Cockermouth Union Board of Guardians - Cumberland and Westmorland Newspaper Transcriptions

Cockermouth Union Board of Guardians

The fortnightly meeting of this board was held at the courthouse, Cockermouth on Monday morning. Mr. W. HERBERT presided, and there were also present:

Mrs. DODGSON

Mrs. BIRKENSHAW

Mrs. L. WILSON

Miss. KING

Rev. A SUTTON

Rev. T. W. MELROSE

T. PAISLEY

W. BRIGGS

S. MUMBERSON

P. WEDGEWOOD

J. STOCKDALE

T. FLETCHER

T. ROOK

J. HENDERSON

J. CAPE

G. CLARK

G. S. WILSON

J. DIXON

T. MILBURN

T. BEWSHER

J. BIRD

J. D. WALKER

T. LANGCAKE

J. W. ROBINSON

J. PEARSON

J. IRVING

J. CLARK

J. TEASDALE

J. W. TOWERS

R. MITCHELL

J. STEPHENSON

W. DAVIDSON

J. ROSS

W. LAIRD

J. MUSGRAVE (clerk)

J. H. MUSGRAVE (assistant clerk)

A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION:

Mr. G. CLARK, upon the minutes being read, asked if the report made by the Workhouse Committee with reference to the appointment of an architect to submit plan and estimate with regard to the proposed new wing for the imbeciles was a unanimous one.

Mr. DIXON: It was.

Mr. CLARK: I was led to believe it was not. (Laughter)

Miss KING: We were not asked all around.

Mr. DIXON: It was put "for" and "against."

Miss. KING: And the majority carried it. (Laughter.)

Mr. DIXON: Nobody voted against it; that's all I know.

Mr. MITCHELL: I think it was perfectly unanimous. There were no dissenients.
Mr. DIXON said there was an important meeting of the Workhouse Committee that day at one o'clock. Mr. SCOTT the architect, would be present with the plans and estimates, and he hoped as many members would be present as possible so that the matter might be thoroughly investigated and acted upon.

A letter was read from the Local Government Board again drawing the attention of the Guardians to their communications with reference to the accommodation at the Workhouse and asking that action might be taken without further delay.

TREATS AND GIFTS TO THE
WORKHOUSE INMATES:

The Master reported that Mrs. Lloyd WILSON kindly sent wagonettes on the 29th ult. And conveyed sixteen of the old women to Westworth House and entertained them to a good tea on the lawn. Everyone of the old dames seemed to enjoy
themselves and returned home delighted with the treat. Miss KING of Portinscale entertained the old women not able to go to Westworth House to a good tea in their wards, and it was much appreciated by them. The female imbeciles, on the following day, were entertained to tea by Mrs. DODGSON. A basket of oranges and flowers were received from Christ Church, Cockermouth, on Sunday. Mr. HARRISON, of Dunthwaite, sent large parcels of magazines during the week, and Mr. SEALBY, of Cockermouth, a parcel of Wesleyan tracts. On motion of the chairman, seconded by Mr. BRIGGS, a vote of thaks was accorded the donors.

DESERTED CHILDREN:

The Flimby Lodge Committee recommended that every effort should be made to ascertain the whereabouts of fathers of deserted children and compel them to maintain them.

Mr. FLETCHER moved that the recommendation be acted upon. Some of the parents went away and left their children in the Lodge, and when they were of age to come out and work they came back. He knew of one who came back quite swell in a black suit. (Laughter.) Mr. MITCHELL seconded and it was agreed to.

THE WORKHOUSE NURSE
HAS HER HEALTH GIVEN WAY OR NOT?

The clerk read the following letter from the Northern Workhouse Nursing Association, Manchester: - "Nurse HAWES, who was supplied to your Board by this Association in December, 1893 is evidently run down in health and unable to undertake the duties demanded of her, and the Executive Committee are of opinion that she should be removed, and if possible another nurse sent by us in her place. They have according instructed me to authorize Nurse HAWES to send in her resignation and to advise you of their decision. (Laughter)

The Clerk: I have no resignation

The Chairman: Then it will have to stand over until we have one.

Mr. ROSS: How have they received this communication?

The Clerk: I don't know.

Mr. HENDERSON: I was given to understand about a month ago that the nurse was
satisfied.

Mrs. DODGSON: She was visited by the lady inspector.

Mr. BRIGGS: Oh! The lady inspector. (Laughter.)

Mr. DIXON: She did not know she was ill and therefore the lady inspector told her. (Laughter.)

Mr. MITCHELL: We might ask Mr. FRENCH about her. She looks very well.
(Laughter.)

Mr. BRIGGS: There is nothing left before the Board.

