THIRTIETH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE VESTRY OF THE PARISH OF ST. JAMES AND ST. JOHN, CLERKENWELL, FOR THE YEAR 1885-6. Presented pursuant to the 198th Section of the Metropolis Local Management Act, 18th and 19th Vict., cap. 120. LONDON: W. J. GOODE, PRINTER, 23, ST. JOHN'S LANE, CLERKENWELL. 1887. INDEX. PAGE. Report of the Vestry 5 Annual Statement of Accounts 29 Summary Statement of Contracts 41 Report of Committee of Works on Wharf Operations 43 Report of Surveyor 49 Report of Medical Officer of Health 57 Reports of Analyst and Inspectors 71 List of Vestrymen and Committees 83 List of Officers 88 APPENDICES. No. 1.—Poor Rate Accounts 89 No. 2.—Evidence of the Vestry Clerk before the Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes 107 No. 2.—Report of Mr. D. Cubitt Nichols on the Sanitary Condition of the Parish of Clerkenwell 159 REPORT OF THE VESTRY For the Year ended 25th March, 1886. Pursuant to the 198th Section of the Metropolis Local Management Act, 1855, the Vestry of the Parish of St. James and St. John, Clerkenwell, beg to present the following Report of their proceedings under the above the other Acts which are administered by them, CORRIGENDA. Page 27, line 20, for "1886-7" read "1886-7." Page 81, Case C, 1.48, For adjudication" read "Defendant left before issue of summons." Page 81, Case C, 1.46, for "For adjundication" read "Fined 40s. and costs. Page 81, Question 17,813, insert "been" after "has" in second line. Pagr 105, last line but 3, for "answered" read "answering." Page 158, line 7, for "included" read "answering." Page 158, line 18, for "your" you." The General Pate for the second half-year was 2d. lower than it would otherwise have been, in consequence of a sum of £2,267 received from the North Metropolitan Tramways Co. for paving taken to by them in Clerkenwell Road, REPORT OF THE VESTRY For the Year ended 25th March, 1886. Pursuant to the 198th Section of the Metropolis Local Management Act, 1855, the Vestry of the Parish of St. James and St. John, Clerkenwell, beg to present the following Report of their proceedings under the above Act, and the other Acts which are administered by them, during the year ended on the 25th March, 1886. Rates.—During the year the Rates made by the A estry were as follows:— For the half-year to Michaelmas, 1885. A Poor Rate of 1s. 5d. in the £, estimated to realize nett £22,185 A Metropolitan Consolidated 3d. ” ” „ 3.915 A Sewer Rate 2d. ” ” ” 2,610 A General ” 1s. 0d. ” ” „ 15,660 2s. 10d. £44,370 For the half-year to Lady-day, 1886. A Poor Rate of 1s. 3d. in the £, estimated to realize £19,725 A Metropolitan Consolidated ” 4d. ” ” ” 5,260 A Lighting „ 2d. „ „ „ 2,630 A General „ 10d. ” ” ” 13,150 2s. 7d. £40,765 The General Rate for the second half-year was 2d. lower than it would otherwise have been, in consequence of a sum of £2,267 received from the North Metropolitan Tramways Co. for paving taken to by them in Clerkenwell Road, 6 The rates made in April, for the half-year to Michaelmas, were based upon a rateable value of £343,505, and those for the half-year to Lady-day, upon a rateable value of £343,696. The amounts required by the Guardians of the Holborn Union were £24,036 in the first, and £20,520 in the second half-year, towards which the Parish of Clerkenwell received from the Common Poor Fund £4,769 1s. 5d. and £5,938 12s. 2d. in the first and second half-years respectively. The precept of the Metropolitan Board of Works for the year was for the sum of £10,310 14s. 0d. and that of the School Board of £11,999 1s. 10d. The Police precepts for the year amounted to £7,004 18s. 4d. It will thus be seen that of the £87,402 raised during the year, the sum of £63,163 was required by bodies beyond the control of the Vestry. Valuation List.-The past year was that in which it was the duty of the Vestry to make a new Valuation of the rateable hereditaments of the Parish, under the provisions of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. The net result of this Valuation has been to raise the total rateable value from £343,505 to £350,380. The assessment of the Metropolitan Railway's, the Gas Light and Coke Company's, and the New River Company's works, were placed in the hands of professional valuers, Messrs. Castle & Son, the result being that the rateable value of the Railway was raised £4,809,from £22,000 to £26,809; that of the Gas Co. £959,from £8,458 to £9,417; while, in consequence of the operation of Torrens' Act, making the rateable value the basis of charge for water rates, the rateable value of the New River Company's works has been reduced, on appeal to the Assessment Sessions, from £11,116 to £11,074, a reduction of ,£42. 7 In connection with the Quinquennial Valuation, an important question has been decided, affecting not only this Parish, but every Parish in the country, viz., that of the assessment of the Board Schools. Notices of objection were given by the School Board, claiming reductions in the value of all their schools in the Parish, as follows:— Ann Street from £1264 to £300 gross. Bowling Green Lane „ £500 to £200 „ Penton Grove „ £512 to £150 „ Risinghill Street „ £796 to £300 „ Eagle Court „ £450 to £200 „ Winchester Street „ £785 to £350 „ Compton Street „ £1200 to £350 „ £5507 £1850 and that the several rateable values be reduced accordingly. When these Appeals came on before the Union Assessment Committee, it appeared that the School Board contemplated carrying a case to the Court of Queen's Bench to settle the question as to the principle upon which these schools should be assessed. The present assessments were therefore confirmed, subject to the decision of the Court. The School Board therefore took a case in Shoreditch as a test case, and in the Queen's Bench Division, on the 22nd December, their appeal against a decision of the Assessment Sessions was heard, as to the principle to be adopted in assessing Board Schools. The Assessment Committee of Shoreditch had assessed the Schools in St. John's Road, Hoxton, upon the usual principle of 4 per cent. on the value of the land, and 5 per cent. on the cost of the buildings, a principle which was upheld by the Assessment Sessions. A case for the decision of the Queen's Bench Division was thereupon stated, the School Board contending that in 8 mating the rent which the premises would fetch, they should not be included among the possible tenants, and that the premises should be rated at a sum which a hypothetical tenant might be willing to give; and also that, even supposing the rent represented by a percentage of the cost were paid by the Board to a landlord, such sum did not represent the rateable value, as the premises were incapable of beneficial occupation in the hands of the Board. The Court, however, decided that, in estimating the value, the School Board should not be excluded from the list of hypothetical tenants, and that, in the absence of more precise methods for ascertaining the gross and rateable value, that of taking a percentage on the cost was a reasonable and fair one, and the order of the Sessions was upheld. The School Board then carried the question to tho Court of Appeal, who confirmed the decision of the Court below. It will be seen that as the Board Schools in the Parish are rated at between £5000 and £6000, the question is one of considerable importance and interest to this Parish. Taxation of Ground Rents.-The Vestry passed a resolution in December, 1885, expressing the opinion that powers should be obtained to rate the ground rents of London in aid of the Metropolitan Consolidated Rate and the local Sewer Bates, and presented a Memorial to the Government to effect this object. Artizans' Dwellings Acts, 1868—1882—It was stated in the last Annual Report that with regard to two areas in the Parish—Bolton Court, and some obstructive buildings in St. John's Square in connection with the Bishop's Court area—the owners had called upon the Vestry to purchase their interests, which claims were under consideration. In regard to the latter, proceedings have been abandoned owing 9 to informality, but in regard to Bolton Court, the owner submitted his claim to the Vestry, which was not acceded to, and an Arbitrator, Mr. E. C. Driver, was appointed by the Local Government Board to adjudicate upon the matter, and his award was received by the Vestry on the 25th March. This closed the proceedings so far as the year now under view is concerned. While on this subject, a short resume of an Act passed in the Session of 1885, the Housing of the Working Classes Act, so far as it concerns this Parish, may not be out of place. The first part of the Act provides for the adoption of the Labouring Classes Lodging Houses Acts, 1851 to 1867, by the Commissioners of Sewers for the City, and by the Metropolitan Board of Works for the rest of the Metropolis, subject to the approval of the Home Secretary. These Acts give power to Town Councils and Local Boards to provide lodging houses for the working classes, and to borrow money for the purpose from the Public Works Loan Commissioners for a period of forty years. The expenses are to be defrayed out of the Dwelling House Improvement Fund, under the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Improvement Act, 1875; and power is given to the Treasury to sell the sites of Millbank and Pentonville Penitentiaries, and to the Middlesex Magistrates to sell the sites of Coldbath Fields Prison or the House of Detention, to the Metropolitan Board of Works, at a fair market price. Clause 11 appears to define the market price to be the best that can reasonably be obtained, having regard to the purpose to which the land is to be applied. An important amendment is made in Torrens' Acts by clause 4, which takes away the power of an owner, who has been called upon to execute works, or to demolish any premises, to require the local authority to purchase such premises. 10 Another important provision is made by clause 5. This clause provides that where a difference of opinion exists between the Metropolitan Board of Works and a Vestry or District Board as to whether an area should be dealt with under Torrens' Acts or Cross's Acts, or in other words, whether the Vestry or the Metropolitan Board of Works should carry out the work, an arbitrator may be appointed by the Home Secretary to hold an enquiry, and to report upon the question. Power is also given to such arbitrator to report that in the event of the area being dealt with by the Vestry under Torrens' Acts, the Metropolitan Board of Works ought to contribute towards the expense. After receiving the arbitrator's report, the Home Secretary may decide under which Acts the case is to be dealt with. It also provides that where an arbitrator, under Cross's Act, has determined the amount of compensation, no appeal from his decision to a jury shall be made without the consent of the High Court of Justice. Power is given to the Public Works Loan Commissioners to grant loans for the execution of the various Artizans' Dwellings Acts, at a minimum rate of 31/8 per cent. This power, however, ceases in 1888. Clause 7 is somewhat vague. It purposes to lay down the general duty of a local authority to put in force the laws relating to public health and local government, with which it is invested, "as occasion may arise," but is very general in its terms, and seems an odd mixture of permissive and compulsory legislation. Clause 9 extends the provisions of the Sanitary Act, 1866, to tents and vans used for human habitation, and provides for their inspection by the Sanitary authority. Clause 12 states that in any contract, made after the passing of the Act, for letting for habitation by persons of 11 the working classes a house or part of a house, there shall be implied a condition that the house is, at the commencement of the holding, in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation, and the operation of the clause is confined to the letting of a house or part of a house at a rent, in London, not exceeding £20 per annum. Demolition of Prisons.-With regard to the removal of the House of Detention and the Cold Bath Fields Prison, the Vestry are strongly of opinion that some portion at least of each of these sites should be retained as an open space, and they therefore strongly urged this point on the Metropolitan Board of Works, so that it might be kept in view if negociations were opened for the acquisition of the sites by that Board. In February last, the Vestry appointed a Deputation to wait upon the Home Secretary to urge the immediate demolition of the Prisons. The Home Secretary, however, declined to receive the Deputation, stating that the matter was under his consideration. The Vestry therefore again wrote to the Home Secretary, urging a reconsideration of the price (£180,000) at present asked by the Government for the site, it being, in the opinion of the Vestry, altogether prohibitory. A question upon the matter was also put to the Home Secretary, by Mr. Howard Spensley, M.P., at the request of the Vestry, which was answered by the Under Secretary, Mr. Broadhurst, in the following terms: "My hon. friend appears to think that these prisons are at my "disposal, and that I have only to order them to be pulled down. 'This is not the case. My first duty was to offer to reconvey them "to the County authorities. A few days ago I received their final "refusal. It is now my business to sell them on the best terms I "can, and the statute prescribes what shall be done with the "proceeds. Negociations for their sale are now proceeding. "Considering the many interests involved, I cannot precipitate my "action, but I will tell my hon. friend when the sale is effected." 12 The matter was at this stage at the close of the period to which this report relates. Green Terrace Site for Board School.—In August, 1885, the Vestry found that, notwithstanding the great opposition which had been shown to the retention of the Green Terrace Site by the School Board, and the action of the School Board itself, referred to in the last report, in making application to the Education Department to abandon the site, and to select a site south of Exmouth Street, or to reconstruct and enlarge the Bowling Green Lane School, there was an evident determination on the part of certain Members of the School Board to retain the site if possible. The Vestry therefore, with a Deputation of the inhabitants, again waited upon the Education Department and again presented a Memorial upon the subject, and were received by Sir Henry Holland, Bart., M.P., when he stated that he would do what he could, but that until the School Board took action to provide another site, the Department was almost powerless in the matter. The Vstry, however, are pleased to say that on the 24th November they received a letter from the Department announcing the abandonment of the site, the Waterloo Place site, adjoining Bowling Green Lane School, being substituted for it. Colney Hatch Lane, Muswell Hill.-With reference to the statement in the last report that it was understood the Metropolitan Board of Works have come to an arrangement with the Friern Barnet Local Board to take the drainage of the houses in Colney Hatch Lane belonging to this Parish, the Vstry regret that this arrangement appears to have fallen through. The Metropolitan Board of Works made a suggestion to the Friern Bar.net Local Board, which was to the effect that that body should admit into its system of drainage the sewage of the out-lying portion of Clerkenwell 13 upon condition of the Metropolitan Board making an annual contribution, based on the rateable value of the outlying area, it appearing to the Board that this was the best and most practicable method of providing for the drainage of the area referred to. The Board, however, received a reply to the effect that the Friern Barnet Local Board was not then in a position to enter into an arrangement for dealing with such sewage, and afterwards a further letter was received inquiring whether the Board would consent to the Local Board taking over the detached portion of Clerkenwell for all purposes. A similar letter was also received from the Friern Barnet Local Board by the Vestry. Upon an order to that effect being made by the Local Government Board the out-lying district would cease to form part of Clerkenwell, and would thenceforth form part of the parish of Friern Barnet, and it would at the same time cease to form part of the Metropolis as defined by the Metropolis Local Management Act. The Metropolitan Board, before expressing any opinion upon the point to the Friern Barnet Local Board, invited the Vestry's opinion upon the matter. The Vestry gave careful consideration to the subject, and found that the rates at present derived from the district amount to about £250 per annum, and making an allowance of £100 per annum for charges of maintenance of roadway, lighting, &c., a net contribution of £150 per annum is made to the rates, which will be increased in the future, as the place becomes more developed for building purposes. Having regard to all the interests concerned, the Vestry deemed it inexpedient to accede to the proposal. 14 It is understood that the Metropolitan Board of Works are in communication with the Hornsey Local Board, with the view to the latter Board admitting the drainage into their system. Subsidence of Metropolitan Railway Tunnel.—Considerable alarm was occasioned in December last by the subsidence of the Tunnel of the Metropolitan Railway in Euston Road, in the adjoining Parish of St. Pancras. A Board of Trade Officer being appointed to inspect same, the Vestry asked that such inspection might be continued through so much of the Tunnel as is in this Parish. The Inspector's Report was forwarded to the Vestry early in January, and contained a statement that the tunnels which carry both the old main lines, and the widened lines, between King's Cross and Farringdon Street, were inspected, and that no signs of settlements in any of the walls or arches could be discovered. Christ's Hospital.-The Vestry have had under consideration a scheme of the Charity Commissioners, for the future management of Christ's Hospital, under which Scheme the Churchwardens and Overseers would be deprived of their right and privilege, under the will of Giles Russell, of electing three boys from the Parish for presentation to the School, and in lieu thereof two boys and one girl in Public Elementary Schools are to be eligible by competitive examination only. The Churchwardens and Overseers opposed the Scheme, but the Vestry approved it, adding to their representation to the Charity Commissioners an expression of opinion that, having regard to the increased value of the endowment property, more boys should be elected from the Parish. The Vestry have received a communication from the Charity Commissioners stating that they have approved the scheme, and have forwarded it to the Education Department for their confirmation. 15 Members for the Borough of Finsbury.—Having regard to the identity of interest existing between the Parishes of Holborn, St. Luke's, and Clerkenwell, constituting the three divisions of the new Borough of Finsbury, under the Redistribution of Seats Act, inasmuch as they are united for Poor Law, School Board, and other purposes, the Vestry thought it desirable that a united feeling should exist between the local authorities and the representatives of the divisions of the Borough, and the Members, the Hon. Howard Spensley, Central (Clerkenwell) Division; James Bigwood, Esq., Eastern (St. Luke's) Division; and Col. Duncan, C.B., R.A., Holborn Division, attended a meeting of the Vestry on the 7th January by invitation, when each made a short address to the Vestry. Of the Bills introduced into the past Session of Parliament affecting the Vestry, and the Vestry's action thereon, the following is a brief summary:— Beer Adulteration Bill.—Which provided that every person selling beer brewed from or containing any ingredients other than hops and malt from barley, shall keep conspicuously posted at the bar a legible notice stating what other ingredients are contained in such beer, on penalty of a fine of 40/- for the first offence, and £10 for any subsequent offence, to be recovered by any informer. The Vestry approved the Bill and presented a Petition to Parliament in favour of same, but the Bill was thrown out on the second reading. Metropolitan Board of Works (Fire Brigade Expenses) Bill.—This Bill provided for an increase of the Eire Brigade Rate levied by the Metropolitan Board of Works from the present sum of one halfpenny in the pound to a sum of one penny in the pound, and for an increase in the contribution of the Eire Insurance Companies from £35 16 to £40 per million pounds insured by them. It appears that the present halfpenny rate produces about £72,000 per annum, and that the Insurance Companies now pay about £25,000 per annum towards the expenses of the Fire Brigade. The Bill proposes to increase the rate to one penny or an additional £72,000 per annum, and to increase the Companies' Contribution by some £3,500 per annum. The Vestry felt that this was a very inadequate proportion to be paid by the Companies, and they therefore expressed the opinion that if any increase over the present halfpenny in the pound be required, it should be met by the Insurance Companies. Charterhouse Bill.