Following on from the last blogpost, opposition to the existence of the Spinning House pre-dated the death of Elizabeth Howe at those premises – to all intents and purposes little short of corporate manslaughter on the part of the University, and quite possibly contempt of The Coroner’s Court by the Rev W.T. Kingsley of Sidney Sussex and Cambridge University.
Below: the much-hated Spinning House on Regent Street – demolished in the early 1900s to make way for the old police and fire station. Plans are afoot to turn the site into a boutique hotel.
This article below from the British Newspaper Archive reads as an opinion piece in the Cambridge General Advertiser from 02 Sept 1840.
“We were last week unable to fulfil our promise of entering into an examination of the three schemes proposed for the future appropriation of the revenues of Hobson’s Charity. We now, however proceed to do so.
“The scheme proposed by the University is. in substance, that the Spinning-house should continue to be used as a prison for incontinent women committed there by the Vice-Chancellor, in the exercise of the extensive functions vested in him by the University Charters. a more systematic classification being made of the inmates, and a more regular provision being established for their religious instruction (now, if we mistake not. entirely neglected ).
“The University also propose to defray (as that body has hitherto done) the maintenance of, and medical attendance upon, these unfortunate women; but the salary of the Governor, and the taxes, repairs, and insurance of the house (amounting altogether to about £140. per annum), are to be charged upon the Trust funds. After setting aside a sum for gradually replacing the stock bequeathed by Mr. BOWTELL, the University consider there will be a disposable balance of £75 per annum, to be employed for the benefit of the other objects of the Trust; but how, or in what way, does not appear.
“Comment upon this most monstrous scheme can hardly be requisite. The Charity was founded by Hobson, from his earnest and fervent wish to do good to the poor, and yet it is gravely proposed to appropriate the greater part of the funds to the maintenance of a University prison. The Corporation propose that the Spinning-house should be a prison for loose women committed by the Vice-Chancellor or by the Town Magistrates!!!
That the Trustees should fix the salaries of the Governor, Matron, Chaplain, and Surgeon, to be paid (with the maintenance of the prisoners) by the University. The inmates to be employed at some useful work, the profits of which are to go towards payment of officers’ salaries, and in augmentation of the Trust funds. It is further proposed that alterations and additions should be made to the Spinning-house; the rest of the Cambridge Estate being sold towards defraying the expence!!! After freeing the Trust estate from all incumbrances, the clear yearly income is proposed to be applied in apprenticing poor boys and girls,—no premium exceeding £15.
“The appropriation of the Spinning-house to the purposes of a prison for loose women appears to us a gross misapplication of the Charity funds, for we cannot believe any such purposes were ever contemplated by HOBSON.
“In short, the Corporation scheme seems to us quite as objectionable as that of the University except so far as it would compel the latter body to pay the salaries of officers as well as the maintenance of the parties imprisoned.
“The Relators propose that the Spinning. house should be converted into a hospital, to be called HOBSON’S Hospital. to be inhabited by a master (being a person who has moved in a respectable station of society, but become reduced by unavoidable misfortune), five almsmen and five almswomen, and that the net revenues should be applied to their support, after appropriating £30 per annum for apprenticing poor children.
“Taking into consideration that all parties admit that the provisions of Hobson’s Trust Deed cannot be literally carried into effect, it appears to us that the Relators’ scheme is calculated to effectuate its spirit,—in other words, it appears to us the scheme calculated to do most good to the poor.
“Nor can we hesitate to believe that, if old Hobson were yet living, this is the scheme that he would prefer,—nay, that he would shrink with disgust from those who seek to apply his bounty to the purposes of a University prison, or rather a Lock hospital.
“We have not entered into the details of the schemes proposed by the Corporation and the Relators, both of which appear to contain some wholesome provisions for the regulation of the estates, the inspection of the accounts, &c.; but there is one particular in which they disagree, and which we cannot help noticing.
“The Relators propose that the Town Trustees shall not be chosen from amongst the Members of the Council, (and this proposal is in consonance with the spirit of the Municipal Act). The Corporation, on the other hand, expressly require that these Trustees shall be Members of the Council, or persons qualified as such. This variance displays a grasping love of power on the part of the Municipal body, which is to us perfectly odious.
“We trust that some Member of the Council will not allow this important business to remain stationary much longer. There are circumstances which appear to us to call for prompt and immediate attention. Why, at any rate, should not an attempt be made to obtain the co-operation of all parties in a scheme which would be really beneficial to the town? We may again notice this subject, and shall certainly do so unless we find it taken up in a proper manner by those who are the legitimate guardians of the rights and interests of the town.”
Lost Cambridge 