The Inquests
This is a transcript of the inquests held by Thomas Wakley into the deaths of childen from various Unions who had been lodged at the Tooting pauper establishment. Various inquests were held by the separate Unions whose children were affected, and to some extent the transcription below includes pieces from several of them.
Any mistakes in the transcription, which are from The Examiner of Saturday, 20 January 1849, are my own. On my to-do list is to consult coroner Thomas Wakley's casebooks, to see what he had to say about these high-profile cases.
Read about the subsequent trial here
Key takeaways
1. Systemic neglect
This case reveals a systemic failure of both oversight and care standards in Victorian England’s child welfare system. Bureaucratic rigidity, financial parsimony, and reliance on private contractors to house pauper children led to tragic consequences.
2. Profit over welfare
The cost-cutting motives of the Poor Law Unions (4s. 6d. per child per week, including clothing and care) created strong incentives for operators like Drouet to maximize profit by minimizing care. Despite inspections and reports, guardians often deferred to Drouet, even in the face of growing complaints.
3. Voices of children
The children themselves were often the most reliable witnesses—describing abuse, hunger, and illness in stark terms. Yet their testimonies were often undervalued until death made them unavoidable.
4. Inadequate oversight & conflicting reports
The lack of centralised enforcement, reliance on contradictory visiting reports, and bureaucratic inertia meant that warnings were repeatedly missed or ignored. Official responses were often reactive rather than preventative.
Inquest transcript
People involved (in order mentioned):
- Thomas Wakley, coroner
- KELLICK, girl at Tooting, from Chelsea Union, died of cholera, possibly Mary Killick
- Mr J. KELLICK, father of the above and another
- RIDGWAY, child at Tooting, died of cholera
- G. HARTLEY, boy at Tooting, died of cholera
- SARAH INGAR, girl at Tooting, died of cholera
- MARIA INGAR, mother of the above
- POLLINGTON, child at Tooting, died of cholera
- WILLIAM JAMES KITE, MRCS, surgeon
- WILLIAM HOME POPHAM, surgeon
- RICHARD DUGARD GRAINGER, surgeon, Board of Health inspector
- WILLIAM ROBERTS JAMES, solicitor and clerk, Holborn Union
- ANN SLIGHT, girl at Tooting
- ELIZA MANGLE, mother of children at Tooting
- WILLIAM BARKER, boy at Tooting, died of measles
- WILLIAM WINCH, Guardian, Holborn Union
- Mr W. REBBECK, Guardian, Holborn Union
- WILLIAM SHAW MAYES, Guardian, Holborn Union
- CARTHY, boy at Tooting [likely McCarthy]
- WILLIAM BENSON WHITFIELD, medical officer, Holborn Union
- Mr R. HALL, assistant Poor Law commissioner
- John BOSOMWORTH, potato dealer, Borough market
- Mr H. BOLDING, foreman to Mr Wilkinson, baker
- Mr J. GAIN, butcher
- SAMUEL BOWYER, corn dealer and mealman
- Mr MILLS, coroner, St Pancras
- Mr BAKER, coroner, Hackney
- JOSIAH JOSEPH COSTER, 5, child at Tooting, from St Pancras Union, died of cholera
- Mr M. GAHEY, clerk to the Board of Guardians, St Pancras Union
- Mr ROBINSON, medical officer, St Pancras Union
- Mr JOHNSON, medical officer, St Pancras Union
- J. WOODHOUSE, 14, boy at Tooting, from St Pancras Union
- MARGARET YARROW, 13, girl at Tooting, from St Pancras Union
- WILKINS, boy at Tooting, died of cholera, from Kensington Union
- WILKINS, 9, sister of the above, from Kensington Union
- Mr BLACKWELL, unknown role, possibly Kensington Union
- FANNY BAILEY, 14, girl at Tooting, from Kensington Union
- T. MILLS, 12, boy at Tooting, from Kensington Union
- J. THOMAS, 14, boy at Tooting, from Kensington Union
- Mr GOODRICH, unknown role, possibly Kensington Union
An inquest was opened on Monday by Mr WAKLEY, at Chelsea workhouse, on five children, named KELLICK, RIDGWAY, HARTLEY, INGAR and POLLINGTON, removed from Mr Drout's pauper establishment at Tooting, where they had died of cholera.
The first witness examined was J. KELLICK, an inmate of Chelsea workhouse. His statement was: That two of his children had been sent to Tooting about nine weeks back, when they were in perfect health.
He visited them first at Tooting about six weeks back, and then was more satisfied with their appearance than when in Chelsea workhouse. When he saw the children he was not allowed to see them in private. The children were sent out into the lodge to see him, and the porter and some other officers of the establishment were there.
He again saw them on his last monthly Sunday out, and then asked them if they had sufficient to eat there, and they answered "No." He took them down three allowances of pudding, which his wife had brought, and two allowances of bread and butter, and although the children had just had their dinner they were so hungry that they ate the whole of it. They said they did not get enough to eat there, and they wished they were at home, meaning back at the Chelsea Workhouse.
I did not (said witness) complain to the Chelsea guardians that my children had not enough to eat at Tooting. Had I done so I might have met with worse treatment than I have done. When I went the second time I found that as well as not having had enough to eat the younger one was eaten up with the itch. I was there last Sunday week, and then thought my children looked well; but that was the time they were dying.
On the following Thursday I received notice that my child was ill, and on going to Tooting the same day I found the deceased in one of the sick wards, and very sadly. I remained in the ward with her for two hours.
I have been down there several times since. I saw no medical gentleman attend upon my child or any other all the time I was there.
Mr KITE: Do you mean to say you never saw me?
WITNESS: Yes, I saw you and that gentleman (Mr. POPHAM), but not attending my child. I think there were about 15 children in the ward where my child was
CORONER: Did you ask to see the medical men about your child?
WITNESS: I did not. I am positive. I saw no medicine administered either by the nurses or the medical man. When I came back, I sent in a petition with four others to the board to say that we would find lodgings for our children in the parish, if the Guardians would let them come away from Tooting and find them in food. The answer was that the guardians had decided that the children should all remain in Tooting and it could not be allowed.
MARIA INGAR said she was the mother of the deceased, Sarah Ingar and saw her die at the Tooting Asylum at four o'clock on Saturday morning last after an illness of 24 hours. Deceased had been at Tooting about eight weeks, and on remarking that she looked very pale the last time she saw her, she complained that she was kept out in a cold yard.
BY THE CORONER: I saw her in the lodge but I had no opportunity of speaking to her in private.
I did not notice that she was scantily clothed except about the neck and shoulders. On Friday night, after she was taken ill, I asked her if she had sufficient food and she said, "No mother. I did not get food enough," and then she told me she had bought bread of one of the nurses, with some halfpence I had given her. On the Friday evening nothing was given her but brandy and water.
Mr. W.H. POPHAM, surgeon, deposed to having attended G. HARTLEY, one of the deceased and described his death as resulting from cholera. Witness was sent to the Tooting establishment, by the board of directors of the poor of St Pancras, at the suggestion of the Board of Health, to attend the boys belonging to the Parish. He saw also most of the other patients, as he went occasionally into all the other Wards as well as that in which the St Pancras children were placed.
Mr. POPHAM added, that amongst the facts which have gone forward before the public, Mr. GRAINGER, in his evidence given at the Free Hospital, stated that the patients had some lain five in a bed. He (Mr. POPHAM) had given Mr. GRAINGER that information under an erroneous impression that it was a fact, but he had subsequently ascertained that where he supposed that to be the case it was a fact that a board had been placed between two beds for the purpose of making an additional bed for a patient, which made it appear that five were in a bed.
The coroner then observed that the enquiry had now reached the point at which it would be necessary it should be adjourned. There would be two questions into which they would have to enquire. The first was as to how this calamity had originated. And secondly, as to the non-removal of the children belonging to Chelsea from Tooting, which would require to be most fully gone into.
Mr. WAKLEY added that it would be necessary that this inquest should be adjourned until after that held at the Free Hospital was concluded, so as to prevent the two clashing together. He proposed to take the Free Hospital inquest on Tuesday, and it would most probably be held on the following Tuesday.
He would therefore suggest that this enquiry should be adjourned until after that time, which was accordingly done.
On Tuesday, the inquest on the bodies of the poor children who died in the Free Hospital, Gray's Inn Road, was resumed before Mr. WAKLEY.
The first witness examined, was Mr. JAMES, clerk to the Board of Guardians of the Holborn Union. He stated the nature of the arrangements, entered into with Mr. Drouet, for the support of the parish children at his establishment. Mr. Drouet's terms were 4s. 6d. per week for each child, including clothing. As many as 211 children belonging to the Holborn union were eventually placed there.
Some of the Guardians thought that owing to the reduction in the price of provisions last summer, Mr. Drouet might reduce his charge to 4s. 3d., but, on suggesting it to him, he positively refused to do so.
He (witness) could not say there was any distinct contrast as to the dietary, but he knew of his own knowledge, that changes had been made in it on the suggestion of the visiting Guardians.
Witness held in his hand a report of the visiting Guardians, dated March 1848 in which they expressed themselves fully satisfied with the cleanliness and general condition of the children. These visits were monthly.
The witness then read several reports of the visiting Guardians, which were most favourable to the asylum. That of December 1847 reported the children extremely healthy, the exception being a few cases of measles.
That of January, 1848 was similar, and declared that the charge that ANN SLIGHT had had an insufficiency of food was unfounded. She was now in the Free Hospital. The report also said that there was no just cause for the complaint made by ELIZA MANGLE that she found her children in a dirty state.
The report of the 9th of February said, they were upwards of 1,100 children in the asylum in good health and spirits and bearing a cleanly and happy appearance. The food was good and the illness consisted of a few cases of whooping cough.
The March report spoke of a charge of neglect in the case of WILLIAM BARKER, who died; said that upon a post mortem examination he was declared to have died from measles and that the charge was unfounded.
The report of the 9th of May stated that the visiting Guardians were at the asylum during dinner and found the meat good. But the potatoes bad. They declared everything to be clean and comfortable in the school rooms, dormitories and work rooms. But in the new sleeping rooms for infants on the ground floor, they found a bad smell. The girls all looked well, but, observing the boys looking sickly, they were induced to question them as to the supply of food, and about 40 of them held up their hands intimating that it was insufficient.
Mr. Drouet's conduct thereupon became violent. He said the boys who did so were liars, that they were the worst boys in the school, and that if he did them justice, he would follow out the suggestion of Mr. JAMES and thrash them well.
Some of the boys complained of not having a sufficiency of bread for breakfast, on which Mr. Drouet's conduct became more violent. He said that they (the visitors) were acting unfairly, that they ought to be satisfied to rely upon his character, that they had no right to pursue inquiry after that fashion and that he would be glad to get rid of the children who complained. The report concluded by stating that the visitors left without completing their enquiry. They were Messrs W. WINCH, W. REBBECK and W.S. MAYES. Witness was not present.
On the 17th of May that report was referred by the board to a committee including the chairman and vice-chairman of the board who visited the asylum accompanied by Messrs WINCH, REBBECK and MAYES, and certified that they had examined the appearance in condition of the children etc. and were able to report most favourably thereof. They inspected the meat, bread and potatoes and were perfectly satisfied both as to the quantity and quality given to the children. In fact, they could not speak of the whole establishment otherwise than in terms of encomium and satisfaction. Regarding Mr. Drouet they stated that he expressed his great regret at the warmth of temper evinced by him in the presence of the visiting Guardians.
Not one of the children expressed any dissatisfaction, The Holborn children on being asked whether they were happy, answered "yes," the question being put in that manner. The majority said they had enough of food. At least twice as many as had previously expressed dissatisfaction.
The next report is dated July 11. The committee report that they found the children entering the dining-room. They inspected the food, consisting of meat and potatoes, and found it good. After dinner, inspected the children, and found them clean, and, with slight exceptions, healthy. They had the full glow of health and inward satisfaction on their countenances. [A laugh.]
We found the bedrooms clean; inspected the invalid wards, and found one case of small-pox; the other cases of sickness were trifling. We found that eight of the children were ready to take situations, and recommended them to the notice of the board.
The next report is that of August the 3rd; it found the children in a clean and healthy state, but complained of the supply of water in the boys’ lavatories as inadequate.
The report of the 11th Sept, finds the children clean and healthy; only seven cases of slight illness out of 1,200 children. The supply of water was ample in the lavatories, and changed every day. The children afflicted with ophthalmia were separated from the rest, and had their eyes washed by the nurses. Some boys who ranged from fourteen to sixteen years were recommended to be removed to the tailors’ and shoemakers’ workshops.
On the visit of October 11 the children were healthy, and their food appeared to be wholesome. Water was supplied in abundance from an artesian well, and there were cocks to supply hot and cold water. They visited the establishment at the early hour of eight o'clock in the morning, and saw the boys bathing and washing themselves; everything appeared most satisfactory.
The next report is dated 13th November. There were then 1,370 children in the asylum, all clean and healthy. Did not hear a single complaint.
9th December, 1848. Everything in a satisfactory condition. The guardians asked the children whether they would emigrate to Australia; only one of them, CARTHY, said yes.
Witness received the first notice of the outbreak of the cholera on the 2nd January. It was a note simply to the effect that the cholera was raging in the establishment, and that he (Mr Drouet) would make an official report as soon as he could. That was on Wednesday, the 3rd of January. At the board on Wednesday there was no explanation as to why earlier intimation was not afforded.
CORONER: What steps were then taken?
On Wednesday evening the board met, and the question was fully discussed. The medical officer was desired to proceed to Tooting the following morning, and examine the children. I had received a letter from Mr Drouet, in which he says, in speaking of the children, "They are worse and worse, and what to do I cannot tell. We have doctors and nurses in abundance: I will send the names this evening."
CORONER: Was there no explanation as to why there had not been earlier information?
No.
CORONER: Was any asked for?
I asked him repeatedly to give me a faithful acegunt of the names of the children who were attacked.
CORONER: Did he give it to you?
No. Mr WHITFIELD went and reported that a great number of the children were very bad, and that in his opinion a removal of all those who could be safely removed should immediately take place. This was on Thursday.
It was then arranged that some wards in the Royal Free Hospital which were vacant should be appropriated to their reception. I immediately got vans and removed all who were in a fit state from Tooting. This was on Friday, the 5th. 155 children were removed.
CORONER: How many were left behind in consequence of being ill?
It was stated that twenty-one were left, but there were thirty-seven in the first instance.
CORONER: How many are there now left alive out of the thirty-seven?
I am sorry to say there were only fifteen on Sunday last. Six are not accounted for, but it is supposed they went home to their parents. We used every exertion to bring away those who did belong to us, and not to bring those who did not belong to us.
I received an official list of the living on Monday, being filled up to the previous day. Mr Drouet called on me on Saturday, and said that the list was made out, but in his confusion he had come away without it. I have an account of sixteen deaths, while there are only fifteen remaining in the establishment. There are six unaccounted for. I have heard that two children left on the 31st December, probably taken out for a walk by their parents, and have not returned.
CORONER: Why did not Mr Drouet give earlier informtion?
He was not asked. If you had seen the reckless state of madness he was in, you would feel that it was utterly useless to put the question.
W. WINCH, member of the board of guardians of the Holborn Union, examined: I went with the committee to Tooting; the children were at dinner. They were all standing. I believe they never sit at meals. I cut up 100 potatoes, not one of which was fit to eat. These were served out to the boys. They were positively black and diseased.
I did not speak to the children, nor did I complain in their presence. I told Drouet the potatoes were very bad. His reply was that they had cost him 7£. a ton. They had no other vegetables. On his mentioning the price, I suggested other food. He made no reply.
We passed through the wards. I remarked to Mr Drouet that the newly-erected rooms smelt unhealthy. One of the committee (Mr MAY [likely Mr MAYES]) suggested that they should be a foot higher. Drouet said he should have enough to do if he minded everybody.
The sleeping-rooms looked clean. The girls were mustered and looked well, the boys very sickly. I am now speaking of the 9th May last. We asked the boys if they had any complaint of their food, and if they had, to hold up their hands. About thirty or forty held up their hands.
I selected one boy who seemed intelligent, for questions. Drouet became very violent, and said we were using him unfairly, and in an ungentlemanly manner. He called the boys liars and scoundrels, and said that the one I had selected was the worst in the school. He said his character was at stake, and if we had anything to say, that was not the way, and we ought to be satisfied with his word. [A laugh.]
The result of this was that I deemed it prudent to leave off inquiry. One boy said he had a short supply of bread, when Drouet said, "You had a good dinner to-day." The boy then said, " We have not bread enough either for breakfast or supper." I found that the printed dietary was one ounce less per meal than in the union.
Witness here read the report here drawn up, which was substantially the same as spoken evidence.
Evidence continued. I went again on the 30th of May, when everything assumed a different aspect. The potatoes were excellent. I was surprised to find that the bread was not weighed. It was cut indiscriminately into 16 pieces. I examined the meat. One thing struck me. I observed some of the boys with salt in a bag and they were bartering it with others for their potatoes. I ascertain that no salt was supplied to the boys. I did not examine any of the children as to whether they had been punished for what they had stated on the previous day. Our report of that visit expressed that the guardians were satisfied with the result of their inspection.
There is a peculiarity about our board that if one set of guardians report unfavourably, the next set are sure to report the contrary. I did not make any formal suggestion for the improvement of the dietary. Having been approved of by the commissioners, it would have been a difficult thing to interfere with. There were no means of ascertaining whether the conditions of the dietary were complied with. I saw the meat weighed. There can be no security on this point in similar establishments.
I did not consider that as a guardian I had any control over the dietary or clothing. I have been guardian only a year, and submitted myself to the more experienced guardians. I never went since May; but it so happened that it never came to my turn.
The calculated cost of maintaining children in the workhouse, including clothing, is 3s. 1d. per week. It has been as low as 2s. 6 1/2d. I think 4s. 6d. was ample payment. Ten or twelve shillings a year would clothe them as they are clad at Tooting. Mr Drouet keeps a tailor on the premises.
I did not object to the dietary, further than the potatoes. Mr Drouet said that, if we paid more, we might have them fed better. I heard that St George's in the East paid 5s. Mr Drouet promised to reduce to 4s. 8d. when provisions became cheaper.
Everything was better on the second day’s visit; but my impression was, that our visit was expected. Mr Drouet apologised. I don't think he had notice, but he would learn it in so many ways.
Mr R. HALL, one of the assistant poor-law commissioners, stated that he had occasionally inspected Mr Drouet’s establishment; about twice a year. He said: We represented to him that the school rooms were too small. We fixed the numbers to be not more than 400 for the large school-room, not more than 160 for the senior girl’s school, and not more than 120 for the junior girl’s school, and not more than 260 for the infant school.
I did not think that the atmosphere of the school was in a proper state at the time of our visit. It was too hot. I said so to Mr Drouet.
CORONER: Did you ever expostulate with Mr Drouet as to the crowding of his rooms?
Yes, in 1846 I found that the children were sleeping three in a bed, and I expostulated with him on the subject, informing him that in the unions only two in a bed were permitted. He promised to give the subject his attention, and to have the defect remedied.
My memorandum of my visit is, "School full; 1,065 in the institution; could accommodate 1,100; Holborn guardians have visited the establishment, and expressed themselves satisfied."
The children were variously employed, in tailoring, shoemaking, garden work, etc. I have no recollection of having examined the dietary. I consider the published dietary a fair dietary, provided fair quantities are given when not specified; there is no quantity fixed for supper.
I think that even during the cholera there was sufficient accommodation, provided proper arrangements were carried out. I had official authority to visit any establishment in which pauper children were lodged, but no power to alter its internal management.
