Folios 188-194. Draft letter from the Poor Law Commission to William E Goodacre,...

Folios 188-194. Draft letter from the Poor Law Commission to William E Goodacre, Clerk to the Guardians of the Mansfield Poor Law Union, informing that they had received a report from Robert Weale, Assistant Commissioner, together a copy of the evidence taken by him, on 15 July 1847 [not included]. This relates to charges against William Winter, Mansfield Poor Law Union Workhouse Master and Theosopholis Winter, Relieving Officer, of having mistreated John Tallents, whilst in the workhouse. It appears that Tallents called at the workhouse on the evening of 24 June 1847 and applied for relief to John Bingley, Porter. Tallents' was in a state of intoxication, but he was offered night's lodging on condition that he performed a task of work in the morning. Tallents entered the workhouse but left immediately, his reason being that he did not see any beds and the place was dirty and unfit to sleep in. The following day, 25 June 1847, Tallents made application to Theosopholis Winter, and showed him a certificate which he had brought from Scotland, where he had previously been residing. The relieving officer considering that the case was one coming under the denomination of 'casual poor', offered Tallents relief in the vagrant's ward until the meeting of the board of guardians. Tallents refused to accept this and again left the workhouse. However, it does not appear certain that the object of Tallents' visit was to obtain immediate relief, but rather to gain some information as to the place of his settlement. Talent's statement differs somewhat from this, he alleges the relieving officer would not listen to him, telling him he was an 'vagrant and an imposter'. The relieving officer asserts that Tallents was very saucy to him. On 26 June 1847, there was a special meeting of the guardians at the workhouse and Tallents, again, attended the workhouse, saw the guardians and stated his case, but it does not appear that they made any order on that occasion. On 1 July 1847 Talents, again, attended a meeting of the board, made his application, which was examined and recorded as that of a 'tramp', and an order was given for his relief in the workhouse and delivered to the master.

The Commission say that, at about 12noon, Tallents was taken, by the master to the men's yard, where men were working at the mill and he was told to join them and work, he refused, stating he was unable. Shortly after the master requested him to work, but, again, was told he was unable to do so. The Commission advise that Tallents was then taken from the men's yard to the lodge and allowed to remain, standing, in the vagrant's yard for several hours. He had no seat and dinner was withheld from him. At night he was supplied with supper and removed to the vagrant ward. The following morning, between 5am and 6am Tallents says he left the sleeping and went to the yard. The Commission state that at about 2pm Tallents discharged himself and left, having previously offered a dinner, which he did not accept. The Commission state that Mr Nathan Cooper, Medical Officer was examined by Mr Weale and said that Tallents was suffering from severe rheumatism, the muscles of his left shoulder were much wasted. He had been labouring under the disease for some time and it would be very improper for him to work at a mill or any work that involve muscular exertion.

The Commission advise that, on review of the circumstances of this case, they desire to remark that the relieving officer seems to have decided, erroneously, in considering Tallents like a vagrant, and offering him relief, as though he were a vagrant. The Commissioners think that the relieving officer, should, as directed by the regulations, have listened to Tallents' statement, have received his application, examined the circumstances, enquired into the state of his health and his ability to work, and if the case had been sudden and urgent, should either have given him an order for the workhouse or afforded him temporary out relief, according to his discussion, until the next meeting of the guardians. He should then have reported the case to the board, see Article 20 of the General Order of 21 April 1842. The Commission say that the error on the part of the relieving officer in treating Tallents as a vagrant, perhaps led to him subsequently being as belonging to that class of paupers. The Commission state that the master of the workhouse, might, on the admission of Tallents to the workhouse, have placed him in the receiving hall, and allowed him to remain there until examined by the medical officer of the workhouse. See Workhouse Rules, Article 4. Had the master taken this course, it is clear that he would not have fallen into the further error of requiring a man to work, when he was quite unable to do so, and would not have been induced by his refusal to keep the man standing in the yard for several hours, in the open air without a seat, and to have violated the regulations by depriving the man a dinner, when he had no authority to do so. The Commission state that the treatment that Tallents met with from the relieving officer, probably arose from an error of judgement. The Commission think it is sufficient in this case to caution him on the subject and to commend him to be more careful in future. The Commission advise that they consider the conduct of the master in a much more serious light. The Commission consider that in requiring Tallents to work, before he had been examined by the medical officer, in keeping him standing in the yard and depriving him of a meal, the master is so greatly to blame that the Commission have been led to doubt whether they might permit him to continue in his office. However, the Commissioners say that they are desperate to make some allowance for the heavy duties required of William Winter at the time, in consequence of the great number of inmates under his care, and from him having 1500 meals to serve daily to the out poor. Moreover, the Commission adds that they have had representations made to them as to Winter's good conduct and respectability and have been informed that the guardians entertain a high opinion of his services and competency, also Mr Linwood, who brought the complaint, has no wish that Winter be removed. Nevertheless, the Commission say that they must repeat that Winter's treatment of Tallents was highly reprehensible and request the guardians reprimand Winter for his misconduct and to point out to him the importance of him paying strict attention to his duties as set out in regulations, in future.

Paper Number: 15123/B/1847.

Poor Law Union Number: 337.

Counties: Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire.