortune can befall the poor or the ratepayers than that he should be persecuted by the Guardians of Westminster for doing his duty. We cannot believe that Sir Charles Dilke will allow such a misfortune to happen. The Local Government Board have acted with a strange inconsistency in retaining the master of the Workhouse. It is inconceivable that they will play into his hands, and those of the Guardians who assist him, by sanctioning the dismissal of Dr. Rogers. But the profession and the members of the Poor Law service, should lose no time in organizing a proper movement for vindicating Dr. Rogers' claims and position."

After my suspension I went to Bournemouth, and whilst there heard of the above movement in my support, and also saw that my friends in the profession were organizing a testimonial in my favour, subscriptions to which came from all parts of the kingdom. So that, instead of injuring me, the action of the Guardians secured me three months' holiday, a testimonial worth £200, and gave me that leisure which enabled me to work up a party that some six months after drove the Chairman and his followers from office.

On my return from Bournemouth I set to work to get up a list of candidates for Guardians for the ensuing year. It was necessary to get thirteen, as I had only five supporters. It is true that they were the most respectable men on the Board. I was not very long in getting three respectable ratepayers to stand for St. Anne's; but the great difficulty was in St. James's, where ten were required; and if it had not have happened that the Rev. Henry Sheringham, Vicar of St. Peter's, Great Windmill Street, exerted himself most earnestly, we could not have succeeded at all. He not only came forward himself, but he induced a colleague, the Vicar of St. John's, Great Marlborough Street, and four very wealthy and well-known gentlemen in St. James's to do likewise. The obtaining of four others ceased to be a matter of difficulty. The Rev. H. Sheringham took the greatest interest in the election, and it was through his help that the Bishop of London, the Marquis of Waterford, and a large number of the nobility and gentry, bankers, and others who were ratepayers in St. James's, and up to that date had never voted in any election of Guardians, were, on this occasion, secured.

Mr. Sheringham was the incumbent of the poorest district in St. James's, and consequently he was constantly brought into contact with those who had either been inmates, or had friends in the House, and for a long time he had been cognisant of Mr. Bliss's management, and of the Chairman's support of the master. When I was suspended, Mr. Sheringham showed his feeling by going round to some of the leading people in St. James's and getting them to sign the testimonial in my favour, and at the election in the following April he worked hard all day long to get rid of the Chairman and his party.

It may be thought by those who have followed this narrative of Poor Law management in 1883, that I had not sufficiently referred to the action of Mr. W. J. Fraser, solicitor, of Soho Square, and of 191, Clapham Road, but it does not arise from want of gratitude to this gentleman, who has known me for many years, who asked me to see poor Watson in 1872, who induced me to become a candidate for the office the same year, and whose worthy father used to take an honest pride in bringing him to my house nearly thirty years before, to show me how he had got on during his half-year's schooling. If it had not been for the high sense of conscientiousness, and his invariable hatred of such wrong-doing as was implied in the support of such a person as J. Bliss, as a young solicitor he could not have made so great a sacrifice of time, of labour, and of money.

The fact of Mr. Bliss being no longer master of the Westminster Workhouse, and his chief supporter no longer in power as the Chairman of the Westminster Union, with all its possible advantages, is owing almost entirely to Mr. W. J. Fraser, who, recognizing the wrong-doing of both, exerted himself untiringly to get rid of both, which he achieved with singularly complete success.

It was not until just before Christmas that one of the Guardians who was friendly to me, told me that a letter had just been received from the Local Government Board, directing me to resume my duties, thereby removing my suspension; at the same time saying there was an oblique reference to me at the end of the letter. "Oh," I replied, "I understand all about that; but I can afford to let that pass so long as the President supports me."

I returned to my duties, but had it not been for the fact that my nurses (one woman excepted, who was Bliss's confidant, and whom I would have got rid of months before for incompetence and worse qualities) welcomed me back, as did the sick inmates, whose friend I had tried to be, I really should have hesitated to continue in my office, for every form of petty obstructiveness was exhibited by the master, matron, the master's clerk, the Chairman, and his followers. The only retaliation in my power was to draft questions and get them put in the House. This process made the names and doings of the majority of the Westminster Board of Guardians come out rather awkwardly before the public and the ratepayers of the Union; the extraordinary circumstance being that both parties, or rather I may state all parties, in the House assisted me in getting these questions put to Ministers.

At last the election took place. I feel pretty well convinced that when the Chairman saw our list of candidates and who were the nominators, consisting as they did of most of the nobility, gentry, bankers, clergy, and leading ratepayers in both parishes, he felt that his reign was over, but he did not think, even then, that his defeat could have been so complete and overwhelming, for not only was he left in an absurd minority, but his twelve followers were left also.

Subjoined is a copy of the address sent to the ratepayers of both parishes.

"Election of Guardians.