CORONER: Was there ever any attempt made to supersede the necessity for these establishments?
The only attempt was the proposal to establish district schools, but the outcry against them was so general, that we were forced to abandon the idea. The nature of the connexion between these establishments and the Board was as unsatisfactory to the latter as it could be to the Coroner.
The remaining witnesses examined were those who supplied provisions to the establishment.
J. BOSOMWORTH, potato dealer, in the Borough market, had supplied Mr Drouet with potatoes for twenty-five years: Mr Drouet paid higher prices than the purveyors of the union. He always bought a good quantity of potatoes. I think it not unlikely that potatoes might be black in May, when they are going out. You can’t keep potatoes twelve months without their going black. Mr Drouet complained of the potatoes in May, and said I had got him into disgrace.
H. BOLDING, foreman to Mr Wilkinson, baker: We supply Mr Drouet with the same bread we sell in the shop. It is not full-priced bread. We do not send him two qualities. We supply his private table out of the same batch.
J. GAIN, butcher: My contract was to supply the best beef and mutton. Not the best parts; what we term a steak contract. We send sixty stone of beef three times a week, free from bone — the stone of 8 lbs.; five or six stone of mutton twice a week, besides one whole sheep; and three or four stone of legs and shins of beef three times a week. I supplied the wether at 4s. 6d.; the beef and fore-quarters at 4s. the stone; the legs and shins, 3d. per lb.
S. BOWYER, corn dealer and mealman: I supply Mr Drouet with flour and split peas. I sometimes sell him twenty-five and sometimes fifty sacks of flour, quality No. 2. The split peas are of the best quality. He paid the highest price.
The Coroner said he thought the ends of justice would be best answered by taking as the next witnesses the children who had been in the habit of sleeping with the four who had died.
Mr Drouet here interposed, and objected to the evidence of these children being taken.
The Coroner observed, that whenever he wanted to elicit the truth children were the best witnesses, but he was willing that the children at the hospital should be first taken if Mr Drouet wished it. Mr Drouet acceded to this arrangement, and the proceedings were adjourned until yesterday.
Simultaneous inquests have been before Mr MILLS in St Pancras and Mr BAKER at Hackney, but as there would necessarily be a great deal of repetition in the details of cases precisely similar, and involving the tame principle of examination, we have limited our report to the inquest held by Mr WAKLEY.
From the inquests, however, which were held on Thursday we make exception, for the purpose of illustrating the mode of treatment at Mr Drouet’s establishment as shown in evidence.
At an adjourned inquest on J. J. COSTER, aged five, one of the pauper children who died in St Pancras workhouse after his removal from Tooting, Mr M. GAHEY, clerk to the board of guardians, stated that the reports received from Surrey lodge were satisfactory until August, when, in consequence of a report of a boy who died having been ill-treated there, Messrs ROBINSON and JOHNSON, two medical officers, were deputed to make a personal inspection of the boys.
They did so, and found that several had wasted limbs, large abdomens, and suffered from debility, the results of bad or insufficient diet. Fifty-eight were so affected. It was also their opinion that the master was rather severe. The guardians communicated that to Mr Drouet, who promised that these things should not again occur, and that it would not be his fault if the boys did not in future look plump.
J. WOODHOUSE, aged fourteen, one of the boys from Tooting, deposed that he went with deceased and other boys to Tooting, where deceased and several others caught the itch. The nurse gave them and other boys who had sores on them some medicine, without their seeing the doctor.
They had not enough to eat. The master would knock down and beat the boys across the back with a stick until welds and sores were formed. Beat a boy and pulled the ears of others because they complained of insufficient food. Some boys ran away, and when brought back had their heads shaved as a punishment.
If he were sent back, he should like to got more food. He preferred the workhouse because he got more food there. Some of the boys eat the potato peelings out of the pig tub. Mr Drouet was opposed to the boys being beaten.
