Now! Then! 2024! - Yorkshire On This Day

Excerpt

Full content pending custom excerpt:

A public meeting, which was numerously attended, was held at the Court-house, Leeds, on Monday evening last, for the purpose of aiding the voluntary attempt now making throughout the manufacturing districts for raising money sufficient to secure the liberation of Mr. Richard Oastler from the Queen’s prison, and provide him with an annuity for the remainder of his life.

Mr. Cawood, a highly-respectable iron-founder in Leeds, was called to the chair, and there were present Mr. W.B. Ferrand, M.P., and several of the members of the Leeds Town Council, and extensive manufacturers of the town and neighbourhood.

All the speakers dwelt with admiration upon the noble efforts which Mr. Oastler had made in the cause of humanity, by his energetic and zealous support of the rights of labour, and especially of the protection of factory children, and of his searching examination of the working of the New Poor Law Bill, and his powerful denunciation of that cruel and injust law.

W.B. FERRAND, M.P., made a forcible speech, in the course of which he gave the following instance of the cruelties to use no harsher term perpetrated by the New Poor Law. He said that he had that day, in his capacity as a magistrate of the West Riding, attended a coroner’s inquest, sitting upon the body of a woman who was only one more victim to that infernal law. It appeared that four months ago a poor woman, of the name of Martha Robinson, 70 years of age, along with her daughter, who was the mother of two children, the youngest of whom was only two months old, was released from the union workhouse at Bradford, on condition that they would all live on three shillings a week. (Cries of “Shame!”) They had been accustomed to freedom, and the enjoyment of the light of heaven, and to mingle amongst friends and acquaintances, and they cheerfully accepted the boon offered them, and settled down in an hovel at Harden-beck, near Bingley. They belonged to Wilsden township, and lived beyond the boundary but some few yards. They continued to receive the relief every Monday morning from the relieving officer, who lived six miles from the place, and had to attend to the poor of six different townships, having altogether 1,150 persons to attend to. (Cries of “Shame!”) The daughter of this poor woman told the relieving officer soon after they had gone to this place that they were very badly off, and that 3s. a week was far too little for them to live upon. After this the board of guardians at Bradford, in their mercy, granted 6d. a week more; so that this family of four persons had but 3s. 6d. a week for them all to exist upon – a sum scarcely sufficient, after the – payment ef rent and coals, to keep soul and body together for two days. The daughter was half an idiot, not capable of earning her daily bread; she applied to the relieving officer for more assistance, but he turned a deaf ear to her application, saying that the board were his masters, and he had no power to relieve her. The guardian of Wilsden passed by this woman’s dwelling when her mother was dying without a bed to lie on; she called on him to come and see the state they were in, but he rode by. (Cries of “Shame, shame!” and deep sensation.) On Monday last, she applied once more to the relieving officer, and asked him to come to her house and see her mother. He replied that he had no authority to go to the house, or to grant even so much as 6d. more relief, but they might move themselves to the workhouse at Bradford. She replied, “What’s the use of removing a dying mother to the workhouse!” (Hear, hear.) She asked him for relief; but he said he could not give it. He said she was to go to the relieving officer of Bingley,who lived about a mile from the place where the poor woman was dying; and that relieving officer had excused himself that day before him (MIr. Ferrand) for not going to see the poor woman by saying that he had sufficient to do in relieving the poor of his own district and finding his way home after dark at night. (Cries of “Shame, shame!”) This half-idiot, having been refused relief at her own township, thought it useless ro apply to Bingley. On Tuesday morning last several of the neighbours went into the house and found the poor aged mother lying upon an old dirty loom, wrapped in an old sheet or two, giving up her soul to her Maker and not an atom of food or fire in the house, and her daughter going about to seek for neighbours to do that which her native town refused to do. (Cries of “Shame, shame!”) For a month Wilsden had been without a medical man in the town, and the last medical man there advertised his pill-boxes for sale. These relieving-officers and poor law boards only acted according to law, and as they were amenable to the regulations of the Poor Law Commissioners in London. The coroner’s jury had that day ainst their own consciences, returned a verdict, that “the death of the deceased had resulted from natural causes, accelerated by the want of the common necessaries of life.” [A voice.-“It ought to have been a verdict of murder.”] Residing at some few miles’ distance from the poor creature’s dwelling, he did not know anything of the case till he was asked, as a magistrate, to use his public authority that an inquest might be held on the body. He asked if it were possible even for the Christian religion to be inculcated on our countrymen, or the laws to be enforced, if such cruel oppressions as those inflicted under the New Poor Law were to be allowed to go on? (Hear, hear.) They were Englishmen, living under a Christian dipensation, told by every page in the Holy Bible to feel for and pity the poor; and to whom were those poor to apply for succour and comfort! Richard Oastler, who was now in prison, had always faithfully opposed the New Poor Law, and shown that it was contrary to the spirit of the British Constitution. He asked them, therefore, to unite cordially and unianimonsly to obtain the release of Richard Oastler, that he might exert his energies to raise the public voice against an act that was a disgrace to a Christian land. Although the law cleared the Poor Law officers, he declared emphatically in the face of that numerous and highly respectable meeting, that the New Poor Law had been guilty of the manslaughter of that woman.

Several resolutions were agreed to in promotion of the “Oastler Liberty Fund,” and various subscriptions, including one of 100l., from Mr. Wood, of the firm of Wood and Walker, of Bradford, were announced; and the meeting separated at half-past 10 o’clock in the evening, having been occupied for upwards of three hours.

Comment

Comment

3 shillings is about £19.50 at 2020 prices.

Something to say? Get in touch

Original

A public meeting, which was numerously attended, was held at the Court-house, Leeds, on Monday evening last, for the purpose of aiding the voluntary attempt now making throughout the manufacturing districts for raising money sufficient to secure the liberation of Mr. Richard Oastler from the Queen’s prison, and provide him with an annuity for the remainder of his life.

Mr. Cawood, a highly-respectable iron-founder in Leeds, was called to the chair, and there were present Mr. W.B. Ferrand, M.P., and several of the members of the Leeds Town Council, and extensive manufacturers of the town and neighbourhood.

All the speakers dwelt with admiration upon the noble efforts which Mr. Oastler had made in the cause of humanity, by his energetic and zealous support of the rights of labour, and especially of the protection of factory children, and of his searching examination of the working of the New Poor Law Bill, and his powerful denunciation of that cruel and injust law.

W.B. FERRAND, M.P., made a forcible speech, in the course of which he gave the following instance of the cruelties to use no harsher term perpetrated by the New Poor Law. He said that he had that day, in his capacity as a magistrate of the West Riding, attended a coroner’s inquest, sitting upon the body of a woman who was only one more victim to that infernal law. It appeared that four months ago a poor woman, of the name of Martha Robinson, 70 years of age, along with her daughter, who was the mother of two children, the youngest of whom was only two months old, was released from the union workhouse at Bradford, on condition that they would all live on three shillings a week. (Cries of “Shame!”) They had been accustomed to freedom, and the enjoyment of the light of heaven, and to mingle amongst friends and acquaintances, and they cheerfully accepted the boon offered them, and settled down in an hovel at Harden-beck, near Bingley. They belonged to Wilsden township, and lived beyond the boundary but some few yards. They continued to receive the relief every Monday morning from the relieving officer, who lived six miles from the place, and had to attend to the poor of six different townships, having altogether 1,150 persons to attend to. (Cries of “Shame!”) The daughter of this poor woman told the relieving officer soon after they had gone to this place that they were very badly off, and that 3s. a week was far too little for them to live upon. After this the board of guardians at Bradford, in their mercy, granted 6d. a week more; so that this family of four persons had but 3s. 6d. a week for them all to exist upon – a sum scarcely sufficient, after the – payment ef rent and coals, to keep soul and body together for two days. The daughter was half an idiot, not capable of earning her daily bread; she applied to the relieving officer for more assistance, but he turned a deaf ear to her application, saying that the board were his masters, and he had no power to relieve her. The guardian of Wilsden passed by this woman’s dwelling when her mother was dying without a bed to lie on; she called on him to come and see the state they were in, but he rode by. (Cries of “Shame, shame!” and deep sensation.) On Monday last, she applied once more to the relieving officer, and asked him to come to her house and see her mother. He replied that he had no authority to go to the house, or to grant even so much as 6d. more relief, but they might move themselves to the workhouse at Bradford. She replied, “What’s the use of removing a dying mother to the workhouse!” (Hear, hear.) She asked him for relief; but he said he could not give it. He said she was to go to the relieving officer of Bingley,who lived about a mile from the place where the poor woman was dying; and that relieving officer had excused himself that day before him (MIr. Ferrand) for not going to see the poor woman by saying that he had sufficient to do in relieving the poor of his own district and finding his way home after dark at night. (Cries of “Shame, shame!”) This half-idiot, having been refused relief at her own township, thought it useless ro apply to Bingley. On Tuesday morning last several of the neighbours went into the house and found the poor aged mother lying upon an old dirty loom, wrapped in an old sheet or two, giving up her soul to her Maker and not an atom of food or fire in the house, and her daughter going about to seek for neighbours to do that which her native town refused to do. (Cries of “Shame, shame!”) For a month Wilsden had been without a medical man in the town, and the last medical man there advertised his pill-boxes for sale. These relieving-officers and poor law boards only acted according to law, and as they were amenable to the regulations of the Poor Law Commissioners in London. The coroner’s jury had that day ainst their own consciences, returned a verdict, that “the death of the deceased had resulted from natural causes, accelerated by the want of the common necessaries of life.” [A voice.-“It ought to have been a verdict of murder.”] Residing at some few miles’ distance from the poor creature’s dwelling, he did not know anything of the case till he was asked, as a magistrate, to use his public authority that an inquest might be held on the body. He asked if it were possible even for the Christian religion to be inculcated on our countrymen, or the laws to be enforced, if such cruel oppressions as those inflicted under the New Poor Law were to be allowed to go on? (Hear, hear.) They were Englishmen, living under a Christian dipensation, told by every page in the Holy Bible to feel for and pity the poor; and to whom were those poor to apply for succour and comfort! Richard Oastler, who was now in prison, had always faithfully opposed the New Poor Law, and shown that it was contrary to the spirit of the British Constitution. He asked them, therefore, to unite cordially and unianimonsly to obtain the release of Richard Oastler, that he might exert his energies to raise the public voice against an act that was a disgrace to a Christian land. Although the law cleared the Poor Law officers, he declared emphatically in the face of that numerous and highly respectable meeting, that the New Poor Law had been guilty of the manslaughter of that woman.