-This Bill, introduced into the House of Lords, makes provision for the sale or lease of the Middlesex Estate of the Governors of Sutton's Hospital in Charterhouse. Application has been made by the Governors to the Charity Commissioners for a scheme for the more beneficial disposition of the endowments of the Hospital; and to that end for the removal from the Hospital of the Poor Brothers hitherto maintained therein, and for the establishment of a system of out pensions in lieu thereof, and hence the proposal to sell or otherwise dispose of the remainder of their Estate. The Bill was considered by the Vestry, with the view to efforts being made to secure some portion of the site as an "open space." By clause 4 of the Bill, it was provided that the Governors "may set apart and appropriate for the formation of streets, roads or open space, any part or parts of the land," subject to the consent of the Court of Chancery or the Charity Commissioners, and also that by clause 5 they may lay out the disused burial ground as an ornamental 17 garden or recreation ground, and may hand it over to the City Corporation or the Metropolitan Board of Works for preservation and management. Inasmuch as the only portion of the site definitely mentioned in the Bill as being reserved for an open space was the Burial Ground, which covers about half an acre out of the five and a half of which the site consists, the Vestry felt that some effort should be made to induce the City Corporation or the Metropolitan Board of Works to acquire the site or a large portion of it, and they therefore communicated with the Governors of the Charity, calling attention to the desirability of preserving the greater portion as an open space, asking them to extend Clause 5 for the purpose, and they also presented a petition to the same effect to the House of Commons. The Bill was however withdrawn. Metropolitan Board of Works (Keeping of Firewood) Bill.—The object of this Bill was to enable the Metropolitan Board of Works to make bye-laws for the safe keeping of firewood, and to provide that no person shall keep firewood for sale above an aggregate quantity of two thousand cubic feet, without a license from the Board, under a penalty of £20 a day. The Vestry had before them a communication from the Firewood Merchants' Association, submitting reasons against the passing of the Bill, first, that the proposed restrictions are unnecessary, and secondly, that the passing of the Bill would practically drive the trade away from the Metropolis, and throw a large and industrious class of persons out of employment. Having considered the subject, the Vestry resolved to present a petition to Parliament against the Bill as being an unnecessary and vexatious interference with a struggling 18 industry, at present affording employment to a large number of poor people in the Metropolis, but the Metropolitan Board of Works withdrew tin Bill before that course was adopted. Hampstead Heath Enlargement Bill, 1886.—This Bill provided for the acquisition by the Metropolitan Board of Works, of Parliament Hill, Parliament Fields, the Elms Estate, and the East Park Estate, and their addition to Hampstead Heath, to be preserved as an open space, and with this view proposed to empower the City Corporation, the Vestries and District Boards, the Charity Commissioners, and the Trustees of the London Parochial Charities, to make a contribution towards the purchase money for the Estates. While quite agreeing with the object of the Bill, the Yestry could not undertake to make any contribution towards the expenses of carrying out the Act. Smoke Nuisance Abatement (Metropolis) Bill.—This Bill, introduced into the House of Lords by Lord Stratheden and Campbell, proposed to confer upon the Vestries and District Boards of the Metropolis the power of making byelaws for prohibiting or regulating the emission of smoke from any building within their respective districts, which bye-laws are subject to confirmation by a Secretary of State. A large discretion is left to the local authorities in framing their bye-laws. Thus they may exempt properties below a certain rateable value, or prescribe the hours of the day in which smoke emission shall be unlawful, or may make any other restrictions or provisions they may deem expedient, and may provide for penalties in respect of first and continued offences, and the local authorities are to be the sole agents for carrying out the Act. 19 By Clause 5 it is intended to empower the Metropolitan Board of Works to make bye-laws for requiring any fire place or furnace to be used in any building erected after the passing of the Act, to be so constructed as to effectually consume all smoke arising therefrom. The Vestry, however, were of opinion that sufficient powers are already invested in the police to abate nuisances arising from smoke, and they deem it inexpedient to interfere further with the subject at present, and they therefore presented a petition against the Bill. These Bills, however, are suspended owing to the dissolution of Parliament, but will be taken up at their present stage on the meeting of the new Parliament. Tramway Schemes.—The following Schemes were introduced into Parliament during the past Session : — North Metropolitan Tramways, No. 1.—To continue the line just laid in Clerkenwell Eoad through Theobald's Road, &c. to Hart Street, Bloomsbury, to lay a tramway along Gray's Inn Iioad from Holborn Town Hall to Holborn, and to connect the existing line in Clerkenwell Road with the tramways authorised by the London Street Tramways (Extensions) Act, 1885, to be laid in Farringdon Road. The last of these projects is the only one which is in the Parish, and the Vestry approved the Scheme, subject to the usual undertaking on the part of the Company as to compensation for paving taken to by them. North Metropolitan Tramways, No. 2.—The only portion of this Scheme which affected Clerkenwell is that which proposed to construct a double line of tramway in Goswell Road, in lieu of the existing single line between 20 Percival Street ancl Compton Street, and for that purpose to widen the carriageway of Goswell Road on the west side between these two streets. After negotiations with the St. Luke's Vestry as to the giving up of a portion of the footway on their (the east) side to wdiich they would not consent, the Vestry gave their consent to the Scheme subject to an agreement with the Company that in the event of the Act being obtained no works shall be carried out in connection with the Scheme without the sanction and approval of the Vestry, and that the Company undertake to acquire the private land from the Improved Industrial Dwellings Company, and bear all costs and charges of every description in connection with the acquisition of the land, its adaptation to the public use, and the handing over of it to the Vestry when the alteration is complete. North London Tramways Scheme.—This is practically the same Scheme as was introduced into the last Session of Parliament under the title of the Metropolitan Central Tramways Scheme. It proposes to commence in Seven Sisters Road by a junction with the existing North London Tramway, passing along Finsbury Park Road, Somerfield Road, Ambler Road, Avenell Road, Gillespie Road, Drayton Park, Palmer Place, St. James' Road, Roman Road, Hemiugford Road, Richmond Road, Barnsbury Road, Penton Street, Claremont Square, and Amwell Street, terminating at River Street. The Vestry gave its assent to the Scheme upon certain conditions, but the promoters were unable to obtain the consent of the Metropolitan Board of Works, and the Scheme was consequently abandoned. Municipal Government of London.—No further attempt has been made by the Government during the year to deal 21 with this subject, but sundry conferences have been held by the local authorities in which this Vestry has taken part. Overhead Wires.—A heavy fall of snow on the 6th January, 1886, had the effect of bringing into prominence the dangers arising from the breaking of overhead wires, for great numbers in the Metropolis were broken by the snow fall. The Metropolitan Board of Works took the matter up as to accidents, and the expediency of measures being taken, by legislation or otherwise, to secure greater safety to the public, and asked for information of any damage which may have been caused by the breakage of overhead wires within the area under the Vestry's control. The Board of Works for the Wandsworth District also drew attention to the matter, and suggested that having regard to the report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons of May last to the effect that the risk of danger to the public from overhead wires had been very greatly exaggerated, the several road authorities of the Metropolis should ascertain and record the particulars of all cases of wires being broken in their respective districts, with the view of the information being used on behalf of such authorities in the event of the introduction into Parliament of a Bill authorising the construction of overhead Telegraph and Telephone wires on the basis of the recommendations contained in the Parliamentary Report above mentioned. The Surveyor subsequently laid before the Vestry the letters he had received in answer to his enquiries, by which it appeared that Post Office wires were broken, as follows: 22 From St. John's Lane to St. John's Square, three wires. St. John's Square to Clerkenwell Green Post Office, one wire. Across Myddelton Square, one wire. Across Clareraont Square, one wire. Across Northampton Square, one wire. The United Telephone Company stated that they were not in a position to give the information asked for. Steam Rollers.—In the early part of the year, the Gas Light and Coke Company obtained an injunction against the Vestry of Kensington, restraining them from using Steam Rollers in such a way as to injure the pipes and mains of the Company, and the decision was afterwards upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Company in June, 1885, served upon this Vestry a notice holding them responsible for any injury that may result to their mains and pipes from the methods adopted for repairing the streets. The Vestry in November appointed dele ;ates to a Conference at the Kensington Vestry Ilall to endeavour to obtain legislative relief in respect of such restrictions. Disused Graveyards and the Unemployed.