MARGARET YARROW, aged thirteen, also from Mr Drouet’s, said that they had not sufficient food or clothing. The bed-clothes were also insufficient. The mixed flour and arrow-root which they got for breakfast they could not use, so they only had dry bread for breakfast. They were allowed neither towels nor soap, and had to wipe their hands and faces on their pinafores. She much preferred the workhouse, for in it they had plenty to eat.
Other children confirmed these statements, and the jury returned the following verdict:
"We find that JOSIAH JOSEPH COSTER died from the virulent cholera, a disease occurring to him at a time when he was suffering from the effects of insufficient diet, defective warmth of clothing, and impure air, at Surrey House, Tooting; and the jury add to their verdict an expression of their regret that the directors of the poor of St Pancras did not bind Mr Drouet, the proprietor of Surrey Hall, to fulfil his duty to such a large number of children as they had confided to his care, under a written and a more definite contract than appears to be executed by them.
At the same time the jury most emphatically condemn the practice of farming pauper children in the houses of strangers, because the system engendered by it affords to unprincipled persons disastrous opportunities of defrauding the poor children of their proper food and clothing, in a manner that does not seem to become publicly apparent, nor to produce such adequate effects on the minds of the guardians as to lead them to the correction of the evils which inflict the most direful effects on the helpless population of such an establishment."
At an inquest held by Mr Wakley, at the Kensington workhouse, on the body of a boy named Wilkins, who died there after his removal from Tooting. After the evidence of the boy’s mother respecting his death, the coroner directed the daughter, nine years of age, to be brought into the inquest room. She was brought in in the arms of a nurse, wrapped in a blanket. On examining the child, the Coroner said he had never before seen such a bad case of itch; it was really frightful.
Mr Blackwell explained that the girls had been removed from the Tooting establishment ever since the 9th of November last, in consequence of the complaints of some of them that Mr Drouet’s brother had acted improperly towards them.
Fanny Bailey, aged fourteen, was a helper in the ward where the deceased was placed, in which there were generally sixty-five boys. The number of children in the establishment was 1,872, and out of these about 700 dined in the hall, and the others in other parts of the premises; some in the wards. She was always afraid to speak about Mr Drouet, or of what they had to eat, for fear of punishment. She never had enough to eat when she had her meals in the hall.
T. Mills, twelve years of age, stated that he was employed with another boy to scour out two of the attics, which were sleeping rooms. Sometimes they were done every morning, but generally once a week. They were each paid 2d. a week for doing so. There were twelve beds in one room, and thirteen beds in the other, and in each bed three boys slept. Never while at Tooting had enough to eat; was always hungry after his meals. A great many boys had run away from Drouet’s establishment.
CORONER: Tell us what you think made the children bad, and brought the cholera to Tooting.
WITNESS: Want of enough "grub." There were no water-closets to go to at night at Tooting, but two tubs were placed in each bed-room, which the boys used.
J. Thomas, a boy fourteen years old, was then brought in, and it being found that he had not been to school, and could not tell an E from an A when it was shown him in the room, the coroner would not swear him. He made the same statements as to the insufficiency of the food.
Mr Goodrich said the boy was very intelligent before he went to Tooting, but now he had lost all his animation, and appeared nearly a fool. He had visited the establishment in June or July last with some of the guardians, when he saw reasons to complain of the overcrowding of the children in both the bed-rooms and the school-room. He also tasted the soup, and found it different to that made in St George’s workhouse, there being no fibre of meat in it.
He therefore refused, on leaving, to write anything in the book, and on the way home he impressed on the guardians the necessity for taking the children home, but the new workhouse not being ready, it could not be done.
After some further evidence the Coroner summed up, and the jury returned a verdict:
"That the deceased child had died from the mortal effects of exhaustion consequent upon fever supervening on an attack of malignant cholera."
The foreman said that the jury unanimously considered that, in returning a verdict in accordance with the medical testimony, they should only do right in coupling with it their opinion that the attack of cholera produced at Tooting proceeded from the insufficiency of food and warm clothing, and the want of proper ventilation in Mr Drouet's establishment.
The verdict from the inquest did not in itself punish Drouet - it was more a preliminary before the formal trial which was to come next.