Several resolutions were agreed to in promotion of the “Oastler Liberty Fund,” and various subscriptions, including one of 100l., from Mr. Wood, of the firm of Wood and Walker, of Bradford, were announced; and the meeting separated at half-past 10 o’clock in the evening, having been occupied for upwards of three hours.

1202 words.

Tags

Tags are assigned inclusively on the basis of an entry’s original text and any comment. You may find this confusing if you only read an entry excerpt.

• 📌Bingley (10), market town on the River Aire and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal six miles northwest of Bradford in the West Riding ·
• Board of guardians (1) ·
• 📌Bradford (72) ·
• Conservative Party (1834-) (22) ·
• Harden Beck (1) ·
• Oastler, Richard (1789-1861) (3), "the Factory King," was a "Tory radical," an opponent of Catholic Emancipation and Parliamentary Reform, but also an abolitionist and opponent of the New Poor Law of 1834, and at the heart of the campaign for a ten-hour working day in its early years ·
• Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 (4) ·
• Poor relief (4) ·
• Tory radicalism (6) ·
• West Riding of Yorkshire (147) ·
• Whigs (1678-1859) (21), political faction and, later, party, supported parliamentarism, various forms of elite liberalism, manufacturing interests, opposed Catholic emancipation, succeeded by the Liberal Party ·
• William Ferrand (1) ·
• Wilsden (5) ·
• Workhouse (3) ·

All tags.

Similar

• 29 September 1830: Tory Radical Richard Oastler writes that “free” white workers in the Bradford mills are worse off than their enslaved black counterparts in the colonies
• 3 July 1643: The Royalists take Bradford after the Second Siege, but are warned off massacring the inhabitants by a ghost
• 23 April 1832: “Pilgrims” arrive at Leeds on Easter Monday on their way to York to hear Richard Oastler call for a 10-hour working day for mill children
• 17 June 1830: Prophet John Wroe exorcises the epileptic daughter of a Bradford wool-sorter
• 30 May 1835: Alfred Austin, future poet laureate, “Banjo-Byron that twangs the strum-strum,” is born into rural splendour at Ashwood, 48 Headingley Lane, Leeds
• 17 July 1844: Tory Radical Joshua Hobson tells Leeds council that Liberal mayor Hamer Stansfield was wrong to prohibit public meetings on the semi-privatised Kirkgate market
• 18 March 1650: Dorothy Rodes of Bowling (Bradford) blames witchcraft by Mary Sykes for the postpartum illness of her daughter
• 2 May 1844: The Bradford Observer reports a 10% increase in two years in the borough’s population
• 14 December 1832: On election day following passage of the Reform Act, the magistrate Thomas Bosville has troops fire on radical rioters outside the Tontine Inn, Sheffield, killing five
• 16 August 1819: James Lees of Saddleworth (WR/GM) attends a public meeting in favour of male suffrage at St Peter’s Square, Manchester – Peterloo