—In the early part of 1886, in consequence of the great depression in trade and the severe weather, the Vestry had before them letters from the Local Government Board and Lord Brabazon, Chairman of the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association, upon the question of the desirability and practicability of findiug work for the unemployed by laying out the disused graveyards of the Parish as open spaces. The graveyards of St. James, Clerkenwell, and St. James, Pentonville, are the only ones in the Parish capable of I 23 being dealt with in this manner, and the Vestry are strongly of opinion that it is most desirable that the improvement should be carried out. With regard to St. James, Pentonville, the Vestry are informed that the Trustees of the Church are already in communication with the Vicar of that Church upon the subject, and they therefore adjourned the consideration of the matter, pending the result of the negociations. With regard to St. James, Clerkenwell, the Vestry decided to make an application to the Trustees of the Church for their consent to the laying out of the Churchyard as an open space, and at the same time to the cutting off of the south east corner of the Churchyard so as to allow the very narrow thoroughfare at this point to be widened. They have instructed their Solicitors to take steps for obtaining the necessary faculty for the work to be carried out. While on the subject of depression in trade, it may be noted that the Vestry requested the Royal Commission on the depression of trade to call representatives of the staple trades of the Parish to give evidence on the subject, but no reply has yet been received to such communication. Sanitary Condition of the Parish.—The Report of the Roval Commission on the Housing of the Workino- Classes J O o was issued in May, 1885. The action taken by the Vestry in connection with the matter, and with the allegations made against the Vestry as a body prior to the issuing of the Report, were fully set forth m the last report, and all that took place since was the publishing of the following letter by the Vestry Clerk with regard to certain portions of his evidence to which the attention of the Vestry was called;— 24 REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES. Vestry Hall, Clerkenwell, May 13 th, 18S5. To the Editor of the Standard and other Papers. Sir, The public press of Friday last quoted passages from the Report of the Royal Commission, ill one of which is the following: — "This Vestry ( Clerkenwell j consists of seventy-two members, of whom "the average attendance is stated by Mr. Paget, the Vestry clerk, to "be from twenty-five to thirty. There are on the Vestry thirteen or "fourteen persons who are interested in bad or doubtful property, and "they include several of the middlemen already referred to. There "are, moreover, ten publicans on the Vestry, who, with the exception "of one or two, have, in this parish, the reputation of working with "the party who trade in insanitary property, and accordingly this "party commands a working majority on the Vestry. Taking the "house farmers alone, it is found, from Mr. Paget's evidence, that they "preponderate in very undue proportion on the most important Com"mittees of the Vestry. On the Works Committee there are ten out "of fourteen house farmers referred to, on the Assessment Committee "seven out of the fourteen appear." From the wording of this paragraph, and especially in the absence of the marginal references to the witnesses, as in the Report, it is generally read as my evidence—as if I was the author of this statement. Permit me, therefore, to say very emphatically it is not so. The original authority for such statements must be looked for elsewhere, and to that authority I leave the " reputation " of them. In the course of a long and severe examination and cross-examination upon this subject I stated, in effect, in reply to questions, that I believed a good many members of the Vestry were fortunate enough to be owners of house and other property—at least, I hoped so. That I was of opinion that owners of property were proper persons to be a majority of a Board having- the administration of local affairs. That I was convinced that this was the belief of the parishioners generally, from the fact of such gentlemen being repeatedly elected to the Vestry. That I thought the more property a man had in the parish the more fitted he was, as a rule, to take part in local affairs. Asked about publicans being in the Vestry and on Committees, I stated that there were some, but not the number which had been quoted elsewhere. That I gave it as my decided opinion that they were, as a rule, as well qualified to be on Committees, and quite as eligible as others, because they were, as a class, good business men, and the highest rated people in the parish, and therefore had the most at stake. That T thought it would be an 25 diuary thing to find a like public Board in the Metropolis without publicans, many of whom had held high and honourable positions in parochial work. With regard to the preponderance of the owners of let-out houses on the Committees in "undue proportion," I must point out that, admitting, for the purpose of argument only, that the numbers stated are correct, the Committee of Works consists of twenty-one members [not fourteen only as stated above], but its duties are entirely confined to the ctate of the roads and work of that character; while on the Assessment Committee there are twenty-nine members [not fourteen only as stated above], and seven can, therefore, hardly, by any straining of language, be called a "preponderance" of house farmers on that Committee, and it is, therefore, unfortunate for the Report, on this particular point, that it should attempt to bring discredit upon the Vestry as a whole, and upon the gentlemen who own let-out houses in particular, by stating that the latter are upon the above committees which happen to have nothing whatever to do with the sanitary condition of the dwellings in the parish. This I stated in my evidence, and I therefore the more regret to see it made a feature of in the Report, because the inference to be drawn from the statement appears to me to bo uncalled for and undeserved. With regard to sanitary administration, it will be found in the evidence I gave, or handed in, speaking from nearly thirty years' experience as Vestry Clerk in this parish, that through the incessant labours of the Vestry and its Sanitary Committees, the sanitary condition of the parish has been vastly improved during that time. That the death-rate in Clerkenwell, is now only 16.9, or, allowing for deaths in workhouses and hospitals, 19.8 per thousand, the mortality for all London being 20.4—the death-rat6 for Clerkenwell, therefore, being nearly equal to that of the West District (19.5), and much less than that of the Central Districts (23.2), of which it forms part. And Sir Charles Dilke. in his letter to the Vestry on the 24th of March last year, after visiting the locality, added the remark, which is a weighty testimony, that—"It is undoubtedly true that the parish is a healthy one." During the above period, (since 1856,) the Vestry have spent nearly twenty-eight thousand pounds in sanitary works alone, besides which they have, under the powers of the Sanitary Act, 1866, erected a mortuary, (probably the best in London,) with coroner's court, post-mortem and other rooms, with all modern appliances, and a patent disinfecting oven, at a cost of nearly three thousand pounds, to which a great number of bodies are removed annually from the dwellings of the poor. 26 A mortuary keeper is also paid and resides close by. This mortuary has proved to be an immense boon to the poor, moro especially in cases of doath from infectious disease. [And hero should be recollected the kindness of the Marquis of Northampton in granting the Vestry a piece of land for the purpose, at a nominal ground rent, which got over an almost insurmountable difficulty at the time.] It will thus be seen that notwithstanding the excessively hoavy taxation for other purposes in this parish (including new paving and other street improvements, at a cost of some £ 1 y0,000, which has rendered this parish, consisting of about 380 acres, the Rateable Value of which has noarly doubled of late years, ono of the best paved in London), tho Sanitary Committees of past years, and the Vestry, have not been unmindful of sanitary requirements, and when tho elected of the peoplo thus voluntarily tax themselves it is impossible that I could in my evidence make or endorse any statemont implying that there is any combination between the "house farmers" and "publicans," or any othor class, having for its object tho mal-administration of the parish, whether the numbers on the Vestry or committees, as quoted, be right or wrong—statements which have been recklessly made locally, and have misled people in high places, and dono the parish a groat and unmerited injury in tho estimation of the public. A feature is made in tho Roport that, according to my evidence, we have two sanitary inspectors, and an assistant-inspector, the latter of whom was "something in the jewellery trade." True. But I stated he was employed mainly as a messenger, to deliver Vestry notices, &c., but that, being an active and intelligent man, his spare time was often utilised by the medical officer of health to assist the other two inspectors in looking up sanitary matters for the modical officer's information, and that I thought a man of good common sense sufficient for that purpose.45 A feature is also made in the Report that Clerkenwell has not been sufficiently alive to the 35th clause of tho Sanitary Act of 1866, em powering the Vestry to make regulations for houses let in tenements or occupied by more than one family, and quoting Chelsea and Hackney, as examplos in this respect. But tho Report has unfortunately forgotten to notice tho fact that Clerkenwell was perhaps foremost in being alivo to tlio provisions of tho same Act, which empowers proper Mortuaries to bo provided, and which Clerkenwell has done in a manner which has elicited expressions of admiration from many visitors from other Sanitary authorities, and which might perhaps be an oxample to both Chelsea and Hackney. * The above quotation, in the Report, without the context, is calculated to create an erroneous impression of what I said, hence nay remark here. 27 The Vestry would have been glad to see any evidence given in favour of Clerkenwell noticed in the Report, as well as any against. With regard to the regulations referred to above, I stated that I did not regard their non-adoption recently as a refusal to adopt any regulations, but that, like so many other vestries, they felt chary of trenching unduly upon the liberty of the subject, and that it was not impossible the Vestry might yet formulate a code of rules for the purpose. The postponement of the adoption of these regulations is about the only occasion withiu my memory when the Vestry has hesitated to adopt the recommendations of their Sanitary Committee, beyond a little wholesome criticism, notwithstanding any allegations to the contrary, the rule being rather to accept them unquestioned, even at the risk sometimes of overstepping the law. It is only due to the Vestry, as the responsible Local Sanitary Authority, and their sanitary committees, in answer to charges of supineuess, to point to the precautionary measures they have always taken on the threatened approach of any epidemic disease, under the advice of the Medical Officer of Health, and the extraordinary energy and zeal displayed in presence of the cholera visitation in 1806-7, to which there has been no parallel since the formation of the Vestry. With regard to overcrowding and consequent high rents, I should like to add the remarkable fact, that, although the parish is thickly populated—there being about one hundred and eighty persons per acre—we have always on our rate-books about two hundred empty houses, many of them being in the immediate neighbourhood of the more crowded and " tenemented " parts of the parish. I would add that the Report of the Royal Commission would have been all the more complete and interesting had one or two of the "house farmers" referred to been called as witnesses to give their version of what is laid to their charge, as some think they could have rendered it a much less ex parte statement as to their alleged receipts and profits from their holdings. I regret having to trespass so much upon your space, which I would not, and need not, have done had the Evidence been available at the same time as the Report. I am, Sir, your obedient Servant, ROBERT PAGrET, Vestry Clerk. The Vestry Clerk's evidence is added to this Report as an Appendix by direction of the Vestry. 28 In June, 1885, a letter was received from the Local Government Board, asking for the Vestry's'observations on a Report published by the Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the People with reference to the insanitary condition of a number of houses in Clerkenwell. The condition of No. 7, Baynes Court was about this time engaging the attention of the Vestry and the Local Government Board, and the Vestry invited the Local Government Board to hold an enquiry into the sanitary condition of these premises "and any other tenement houses or premises in the Parish which they may deem fit." The matter was transferred from the Local Government Board to the Home Secretary, who appointed Mr. D. Cubitt Nichols as such Inspector, and at the request of the Home Secretary, two members of the Vestry, Mr. W. Robson and Mr. J. J. Goode, were appointed to act with him. Mr. Nichols' Report will be found as an Appendix to this Report. The Report itself sets out in full detail the action taken by the Vestry, the Mansion House Council, and the other parties concerned, and it is therefore unnecessary to recapitulate it here, but it is only fair, after the serious charges made against the members of the Vestry by Sir Charles Dilke and others, of subordinating proper administration to their private ends, that the paragraph in Mr. Nichols' Report should be entered here in which he says that although he thinks it most desirable some additional sanitary precautions should be adopted, he does not consider the Parish to be in a bad sanitary condition. Upon the Report being laid before the Vestry it was referred to a Special Committee for consideration. Cholera.—During the summer and autumn of 1885, the Vestry again took every precaution against a visitation of cholera, which, however, happily did not reach this country, though it prevailed to a considerable extent on the continent, especially in Spain. By order, ROBERT PAGET, Vestry Clerk. METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT ACT. STATEMENT and ACCOUNT of all Moneys Received and Expended from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March. 1886, By the Vestry of the Pansh of Saint James and Saint John, Clerkenwell. Folio in Ledger. Receipts Moneys received by the Vestry from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 1886. Moneys owing to the Vestry 25th March, 1886. (Estimated) Folio in Ledger. DISBURSEMENTS. Unpaid at 25th March, 1885. Incurred from 26th March, 1885 to 25th March, 1886. Paid from 26th March, 1835, to 25th March. 1886. Unpaid 25th March, 1886. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d, £ s d £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. SKW I.Il ACCOUNT. SEWER ACCOUNT. Received on Rates as follows: 87 Surveyor's salary, one third of 101 3 4 101 3 4 146 Kate made April, 1885 2650 6 8 207 Capon, T., cement, drainpipes, &c. 19 12 11 112 11 5 103 7 6 23 16 10 253 Fees for connecting private 160 2 0 215 Waller & Co., gully grates, flushers' hose, &c 56 0 6 42 7 0 13 13 257 Loan of drain rods,&c. 6 10 0 171 Do.. Urinal, King's Cross Road 8 17 0 170 14 0 170 11 0 New River Co , Water to urinals 18 6 3 27 3 3 Do., Sewer flushing 29 9 8 29 •}. 8 230 Barrett & Son, drain rods 0 19 1 0 19 1 305 C. Killingback, New Sewers in Penton Place ard Eagle Court 67 10 3 67 10 3 302 J. Pizzey, New Sewer in Berkley Street 49 1 11 49 I 11 137 Sewermen's wages 320 0 5 32l> 0 5 233 Rewards for information as to posting Bills in Urinals 2 0 0 2 0 0 239 Mrs. Bawden, Slops for Sewermen 1 1? 0 1 10 0 311 Falberg, F., boots for flushers 2 13 6 2 12 6 312 Clifford, R. do. sewermen 9 18 0 9 18 0 328 Gay & Co., paint for urinals 13 6 0 13 6 0 Collectors' Commission 43 15 10 42 11 1 1 1 4 9 145 2 1 885 9 0 807 9 0 222 15 1 Balance against account at 25th March, 1885 1563 10 1 2370 19 1 Balance in favor of account at 25th March, 1886 445 19 7 2816 18 8 2810 18 8 Folio in Ledger RECEIPTS. Moneys received by the Vestry from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 1886. Moneys owing to the Vestry 25th March, 1886 (Estimated) Folio in Ledger DISBURSEMENTS. Unpaid at 25th March, 1885 Incurred from 26th March, 1885 to 25th March, 1886. Paid from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 1886. Unpaid at 25th March 1886. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. CONSOLIDATED RATE ACCOUNT. CONSOLIDATED RATE ACCOUNT. Balance brought forward from 25th March, 1885 893 19 2½ 199 Metropolitan Board of Works 10310 14 0 10310 14 0 Collectors' Commission 40 5 7 153 12 6 152 12 4 41 5 9 Received on Rates as follows: 40 5 7 10464 6 6 41 5 9 459 Rate made October, l883 0 5 4 463 April, 1884 6 2 3 10463 6 4 466 October, 1884 232 9 11 469 April, 1885 3987 14 0 471 October, 1885 5101 3 5 150 0 0 10221 14 1½ Balance against account at 25th March, 1886 24,1 12 2½ 10463 6 4 LIGHTING ACCOUNT LIGHTING ACCOUNT Balance brought forward from 25th March, 1885 142 19 9 175 Gas Light &Cock Co., Lighting 821 5 10 2737 6 10 2727 11 5 531 1 3 214 Clark,H.,Gas work 89 3 0 321 15 4 336 17 6 74 0 0 Received on Rates as follows: 328 Sugg & Co., repairs to lamp opposite" Angel" 7 5 0 7 5 0 ??? Rate made October, 1883 0 13 2 505 October, 1884 1081 3 5 Collectors' Commission 24 15 9 43 5 2 44 1 0 23 19 11 506 October, 1885 1521 1 8 1130 0 0 251 Sundry persons,Repair of damage to lamps 13 10 0 935 4 7 3109 12 4 936 7 0 3108 9 11 Balance against Account at 25th 2759 7 5 March, 1886 349 2 6 3108 9 11  £ s d £ s £ s d ??? WHARF ACCOUNT. WHARF ACCOUNT Balance on Superintendent's Petty Cash Account brought forward 2 2 8 Watering, Dcstimg, Slopping, and Cartage. Coombe's Exors., 1 year's Instalment of Loan 800 0 0 800 0 0 408 Received for Ashes and breeze 514 8 2 123 5 0 196 422 Do. Trade Refuse 143 11 6 416 Do. Street Sweepings 134 7 6 19 15 0 Do. do. Interest, less tax 30 13 8 30 18 8 382 W. Stubbs, Use of berths for barge loading 14 7 6 4 7 6 381 317 W. Stubbs, Rent, less tax 149 5 4 594 10 0 695 2 10 148 12 6 Long,J.R.,Preparing wrights'Shop at Wharf 56 3 0 56 3 0 ,, W. Stubbs, Rent of Mr. Gore's Apartments 27 0 0 18 0 0 423 Phillips, T. J., Rent of 27, Commercial Road, less tax 10 18 5 43 10 0 43 10 11 10 17 6 401 Hayes & Son, Discount allowed 1 5 0 J. Burton, Use of berths for barge loading 14 7 6 393 Lambeth Vesiry, Rates of Wharf 170 6 8 170 6 8 Do. do. 27, Commercial Road 8 15 0 8 15 0 395 Queen's Taxes for Wharf 19 7 6 25 4 2 41 11 8 Do. 27, Commercial Road 2 13 10 2 13 10 383 Lambeth Waterworks Co.,Water 14 10 9 27 8 11 33 17 0 8 2 8 384 South Metropolitan Gas C., Gas 12 12 11 39 15 5 33 11 10 18 16 6 389 Hay, Straw, &c 88 18 0 353 10 5 352 7 7 90 0 10 391 Oats, &c. 107 6 6 476 18 5 453 15 10 130 9 1 397 Sun Kire Office, Insurance 2 12 6 2 12 6 331 Stubbs, W. do. 2 8 6 2 8 6 4 17 0 152 Wages 2345 0 4 2345 0 4 398 T. S. Price. Veterinary Surgeon and Farrier 19 13 3 19 13 3 F. Ford do. 80 8 9 59 3 0 21 5 9 401 Hayes & Son, Repairs to Vans 72 17 10 72 17 10 388 Smith. Parfrey it Hitchings. Repairing Wheels 48 17 0 35 4 3 13 12 9 313 Fitzgerald, E. G., Timber for Vans 52 19 0 36 16 5 16 2 7 406 Sandell Son do. 25 0 3 17 4 2 10 16 1 431 Smith, J. A , Ironwork for Vans 108 16 8 96 14 11 12 1 9 432 Smith, G. M., Paint for Vans 17 8 2 17 8 2 385 Heeks. M.,Dust Baskets & Repairs 2 17 0 6 19 1 6 15 3 3 0 10 386 Proffitt, J., Harness and repairs 8 6 6 57 9 2 54 10 6 11 5 2 218 Seymour. G. W., Ironmongery, &c. 8 13 11 59 0 2 54 7 4 13 6 9 317 Moser & Son, Wheelwrights' Tools 12 7 11 4 18 2 7 9 9 381 Stubbs, W., Horse hire 171 9 3 154 8 8 17 0 7 324 Varney, W. do 18 10 0 18 10 0 Rowley, do 15 6 0 15 6 0 277 Rota Committee's Expenses 9 3 0 9 3 0 287 Miscellaneous Expenditure by Superintendent 55 17 8 52 17 8 405 Winkley & Shaw, Oil and Grease 5 0 0 7 0 0 404 Walker & Son, Brooms 1 16 9 1 16 9 Carried forward 837 2 4 179 15 0 Carried forward 1317 16 5 4928 4 8 5713 0 0 533 1 1 Folio iu Lodger. RECEIPTS. Moneys received by the vestry from 26th March, 1885 to 25th March, 1886. Moneys owing to the Vestry 25th March. 1886, (Estimated.) Folio in Ledger. DISBURSEMENTS, Unpaid at 25th March. 1885. Incurred from 26th March. 1885, to 25th March. 1886. Paid from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 1886. Unpaid 25th March 1886. £ s. d £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s d. £ s. d. £ s d. £ s. d. Brought forward 837 2 4 179 15 0 Brought for ward 1317 16 5 4928 4 8 5713 0 0 533 1 1 328 Waterman & Co., Brooms 0 10 6 0 0 6 311 H. McLachlan, Carpenter's work 0 3 9 0 3 9 325 J. Buck, Chaff Knives 0 12 0 0 12 0 327 South British Rubber Co., Valves for Water Vans 0 17 0 0 17 0 Kosher & Co , Tiles 1 11 0 1 1 0 399 Harris, S. & H., Harness Composition 4 10 0 4 10 0 402 Fitzwater, J. M., Writing Names on Vans, &c. 1 4 6 1 4 6 403 Ward, W. & E., Removing old tins 2 7 0 2 7 6 419 Barges, Removing Hard Core 41 7 6 41 7 6 420 Do., do. Slop o 10 o 0 0 0 424 Cook, A , Repairs 0 10 0 0 0 0 327 Alcock & Co., Sawdust, &c. 0 15 0 0 5 0 Gibberd, M., Grazing Horse 2 14 0 2 4 0 239 Bawden, Mrs., Dustmens' Jackets s 9 0 8 9 0 317 Lockwood, B. J., Compensation for damage to Van 1 0 o 1 0 0 326 Sherwood, E. B, Compensation for damage to Sheep 1 10 0 1 0 0 315 Hotson & Smith, Removal of Dust at Muswell Hill 1 10 0 1 0 0 203 Heard, E., do., do. 7 10 0 3 1 5 0 8 15 0 837 2 4 179 15 0 1317 16 5 5005 16 5 5786 6 9 536 16 1 Deficiency at 25th March, 1886 (carried to General Account) 4950 6 8 Balance in Superintendent's hands at 25th March, 1886 0 12 3 5787 9 0 5787 9 0 GENERAL ACCOUNT GENERAL ACCOUNT Balance in favor of Account at 25th March, 1885 601 17 5½ Paving, Paving Materials, Ballast, &c. Less due to Clerk on Current Expenses Account 31 6 1 201 Griffiths, J. J., Paving sides of, Pentonville Road from Penton Street to King's Cross 202 14 0 202 14 0 570 11 44 Carried forward 670 11 44 Carried forward 202 14 0 202 14 0  £ s. d £ s. d. £ s d. £ s. d £ s. d £ s d £ s d. Brought forward !) 70 17 41 Brought forward 202 14 0 202 14 0 201 Griffiths, J. J., Paving with Old Material- Rivoivpri nil Rates as follows: 539 Rate marie October 1883. 1st part A o 542 2nd 1 6 4 Clerkenwell close 60 9 5 60 !) b 3 9 0 Winchester Street 45 12 11 45 12 11 545 April. 1884, 1st part 12 4 6 Pine Street 18 1 18 1 Rosoman Street, Lower 17 8 1 14 XI o in 11 548 „ 2nd 25 Spencer Place 13 2 0 13 ? 0 38 3 0 Merlin's Place 9 1?, 11 9 19. 11 551 October, 1884, 1 st part 185 1!) 1 9 10 Vineyard walk 8 15 3 8 15 3 2nd Cross Street 2888 18 0 Brunswick Close 7 8 8 7 8 8 557 April, 1885, 1st part 9304 3 10 Cooldbath Square 7 2 6 7 7 s b 1 2nd 6620 11 10 Red Lion Street 7 15930 15 8 Spencer Place 5 3 3 5 6 3 562 October, 1885, 1st part 7651 16 11 Baker's Row 4 8 5 4 8 6 2nd 3041 19 b Short's Building 10693 16 4 2485 0 0 Clark Sti eet 1 9 1 1 9 1 RENTS. Pentonville Road Sewer Trenches 3 13 3 9 13 3 245 Guardians ot tne roor oi tue Holborn Union, Rent of Board Room of vestry 40 0 l) Do.,Paving- Red Lion Street 211 4 1 211 4 1 247 47&49, Northampton-road 63 11 0 Wellington St. (footway) 192 15 4 2+7 248 Sewell, 8, Rosoman-mews 0 3 0 Berk'ey Street (footway) 127 8 8 127 8 8 249 Ell, 245-7, Pentonville Road 258 15 6 29 9 8 High Street by "Angel" and "Blue Coat Boy " (footway) 44 12 4 41 12 4 303 Chalet Company, Rent of Clerk- 10 0 0 372 9 6 St. James Bldge.(footway) Repair of Trenches Goswell Road (repaying 55 14 6 55 14 6 177 Gas Light& Coke Co. 26S 2 6 47 18 5 carriageway) 50 0 0 50 0 0 174 NewRiver Co 379 7 5 123 7 4 Brunswick Close 72 2 3 72 2 3 222 Post Office Telegraphs 4 2 3 205 Mcwlem, J. & Co., Paving footway, Garnault Place 27 2 3 27 2 3 651 12 2 255 License Fees for the erection of hoardings 82 16 3 Do., do. Green Terrace 37 8 3 37 8 3 Do., do. Resoman Street & Amwell Street 21 8 10 21 8 10 256 Coal-plates, cutting holes for same 2 6 6 Do., Paving Materials 45 3 2 606 12 1 514 9 7 137 5 8 258 Old Stone sold 9 14 4 304 Patent Victoria Stone Co.,Paving footway of High Street 34 9. 5 34 2 6 259 Paving repairs for private individuals, exclusive of amounts deposited for boarding licenses 105 13 6 Do., Paving Rawstorne Place 118 13 2 118 13 2 Val de Travel's Asphalte Co., paving Rawstorne Place 154 7 0 154 7 0 261 Fines and costs recovered under 47 2 0 Do., Berkley Street 180 5 0 180 5 0 252 Do., under Local Management a .id Nuisance Removal Acts 75 14 0 Do., Wellington Street 404 5 0 404 5 0 Do., St. James Buildings 97 3 8 97 3 8 273 Inquests, amounts received for use of Coroner's Court 17 7 6 203 Do.,Jobbing Works 0 1? 6 0 12 6 Heard, E., Ballast, Flints, &c. 145 16 5 178 18 8 278 19 1 45 16 0 314 Cloth workers'Company, Heron's Gift to Highways 145 13 10 Do., Gravel for St. John's Burial 9 12 6 9 12 6 Carried forward 31636 3 81 2685 15 5 Carried forward 727 6 10 2504 6 9 2452 5 3 770 8 4 Folio in Ledger. RECEIPTS. Moneys received by the Vestry from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 1886. moneys owing to the Vestry 25th March, 1886. (Estimated) Folio in Ledger. DISBURSEMENTS. Unpaid at 26th March, 1885. incurred from 26th March, 1835, to 25th March, 1886. Paid from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March, 18S6. Unpaid at 25th March, 1886. Brought forward 34127 18 24 2685 15 5 Brought forward 866 9??? ffi 20832 5 9 90769 5 0 929 9 11 LOANS. 187 Atlas Assurance Society,31st and 32nd'Instalments 5153 9 6 936 5 3 4217 4 31 Ditto Interest 226 10 9 226 10 9 189 Atlas Assurance Society,11th Instalment 10500 0 0 1050 0 0 9150 0 0 Ditto Interest 409 1 6 3 409 16 3 191 Atlas Assurance Society,10th Instalment 2200 0 0 200 0 0 2000 0 0 Ditto Interest 86 5 6 86 5 6 193 Metropolitan Board of Works, 9th Instalment 1380 0 0 115 0 0 1265 0 0 Ditto Interest 50 1 3 5 50 13 5 194 Metropolitan Board of Works, 4th Instalment 5525 0 0 325 0 0 5200 0 0 Ditto Interest 190 0 9 190 10 9 195 Metropolitan Board of Works, 2nd Instalment. 1900 0 0 100 0 0 1800 0 0 Ditto Interest 63 1 7 6 63 17 6 310 DONATIONS, &c. Metropolitan Drinking Fountain Association, Annual donation 2 2 0 2 2 0 Thain, W. F.. on Resignation as 25 0 0 25 0 0 324 Abrahams, Mrs., Gratuity on the death of her husband 10 0 0 10 0 0 VALUATION LIST. Vestry Clerk 200 0 0 200 0 0 First Assistant Clerk 75 0 0 75 0 0 Assistant Clerks 25 0 0 25 0 0 169 Do., Overtime 71 14 0 71 14 0 179-184 Collectors 56 0 0 56 0 0 225 Goode, W. J., Printing 8 7 0 9 0 0 17 7 0 SUNDRY BILLS. 89 R. E. Paget, commission on rents collected . 3 7 0 3 7 0 Carried forward 34127 18 2½ 2685 15 5 Carried forward 27533 6 0 22337 1 4 25008 15 3 24861 14. 1 18 15 5 Bronjfht forward 34127 2½ _ 2685 Brought forword ??? ??? ??? ~ 103 Bonlton, Sons A Sondeman, Counsel's Fees, ic., re Home office Enquiry into Sanitary Condition of the Parish 74 18 0 74 18 0 Do Sundry costs out of pocket 23 13 7 23 13 7 105 Cheshire.F'.iunil Wife, atteuding Holborn Guardian Meetings 5 6 0 5 6 0 177 Gas Light A: Coke Co., Repairing Pipes in Queen Street 1 3 4 1 3 4 209 Lee, J., Smith's work 19 4 3 19 4 3 210 Monk, G. do. 97 18 6 70 18 0 27 0 c 212 Sarjeant. E. H., Carpenter swork 52 9 8 43 19 4 8 10 4 213 iDore, J. R., Plumber's work 7 14 3 96 15 8 104 10 4 216 McDougall Bros., Disinfectants 1 11 0 1 11 0 316 Cooper & Sons, do. 191 13 11 91 13 11 217 Calvert, F. C. & Co., do. 8 14 11 12 13 0 21 7 11 236 Sanitas Co., _ do. 2 8 0 1 8 0 218 Seymour, G. W., Too.s 3 15 4 29 0 8 14 2 10 18 13 2 219 Dunhill, H., Oilskin Coats, 1 8 10 1 8 10 223 ;Lewis, J., Sweepers' Brooms 55 11 6 55 11 6 225 [Goode, W. J., Plinting 28 16 9 314 7 9 286 4 0 .V 57 0 ??? 227 Homewood, J., Stationery 0 15 0 0 15 0 228 Lill, H. do 14 1 4 67 16 1 65 9 4 16 8 1 229 Peacock, E., Repairing Trucks 5 11 0 5 11 0 232 Ay ton, A. W., Chandlery 5 5 11 20 6 8 20 8 0 5 4 7 235 Advertisement 45 7 9 45 7 9 237 Newman, ,T., Billposting 1 12 0 1 12 0 238 Coals for Vestry Hall & Mortuary 19 4 6 19 4 6 239 Bawden, Mrs., Sweepers' Slops 11 5 0 11 5 0 272 Balance of License Fees returned 6 19 4 6 19 4 275 Committee of Works, expenses and refreshments 18 18 3 18 8 3 279 Sanitary Committee, do 36 0 5 36 0 5 231 AssessmentCommittee,including sittings, making out Quinquen1 nial Valuation List 221 5 4 221 5 4 313 Finance Committee, expenses and refreshments 1 7 3 1 7 3 283 Deputations to various bodies 4 5 2 4 5 2 285 Auditors 13 2 0 13 2 0 ,, Railway Fares for Candidates for Inspectorship 14 15 0 14 15 0 . ,, Smith, S., Shorthand Notes re Sanitary Enquiry 5 0 0 5 0 0 ,, Miscellaneous Expenses 12 0 4 12 0 4 297 Mortality Returns 8 11 1 8 11 1 299 [Petty Expenses, Postage, &c. 50 12 0 50 12 0 800 Do., do. (Surveyor) 12 12 8 12 12 8 Can-led torward 34127 18 2½ 2685 15 5 Carried forward 27620 19 2 23875 9 7 26501 17 6 24994 11 3 Felioin Ledger. RECEIPTS. Moneys received by the "Vestry from 26th March, 1885, to 25th March. 1336. Moneys owing to the Vestry 25 th March, 1886 (Estimated) Folio in Ledger. DISBURSEMENTS. Unpaid at 25th March. 1885. Incurred from 26th March, 1335 to 25th March, 1886. Paid from 25th March. 1335, to 25th March, 1886. Unpaid at 25th March 1886. f s d £ s d £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. Brought forward 34127 18 2½ 2685 15 5 Brought forward 27620 19 2 23375 9 7 26501 17 6 24994 11 3 15 305 Cheque Book 1 5 0 1 5 0 305 LondonFever Hospital, expenses of maintenance of Patient 2 18 0 1 18 0 307 Shaw A Sons, Law Books 2 5 0 0 5 0 308 Hansard A Son. Parliamentary Bills, &c. 15 4 7 15 4 7 Bloomfield, R. T., In spectors "Caps 2 2 0 2 2 0 309 Kellv A Co., Directory 1 12 6 1 12 6 Beal. E. W., Magistrate's Clerk's Fees under Valuation List 2 2 11 2 2 11 310 Cove. Repairing Locks o 10 6 0 10 6 311 Austin, J., Inspectors' Boots 4 12 0 4 12 0 312 Inspectors, Petty Cash for Adulteration Purchase-. &c. 12 0 0 12 0 0 315 Moore, J. i Son,Windiug Clocks. Vestry Hall and St James' Church 8 10 0 11 0 6 19 10 6 316 Zuccato A Wolff, Trvpo°raph 2 5 0 2 5 0 Fraser A Co., Repairing Disinfecting Oven 7 16 3 7 16 3 318 Griffith, W. P., Plans of Vestry Hall. Ac., belonging to his late father 2 2 0 2 2 0 Testimonial to Mr. Robson as Churchwarden 26 5 0 26 5 0 319 Bean A Co., Printing Valuation List 40 9 0 40 9 0 320 Everitt A Son. Inspectors' Suits 28 0 0 28 0 0 Dyson A Co., Parly. Agents charges re Tramwav Schemes 2 2 0 2 2 0 Jackson. E., Office Furniture . 4 4 0 4 4 0 321 Callaghan, M, Compensation for injury to flour store throua-h storm water 10 0 0 10 0 0 Holborn District Board, Hire of Town Hall 4 4 0 4 4 0 Ell. G.. Barrows 2 14 0 2 11 0 323 Eyre A Spottiswoode, Housing of Poor Reports 6 18 0 6 13 0 Carried forward 34127 18 2½ 2685 5 Carried (orwanl . 9 2 24068 1 10 26702 19 9 24994 11 3 Brought forward 34125 18 2 ½ 2685 15 5 Brought forward 27620 9 2 24068 1 10 26702 19 9 24004 11 1 Knight&Co.OLaw Books 0 18 0 0 18 0 Arnold & Son, Post-Mortem struments 5 10 0 5 10 0 323 Gagan. J., Dressing Stone 7 0 0 7 0 0 Castle, H. J- & Hon, Surveyor's Fees re Assessment of panies'Works 288 4 0 288 4 0 Jones, J. J., Book Case for Surveyor 9 10 0 9 10 0 326 Marchant, J., Coals for Melting Snow 7 3 0 7 3 0 329 Bumstsd & Co.. Salt for Melting Snow 11 10 0 11 10 0 Unite, J., Waterproof Coats, &c. 22 16 0 22 16 0 425 Removal of bodies to Mortuary 3 0 0 3 0 0 427 Fumigations 4 1 6 4 1 6 27629 8 2 24427 14 4 27028 6 3 25028 17 3 Deficiency on Wharf Account charged to General Account. 4950 6 8 31978 12 11 Balance in favour of account at 25th March, 1886 2173 2 11½ Less due to Clerk on Current Expenses Account 23 17 6 2149 5 3½ 34127 18 2½ 2685 15 5 34127 18 2½ ABSTRACT. RECEIPTS. Owing to the Vestry at 25th March, 1886. EXPENDITURE. Owing by the Vestry at 25th March, 1886. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. Sewer Account 2816 18 8 Sewer Account 0 0 0 Sewer Account 2370 19 1 Sewer Account 222 15 1 Met. Consolidated do. 10221 14 1½ Met. Consolidated do. 150 0 0 Met. Consolidated do. 10463 6 4 Met. Consolidated do. 41 5 9 Lighting do. 2759 7 5 Lighting do 1130 0 0 Lighting do 3108 9 11 Lighting do 936 7 0 Wharf do. 837 2 4 Wharf do. 179 15 0 Wharf do. 5786 16 9 Wharf do. 536 16 1 General do. 34127 18 2½ General do. 2685 15 5 General do. 27028 6 3 General do †125028 17 3 Planting Trees 2 19 0 Planting Trees do. 0 0 0 Planting Trees do. 6 9 0 Planting Trees 0 0 0 £48764 7 4 Bal. at Bank 2024 17 10 „ in Supt. hands 0 12 3 2025 10 1 Bal. due to Clerk on Cur. Exp.Ac 23 17 8 2001 12 5 £50765 19 9 £4145 10 0 £50765 19 9 £26766 1 2 † This amount includes the sum of £23,932 4s. 3d., payable by instalments. PURSUANT to the 195th Section of the Metropolis Local Management Act. We hereby certify that we have carefully examined the respective Accounts of the Vestry of the Parish of Saint James and Saint John, Clerkenwell, for the year ending Lady-day, l886, and that we find them to be true and correct in all particulars, and we hereby sign the same in token thereof. Dated this Twenty-eighth day of May, 1886. JOHN BONE LEWIS, CHAELES DEBNEY, ROBERT HAMPSON. EDWARD LENARD, GEO. W. TILLETT, Auditors. To the Vestry of the Parish of St. James and St. John. Clerkenwell. GENTLEMEN,— We, the undersigned. Auditors of the Accounts for the Parish of St. James and St John, Clerkenwell. having completed our Audit for the year ending March 25th, 1886, have to express our satisfaction at the excellent manner in which the Accounts have been kept, and we tender our cordial thanks to Mr. Paget and his son for their courteous attention to us during the Audit by giving us every explanation required, which gre atly facilitated our work. Dated this 28th day of May. 1886. We are, Gentlemen. Tours very respectfully, JOHN B. LEWIS, CHARLES DEBNEY, ROBERT HAMPSON, EDWARD LENARD. GEO. W. TILLETT. Vestry halL,. May 28th. 1886. We, the undersigned Auditors, take this opportunity of protesting against the extravagant expenditure of money for Refreshments by the Assessment Committee: the sum being £221 5s. 4d. ROBT. HAMPSON, G W. TILLETT. CHARLES DEBNEY. i protest against the extravagant expenditure. but approve of moderation. john B. LEWIS. I object to extravagance, but I am in favor of moderate refreshments to the Committees who do the parochial work, and I note that the main expenses incurred by the Assessment Committee during the past year are in connection with the making out of the Quinquennial Valuation List of the Parish, which is exceptional as occurring only once in five years. ED WARD LENARD. SUMMARY STATEMENT OF CONTRACTS FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF GENERAL WORKS AND THE SUPPLY OF MATERIALS. Date. Name of Contractor. Nature of Work to be performed or Materials supplied. Period. Price. 1885. March 19th J. Mowlem & Co. Paving Materials One year, from March 25th, 1885 At Schedule of Prices ditto J. Mowlem & Co. Broken Guernsey Granite ditto per cubic yard ditto E. Heard Ballast, Flints, &c. ditto At Schedule of Prices ditto W. J. Goode Printing ditto ditto ditto W. Macklin 40-lb. Oats Three months from March 25th, 1885 22/6 per quarter ditto H. Paine Hay, Straw and Clover ditto Market prices April 2nd J. J. Griffiths Repairing part of Bed Lion Street At Schedule of Prices April 14th J. E. Dore Repairs at 47, Northampton Road £14 10s. June 23rd W. E. Bridges 40-lb. Oats Three months from 24th June, 1885 21/9 per quarter SUMMARY STATEMENT OF CONTRACTS— continued. Date. Name of Contractor. Nature of Work to be performed or Materials supplied. Period. Price. 1886. June 23rd H. Paine Hay, Straw and Clover Three months from 24th June, 1885 Market prices June 25th T. Bean & Son Printing Valuation List 4/- per page October 14th W. Macklin 38-lb. Oats Three months from Sept. 29th, 1885 20/3 per quarter October 7th H. Paine Hay, Straw and Clover ditto Market prices Nov. 3rd E. Heard Removal of Dust, Muswell Hill £15 per annum 1886. January 5th W. E. Bridges 40-lb. Oats Three months from 25th Dee. 1885 19/10 per quarter ditto H. Paine Hay, Straw and Clover ditto Market prices 43 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE of WORKS ON DUSTING, SLOPPING, &c., For the year to 25th March, 1886. The Committee beg to present their Report for the year ending on the 25th March last, of the operations and results of the system of doing the dusting, slopping and watering of the Parish, by the Vestry's own staff, as submitted by the Clerk, and approved and adopted by the Committee. Dusting.—During the year there have been 7176 loads of dust, and 258 loads of trade refuse removed, 142 freights of ashes and breeze, containing 8883 chaldrons, have been removed from the Wharf, for which a sum of £557 6s. 2d. has been 44 received, being an average of £3 18s. per freight, against £5 2s. l1d. last year, and £7 15s. l1d. the year before. 23 freights of hardcore have also been removed, for which barges have been hired at a cost of £41 7 s. 6d. Slopping.—During the year 3947 loads of street sweepings were removed from the Parish, 235 of which were collected late on Saturday nights. 118 freights of street sweepings were disposed of, 115 being sold for £147 12s. 6d., two being removed free, and 10s. being paid for the removal of one. Watering.—The watering was done mainly by the Vestry's staff, but for 71 days an average of 4.3 horses per day were hired of Mr. Stubbs for the purpose. Cartage.—The horses and carts have also been employed during the year, in carting stone, gully refuse, &c., the cost of which, reckoning the horse, cart and man at 12s. 6d. per day, would have amounted to £90. In consequence of the exceptionally severe weather experienced in January, February and March, and the heavy falls of snow, additional horses had to be hired of Mr. Stubbs and Mr. Varney, at a cost of £35 10s., to assist in the removal of the snow, and a horse was hired of Mr. Rowley for 17 weeks during the summer and autumn. The Vestry during the year undertook its own wheelwright's work, in lieu of sending the carts and vans to a contractor for repair, the cost of same will be found in the account below. Horses, Vans and Carts.—The horses, vans and carts remained at the close of the year as at the commencement, viz.: 17 horses, 11 vans, 10 carts and 12 water vans. The fodder account amounts to £830 8s. 10d., being an average of 18s. 5d. per horse per week. The Net Expenditure for the Year ended the 25th March. 1886, is shown by the following Account:— Receipts. £ s. d. Expenditure. £ s. d. For Ashes and Breeze 557 6 2 Interest on Loan 30 18 8 Trade Refuse removal 143 11 6 Rent, less Tax 594 10 0 Street Sweepings 147 12 6 Do., 27, Commercial Road 43 10 0 Use of berths for barge loading 32 10 0 Queen's Taxes 27 18 0 Stubbs, Rent of Mr. Gore's late Parochial Rates 179 1 8 Apartments 36 0 0 Gas 39 15 5 Discount 1 5 0 Water 27 8 11 Oats, &c. 476 18 5 Hay, Straw and Clover 353 10 5 830 8 10 Veterinary Surgeon and Farriery 80 8 9 Insurance 5 1 0 Alterations and Repairs to Buildings 58 7 9 Wages, Superintendent 163 16 0 2225 5 6 Horsekeeper and assistance 112 4 6 Clerk at Wharf. 65 0 0 Slopmen 323 18 10 Dustmen 664 16 10 Watering 116 11 0 Barge Loaders 330 18 10 Dust Sifting 425 15 6 Stone Carting 22 4 0 Carried forward 918 5 2 Carried forward 4142 14 6 Receipts—continued. £ s. d. Expenditure—continued. £ 8. d. Brought forward 918 5 2 Brought forward 4142 14 6 Balance, or the net charge for the year 4,518 11 0 Horse hire 205 5 0 Rota Committee Expenses 9 3 0 Barges, removing hardcore 41 7 6 Harness and Repairs 57 9 2 Shovels, Scoops, &c 13 2 0 Baskets 3 19 1 Dustmen's Jackets 8 9 0 Compensation for accidents 2 10 0 Wheelwright's Wages 119 14 10 Repairs to Wheels 48 17 0 Timber 80 19 3 Ironwork 154 4 10 Paint 17 8 2 Tools 12 17 11 434 2 0 Oil and Grease 7 0 0 Harness Composition 4 10 0 Removal of Dust, Muswell Hill 9 0 0 Other smaller payments, including Mr. Gore's Petty Cash 64 4 11 One year's depreciation 434 0 0 £5,436 16 2 £5,436 16 2 47 The net result shows an increased cost over that of last year of £385. The depreciation in the price of ashes is responsible for £160 of this increase, the construction of the wheelwrights' shop, and the increased cost of repairing the vans, &c., they having been in constant use for six years, accounting for the remainder. Even with this increase, the Committee cannot but feel that the result is exceedingly satisfactory as compared with the contracting system. By adding the sweepers' wages for the past year (£1,360) to the net cost of the wharf (£4,519), a sum of £5,879 is arrived at, which contrasted with the accepted contractors' tender of over £6,300 for the adjoining smaller Parish of Holborn, shows a balance in favour of this Parish of between £400 and £500, and the Committee unanimously recommend—That the thanks of the Vestry be given to the Staff for the satisfactory manner in which they have performed their duties in the matter. 40 Surveyor's Report. To the Vestry of the Parish of Saint James and Saint John, Clerkenwell. Surveyor's Office, Vestry Hall, Clerkenwell, 3rd June, 1886. Gentlemen, I beg to lay before you ray Report upon the Works, &c., executed by your Yestry during the year ending Lady-day, 1886. SEWERS AND GULLIES. Forty-nine Sewers were cleansed and repaired, two new side entrance covers were fixed, ten new gullies constructed, 245 cleansed and repaired, six trapped, five new gully grates fixed and four flushing shafts constructed. Ninety-six loads of deposit were removed from the sewers and gullies. 