"To the Ratepayers of the Parish of St. James, Piccadilly, and St. Anne, Soho.

"My Lords, Ladies, and Gentlemen,—Having been nominated to be Guardians to represent St. James's Parish as well as that of St. Anne's, Soho, at the Westminster Union, by many of the nobility, clergy, gentry, and leading tradesmen and large ratepayers of both parishes, we confidently solicit your votes and support at the approaching election.

"We wish it to be understood that, in offering ourselves as candidates, we are actuated by no personal motives or considerations whatever, but solely by a desire to secure the faithful, humane, and economical administration of the laws relating to the relief of the poor in the Westminster Union.

"Public attention has, during the past year, been frequently drawn to serious complaints respecting the treatment of inmates, subordinate officials and others in, and visitors to, the Poland Street Workhouse, and it is very widely felt that a searching and careful investigation should be instituted without delay into matters vitally affecting the comfort, happiness, and welfare of a large body of poor and helpless people, such as inhabit our workhouses.

"We beg to draw your attention to the accompanying copies of two letters addressed by the Local Government Board to the late Guardians; and also to the enclosed copy of an article which appeared in The Standard newspaper.

"Many of the ratepayers will learn with surprise that, notwithstanding the serious and grave charges substantiated against the master of the Workhouse, at the Local Government Board inquiry, held by two of their Inspectors, a large majority of the late Guardians felt themselves able formally to record their confidence in the master.

"It should be clearly understood that this inquiry was demanded by a small minority of the Guardians, who found themselves powerless to bring to light or redress in any other way the flagrant abuses of which they had been informed. And at the same time it should be known that those Guardians upon whom devolved the duty of conducting the inquiry, were denied, both by the majority of the Board, who were opposed to any action being taken, and also by the master, both before and at the time of the inquiry, all access to inmates and resident officers, whose evidence was essential to establish the charges alleged. It was, therefore, only with the greatest difficulty that the necessary evidence could be collected.

"We have further to state that, after the decision of the Local Government Board was communicated to the Guardians, and when all the facts of the case were fully before them, the Chairman and the majority of the Board presented to Mr. Bliss, in the Board-room of the Poland Street Workhouse, a testimonial, in the form of a sum of money, ostensibly for the purpose of defraying the expenses of his professional adviser in conducting his defence during the inquiry into his conduct.

"It may be added that the Chairman, when compelled to admonish Mr. Bliss, in accordance with the directions of the Local Government Board, did so with reluctance, entertaining, it would seem, the belief that the master was not guilty of all or any of the charges proved against him; and, when so admonished, the master himself expressed no regret that the charges set forth in the Local Government Board's letter should have been held to be established against him, and gave no assurance whatever that he would comport himself differently in future.

"Thus the official inquiry was rendered practically abortive, owing, as we believe, to the action of the majority of the Guardians in virtually upholding the master, in the face of such overwhelming evidence of misconduct.

"Various complaints have since been made both by inmates and officers respecting their treatment, and, notwithstanding the recent inquiry, the internal condition of the Workhouse remains up to the present time unaltered and unimproved.

"It is for these reasons that we feel it our duty to offer ourselves as candidates at the present election, believing that the ratepayers of St. James's and of St. Anne's, Soho, will no longer be able to place confidence in the Board as lately constituted, and that they will demand a searching inquiry into the whole system of the management of the Poland Street Workhouse.

"If, therefore, it be your pleasure to elect us as your representatives on the Board, we shall address ourselves, without fear or favour, promptly and impartially to the consideration of every matter requiring attention; and with the co-operation of the Local Government Board, which we doubt not will readily be given, we shall make it our chief aim and endeavour to remove all legitimate grievances, and to secure humane and kindly treatment for the many aged sick and helpless inmates of our Workhouse.

"We have the honour to remain,
"Your most obedient servants,
"——."

As the election had mainly turned on the conduct of Mr. Bliss, one of the first things done by the new Board when it met was to suspend Mr. Bliss from his office, which being done, shortly afterwards a committee of the Board met and drew up an indictment against him; but as the Department had condoned the whole of the thirteen charges which were considered proved, they could not raise any of these again; but as Mr. Fraser was aware that the complaints I had made subsequent to the inquiry had been ignored by the late Chairman and his friends, and that the duplicate copy had never been acknowledged by the Department, I, and the nurse of the receiving wards, and the head nurse on the female side, were called to prove the order given by me, the refusal of the matron and the master to comply with it, the woman's condition when admitted, her state on her arrival at Cleveland Street Asylum, the remarks as to her exhausted condition when carried by the porter in his arms, she being too ill to walk; all these facts were shown to be absolutely true, and were completely borne out by evidence. Other matters against Mr. Bliss were also gone into and forwarded to the Local Government Board, and with it an intimation that it was the desire of the new Board that he should not be permitted to return to his duties. Whilst away in Belfast, where I went in the month of August to deliver my customary annual address on Poor Law Medical Relief, I received a telegram that Sir Charles Dilke had called on Mr. J. Bliss to resign.

When the master was suspended I can hardly describe the relief I experienced, it was so great. No longer did I dread loud-mouthed expressions of dissent from me in my treatment of the sick, no longer did I fear that he would stalk, unannounced, through the female sick wards when I was examining the poor women; but instead of it there was respectful quiet and orderly behaviour. The matron, who ought to have been sent away also, kept out of my way and was obsequiously obliging when I gave a necessary order. One person only did I at once bring to book—it was the head nurse on the male side. After the formation of the new Board, I immediately drew up and sent in a list of charges against her, comprising refusal to obey my orders, complicity in and support of certain malingerers who she falsely informed me were ill. One of these I had discovered some months before to be an impostor, and ordered his discharge, but the nurse got her friend Bliss to direct his return, thus flouting my authority. She did not stop to meet my charges, but sent in her resignation, and, it being accepted, these complaints were not investigated. I speedily got rid of the malingerer also, and during the remainder of the time I held office the man remained out of the sick ward. What was the tie between the nurse and this malingerer I was never able to divine.

During the latter part of April, the whole of May, and the first part of June, 1884, there had been an outbreak of fever at the Union schools on Wandsworth Common, and it appeared that the medical officer of the schools, the Visiting Committee, and the Poor Law Medical Inspector, could throw no light on the causes of it, when it was suggested at the Board that I should be sent down to examine into the matter and report to the Board thereon. I wrote to the medical officer informing him of the Board's wish, and asked him to arrange a time to meet me and we would go into the subject together. He was not sufficiently courteous even to acknowledge my letter. I then asked a member of the Board (a builder) to accompany me, which he did.

On my arrival at the schools I requested the attendance of the superintendent and matron, as I wished to state the object of my visit and to obtain from them certain information as regards the commencement of the outbreak, the symptoms presented by the sick, &c. I also elicited from them that the medical officer had said that he would not meet me—an act of discourtesy to the Board, whose joint officers we were.

I speedily ascertained that the outbreak commenced amongst the girls, and had been almost entirely limited to the female side of the House, and of these girls those mainly who were employed in the laundry. But as I wanted to make a complete examination of all the water supply, I asked the Guardian to pioneer the way in our general survey. With this object I got out upon the roof of the main building and peered into all the cisterns. I did not discover anything vastly amiss in these, and nothing wrong at all on the male side. I then proceeded with my examination of the cistern supply in the laundry and kitchen, and that on the roof which furnished the kitchen and part of the laundry supply, when I came upon the source of the mischief; for, on lifting the lid of a large cistern there containing many gallons of water, my sense of smell was assailed by one of the most horrible odours I had ever encountered, and I saw a large mass of thick scum floating there which was evolving offensive gases and in constant motion from the activity of innumerable forms of the lowest type of animal life. I asked my friend to hand me up a stick, and with it I took out a large piece of it and spread it out upon the roof of the building. I also requested the Guardian to come up and judge for himself. I did this because I knew that any statement I might make would most assuredly be denied by the parties who are responsible for looking into and examining the condition of the cisterns and keeping them cleansed, a circumstance which, as I expected, did subsequently occur, but which could not be controverted by them as I had the gentleman in question as my witness.

Before leaving I left a written instruction that every cistern throughout the building should be emptied and disinfected, additional care to be taken with the offending one.

On my return home I drew up and forwarded to the Board my opinion as to the cause of the outbreak, and the orders I had given to the superintendent. As no other cases of fever occurred after my visit, it was clear I had discovered the cause and the remedy. The Board wrote me, through their clerk, a handsome acknowledgment of my success, and voted me five guineas for my visit, and informed me that they had directed the clerk to send a copy of my report and the results that had followed it to the Local Government Board. This was somewhat of a rebuke to those permanent officials who had placed that addendum to the letter directing me to resign my duties some six months before, as I had discovered and stopped the outbreak, the cause of which they had utterly failed to ascertain; but then these aforesaid permanent officials never throw any heart or intelligence into the work they are so handsomely paid to do.

In the early part of June the honorary secretary of the fund, Mr. J. W. Barnes, F.R.C.S., wrote to me, stating that it was decided to present a testimonial to me at a meeting of the subscribers, at the rooms of the Medical Society of London, in Chandos Street, Cavendish Square, in June, 1884, and that Mr. J. A. Shaw Stewart had arranged to take the chair. On the day mentioned the presentation took place, and subjoined is a condensed report of the proceedings extracted from The British Medical Journal, June 28, 1884. The assemblage was a very large one, and certainly was a striking manifestation of good feeling towards me from many of my old friends and fellow-workers in the cause of Sanitary and Poor Law Medical Reform.