STREET BETTING:

A letter was read from the Wolverhampton Union asking the Guardians to memorialize the Home Secretary in favour of the passing of an act to suppress street betting. Mr. MELROSE moved that the Board accede to the request of the Wolverhampton Union. Mr. ROSS seconded. Mr. LANGCAKE supported and said that betting was a great evil and led to too much crime and misery, and they ought to support anything that would suppress it. The resolution was agreed to.

GENEROUS POLICY DECIDED UPON:

Mr. MELROSE, according to notice, moved "That a committee be appointed to enquire whether by a careful and judicious extension of out-door relief the number of the inmates at the workhouse may be reduced." There was no doubt he said, that some people might be kept out of the workhouse by a judicious extension of the system of out-door relief. In many cases, he thought, the sons and daughters of people who went into the workhouse would support them outside if they received something from the Guardians to help them. He used the words "careful and judicious" in his resolution, and he wished to emphasise the phrase,because he wished to see the system extended to those who were deserving and not to any means to the vicipus or debased.

The Chairman stated at a previous meeting that the proposed alterations at the workhouse were approved in 1868. It was hardly likely that the Local Government Board would accept a proposal which came from the altered conditions of 27 years. The building of a new infirmary it seemed to him, would be the smallest thing that would satisfy them. If there was a carful and judicious extension of out-door relief the Guardians might prevent a great many people from going into the workhouse. There were people who did not want to be in the house, and there was a lazy class that went into the house because they found it a more comfortable home than they could obtain outside. He did not say this would meet the requirements of the Local Government Board with regard to the workhouse accommodation, but if they had a less number of inmates they could not be called upon to provide for such an extensive building as they would otherwise be.

Mr. G. CLARK, in seconding the resolution, said he thought Mr. MELROSE had
struck the key note to the solution of the workhouse difficulty.

Mr. DIXON asked if the Guardians had not already power to exercise discretion
in any case which they thought ought to be dealt with in the way suggested.
The Local Government Board gave power to Guardians to extend extra relief in
deserving cases.

Mr. PAISLEY: You have a maximum scale of 2s 6d at Maryport. Mr. DIXON said that might be so in certain cases. Mr. PAISLEY, in supporting the resolution,
said he thought every case ought to be decided upon it's own merits, that the
deserving poor should be treated as liberally as possible, and that the Guardians should have neither a maximum nor a minimum. (Hear, hear.) There was no greater hardship than to be driven into the workhouse. (Hear,hear.) There was not one in the room that would like to live in the workhouse. He knew several old people, one especially whom he often saw, and who had told him that he would rather receive 2s a week and be able to go about on a fine summer's day than be shut up in a workhouse. There was another thing. He did not think they were justified in driving old people into the workhouse. (Hear,hear) - They had no accommodation for them. He would keep the workhouse for the idle and dissolute, and give the deserving poor what they deserved (Hear,hear.)

Mr. HENDERSON said that one of the greatest faults of the Guardians was that as soon as regular business of the Board was over and the relief business came on, nearly everybody left the room. If those who wanted more relief given would stay until the relief cases were taken, they could accomplish what they wanted without a resolution at all. Those receiving relief obtained from 1s 6d to 2s 6d a week. He would like to know how anybody could live upon 1s 6d a week.

The Guardians who voted for 1s 6d a week should try and see if they could live upon that sum. If they could do so of course other people could, and then they could vote for relief at 1s 6d a week with a clear conscience.

Mr. BRIGGS said that it was quite new to him that the Guardians drove people into the workhouse. It was optional whether they went in or not. He was of opinion that out-door relief tended to pauperise the people. Then to regard to relief at the rate of 1s 6d per week, it was not supposed that the people
could live upon it; the recipients were supposed to have other means of existence, and the 1s 6d was to enable them to eke out what they had. The chairman said so far as keeping people out of the workhouse was concerned, there was not a single inmate who could be properly relieved outside. (Mr. MELROSE: question) He had assisted to administer relief at the Board for many years, and whenever deserving people had applied for relief who would be better outside, they had never sent them to the workhouse. Mr. MELROSE: question) He was quite of Mr. HENDERSON's opinion that if the Guardians would attend to the cases of out-door relief it would be a great deal better. They never granted more than half a crown a week, and the recipients were always perfectly satisfied with that.

Mr. MITCHELL enquired to what extent the Guardians could give relief.

The Clerk: Every case must be decided upon it's merits.

Mr. MITCHELL: What is the limit?

The Clerk: There is no limit.

Mr. ROSS said that they had cases of married couples, without sons or daughters, where the Guardians thought 4s per week was quite sufficient for two people to maintain themselves, find clothing and pay rent.

Mrs. BIRKENSHAW: Shame.

They wanted an alteration in the system of out-door relief. The most rational and the most humane way of administering relief, especially on cases of this kind was to give a fairly reasonable amount. He was perfectly satisfied that 99 out of every 100 of the ratepayers would agree to it, especially if the cases were really deserving. Besides the married couples there were the single women and the widows, many of whom they compelled to go to the workhouse by offering them only 1s 6d to 2s per week as out-door relief. This sort of thing was contrary to the spirit of the age, and if they persisted in it it would be against the wishes of the vast majority of ratepayers. If they adopted a more generous policy it might enable tem to get over the difficulty with the local Government Board.

He knew a man in the workhouse who was a respectable working man. He didn't say he was a teetotaler - he took a glass of beer, but was none the worse for that. If this man had received a reasonable sum from the Guardians he would never have gone into the workhouse, as his friends would have taken him in, but owing to the fact that the Guardians would only give him 2s a week, no one would have him. He hoped the Guardians in the future would act with a greater degree of leniency than they had hitherto.

The Chairman: You have the power to extend the amount of relief already, only you can't relieve the able bodied persons except by sending them into the
workhouse.

Mr. ROSS: How much does it take to keep a pauper in the workhouse?

The Clerk: 2s 11d.

Mr. ROSS: That does not cover everything.

The Clerk: That is for necessaries. You must have a workhouse and officials whether there are many inmates or not.

Mr. FLETCHER said the Workington Committee dealt with the applicants in a liberal manner, and it seemed to him what was wanted was a change of Guardians, and a few more like those at Workington. (Laughter.)

Mr. LANGCAKE said at Manchester the Guardiand were reducing out-door relief to a minimum, because they found it acted a great deal better.

Mr. MELROSE said Mr. BRIGGS had stated that there were great objections to out-door relief. The cases to which he referred were deserving cases, not the vicious and degraded, to whom out-door relief should not be granted. The chairman had said the applicants did not ask for more than 2s 6d. The question was, If they had asked for more would they have got it (Laughter.)

The Chairman: They were always perfectly satisfied.

Mr. MILBURN said it appeared to him the resolution was a reflection upon the
local relief committees, and it was also mischievous in that it would encourage applicants for relief. At Workington relief was granted for a short period with a view to inquiries, and if it then turned out that it was a deserving case relief was granted accordinly. If other relief committees adopted the same course there would be and end of the controversy. He thought Mr. MELROSE might withdraw his motion. Sufficient had been said in reference to the matter to educate the relief committees, if that was his object, up to their duties. If Mr. MELROSE found that his views were not being met he could bring that subject forward again. But at the present time, in view of what they were going to do at the workhouse it was scarcely judicious to raise the question.

Mr. G. CLARK said there was a discrepancy in two of the statements which had been made. The Chairman had distinctly stated that there was not a single inmate in the workhouse that ought to be allowed out-door relief, where as Mr. ROSS said he knew of one case. That was a distinct contradiction, and he would like to know which was correct. (Laughter.) They expected reliable information from men holding public positions. (Laughter>)

Mrs. KING said she was afraid they were not always judicious in granting outdoor relief; it was certainly so at Keswick, as there were some who ought not to be allowed it, as they made a bad use of it. She thought they they should board out some of the deserving poor people. The Chairman said that they could not do that. Mr. ROBINSON suggested that Mr. MELROSE should leave out the words in his resolution which as a recommendation to the relief committees.

Mr. PAISLEY: Mr. ROBINSON had just struck the chord I intended to touch.

Mr. MELROSE: I am quite willing to do that.

Mr. PAISLEY: There should be no hard and fast rule, no maximum nor minimum, the committees to deal with each case upon it's merits.

Mr. MILBURN: Don't you think they ought to know that to begin with?

Mr. PAISLEY: Have you no maximum at Workington? At Maryport they have; they
never give more than a half-a-crown. Mr. DIXON said it was not so

Mr. PAISLEY: Either you or Mr. COLLINS is wrong then. Mr. COLLINS says there
is one case where 5s is given.

The resolution, as amended, was then agreed to.

COUSIN CHARLEY'S GIFTS

The Flimby Lodge superintendent reported that he had received a letter from "Cousin Charley" stating that last year he had sent a number of books to form the nucleus of a Cousin Charley Library at Flimby Lodge. He would like to know whether the gift had been appreciated and the books read.He contemplated more books for the library unless Mr. FAWKES could suggest a more suitable gift.
No doubt a days outing or a treat would please the children; but he would rather provide them with something of a more permanent and profitable character. Mr. FAWKES reported that in his reply he had stated that the books were readand

appreciated, and he should be glad if "Cousin Charley" could see his way to send a further supply. He agreed that a trip would be enjoyed by the children but if the money which would provide a days outing was spent on books it would provide enjoyment for months besides forming a nice library for years to come. The Chairman said he supposed they must allow "Cousin Charley" to have his own way. He moved that a vote of thanks be forwarded to him. Mr. DIXON seconded and it was agreed to.