50 Sixty-five private drains were let off by the Sewermen, at the expense of the owners of the premises upon which the drains were stopped, for which the sum of £6 10s. was received by the Vestry. Complaint was made of the stench arising from the ventilator of the sewer in Eagle Court, and the ventilator was consequently closed. One new manhole was built in Compton Street, and one in Green Terrace. The whole of the pipe sewers in the Parish were flushed by water supplied by the New Eiver Company, and the brick sewers, where practicable, by water from the main sewers being turned through them by means of flushing gates fixed in the sewers for that purpose. About 50 feet of 3 ft. 9 in. by 2 ft. 6 in. brick sewer was constructed in Allen Street at the expense of Messrs. Carter, Paterson & Co. HOUSE DRAINAGE. The total number of premises drained were 205 (including 8 houses in the outlying portion of the Parish at Muswell Hill) the details of which drainage is shown upon 107 plans prepared for that purpose and deposited in the Surveyor's Office: these drains consist of 3 12 inch, 24 9 inch, and 132 6 inch. One old drain was trapped. The amount of fees received for making the connections of the new drains to the sewers was £151 5s. 51 PAVEMENTS. Carriageways.—The carriageway of Wellington Street, Berkley Street, Rawstorne Place, and Saint James's Buildings, were paved with Val de Travers Compressed Asphalte. Part of the carriageway of Red Lion Street was taken up, redressed and relaid. 886 yards super, of the carriageway of Goswell Road was relaid in connection with the work carried out by the North Metropolitan Tramways Company. 148 yards of the carriageway of City Road opposite the "Blue Coat Boy" and by the "Angel" was relaid in conjunction with works executed by the Islington Vestry. Footways.—The footways of Wellington Street, Berkley Street, and Saint James's Buildings were relaid and the deficiency made good with new York stone, and Rawstorne Place was laid with new Patent Victoria Stone Pavement, and a thoroughfare for pedestrians formed into Buxton Street, Half of the cost of repaving Rawstorne Place was borne by the Brewers' Company, and a moiety of £100 towards the expense of paving Wellington Street was paid by Mr. Hare, the lessee of the houses in that street. Broad Yard.—Mr. Milward, a Builder, took up the pavement in Broad Yard, Turnmill Street, erected scaffolding and constructed areas without making the 52 necessary application to the Vestry to do so, the Vestry therefore directed that he bo proceeded against for contravening the Metropolis Local Management Act. Two summonses were accordingly taken out and on Wednesday, the 9th September last, at Clerkenwell Police Court, Mr. Milward was fined 20 shillings and costs for erecting the scaffold and £10 and costs for constructing the areas. The paving was relaid throughout by the Vestry's workmen and the gradients considerably improved. JOBBING WORKS. For the maintenance and general repair of the carriageways and footways of the Parish the following materials have been used:— Three tons of new Granite were laid. Ballast 166 cube yards Hoggin 102 „ Sand 172 „ Shingle 46 ,, Broken Granite 654 yards, of which 155 yards were broken by the Vestry's men. 6,442 ft. sup. new York were laid. (Of which 736 ft. were for the various Companies) 49,971 ft. sap. old York relaid. (Of which 12,221 ft. were for the various Companies) 81 ft. sup. new Patent Victoria Stone were laid. (Of which 44 ft. were for the various Companies) 252 ft. sup. Patent Victoria Stone relaid. (Of which 190 ft. were for the various Companies) 53 22 ft. run new Kerb fixed. (Of which 2 ft. were for the various Companies) 1,078 ft. run Kerb reset. (Of which 153 ft. were for the various Companies) 7,254 yds. sup. Granite were relaid. (Of which 2,790 yds. were for the various Companies) 382 yds. sup. Pebbles relaid. (Of which 15 yds. were for the various Companies) 40 yds. sup. York edging were laid. 28 yds. sup. Ballast, and 772 yds. sup. Macadam were also laid for the various Companies. 40 coal plates were cut into stones over vaults by the Vestry's workmen at the expense of the owners of the vaults. The amount received from the various Companies for the repair of trenches during the year was £628 17s. 9d. Owing to the severity of the past winter the Masons and Paviors were unable to execute any repairs to the pavements of the Parish on (including wet days during the year) 65 days. On these days the Masons were employed in cutting up York edging and dressing Kerb, and the Paviors in dressing granite cubes, except when assisting to clear away the snow. Snow Storm.—On Wednesday, 6th January, a very heavy fall of snow occurred. A large number of men were engaged and the snow removed to the open 54 space by the Cab Rank in St. John Street Road and to the centre of Clerkenwell Green. I estimated that over 78,000 cubic yards of snow fell upon the public ways of the Parish alone. Complaint having been made to the Works Committee on 9 th February, of the nuisance caused by the snow being stacked on the places above referred to, steps were taken to melt the snow by means of numerous " Fire Devils," and the whole of the snow was got rid of by February 20th. The total cost of clearing the thoroughfares in the first place and melting the snow as mentioned was about £170. Granville Steps, Granville Square.—An iron hand rail has been placed on either side of these steps for the convenience of persons passing up and down them. Trees.—Ten new trees were planted to replace a similar number of dead ones. LIGHTING. The question having arisen as to whether the proper quantity of gas was supplied by the Gas Light and Coke Co. to the public lamps of the Parish, 24 burners taken from various parts of the Parish by the Vestry's Gasfitter, were tested in my presence, the average consumption of which was found to be 5.13 feet per hour. The amount contracted for is 5 feet per hour. The following additional public lamps have been erected by the Vestry during the year:— 55 Opposite No. 51, Exmouth Street. Pine Street by Exmouth Street. Farringdon Road N.E. corner of Exmouth Street N.W. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Opposite No. 15, Guildford Street East. Granville Place by Granville Steps. Penton Place by Pentonville Road. Fryes Buildings, Field Court. Permission has been granted for the following private lamps:— "White Hart" P.H., Myddelton Street. No. 290, Goswell Road. ,, 245a, Pentonville Road. Goswell Club, Compton Passage. No. 124, St. John Street Road. ,, 175, ,, ,, St. JOHN'S BURIAL GROUND. Application having been made by the Rector and Churchwardens of St. John's the Yestry agreed to remove the rough Ballast from the footways of the Burial Ground (now thrown open to the public as a Garden), and to substitute Gravel in lieu of same. Twenty-seven yards of Gravel were used the cost of which, including rolling, &c. was about £19. COURT FLUSHING. The Courts and Alleys in the Parish were washed at night and sprinkled with Carbolic Acid from August 22nd to September 10th. 56 JAMES'S GARDENS, CHAPEL STREET. This Court is flushed once a fortnight, weather permitting, by order of the Vestry. STREET WATERING. The Street Watering was done by the Vestry's own vans, extra horses being hired as required, 5,264,000 gallons of water being used, the amount paid for which, including rent of meters, was £225 18s. The price for water for street watering has been reduced by the New River Company from one shilling to ninepence per 1,000 gallons. URINALS. A new 6-stall Urinal was erected in King's Cross Road by Vernon Square, at the joint expense of the Parish of St. Pancras and the Parish of Clerkenwell. The whole of the public Urinals in the Parish were tarred and painted, and were cleansed three times daily. I have now adverted generally to the principal works in my department upon which I have been engaged during the past year. I have the honor to remain, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, WILLIAM IRON, Surveyor. 57 REPORT OF THE MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, FOR 18S5. To the Vestry of St. James and St. John, Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I have the honour of laying before you my 30th Annual Report, viz. :—That for the year 1885. The number of deaths occurring from all causes in Clerkenwell, during the year 1885, was 1,195. The annual average for the last ten years was 1,298, so that the deaths wore 103 less than the average. The deaths in 1884 having been 1,303, those in 1885 were 108 less than in the preceding year. 58 The accompanying table exhibits the number of deaths which have taken place in the Parish in each of the last ten years, the births in each year being placed opposite: — DEATHS. BIRTHS. 1876 1,342 2,559 1877 1,385 2,522 1878 1,303 2,590 1879 1,456 2,667 1880 1,313 2,430 1881 1,254 2,414 1882 1,261 2,420 1883 1,172 2,402 1884 1,303 2,448 1885 1,195 2,390 The births were thus 58 less than in the preceding year, and 94 less than the average. According to the Registrar-General's sub-districts in which the deaths and births occurred, they stand thus:— DEATHS. BIRTHS. EXCESS. St. James 323 624 301 Amwell 320 650 330 Pentonville 254 499 245 Goswell 298 617 319 In each year a number of deaths of the parishioners takes place in general and special Hospitals, in the Workhouses, which are extra-parochial, in the Infirmary, and in Lunatic Asylums. The number of deaths which occurred in the Hospitals was 123; in the Workhouses, 64; in the Infirmary, 87; in the Asylums Board Hospitals, 19; and in Lunatic Asylums, 7; so that the extra-parochial deaths in all amounted to 300 ; making a grand total of 1,495. 59 It will be noticed that these numbers, excepting the Hospital deaths, are less than in the preceding year. At the Census in 1871 the population of Clerkenwell amounted to 65,380 ; in 1881 to 69,076 ; the increase being 3,696. Assuming this rate of increase to have continued during the last four years, the present population of the parish would be 70,552. At this rate the inter-parochial mortality for the year has been 16.9 per 1,000 ; including the hospital deaths, 18.6 ; and the workhouses and infirmary deaths, 21.1 per 1,000. This mortality compares well with that of the model parish of Chelsea, the parish supervised by the self-constituted censor of Clerkenwell, Sir Charles Dilke. In Chelsea the mortality amounted to 23.1 per 1.000; and in the parishes of St. Luke and St. Giles, the mortality was 26 per 1,000. Hence the mortality of the year has been less than that of the preceding year. The mortality for all London during the year was 19.6 ; that of the West Districts, 17.7 ; of the North Districts, 18.5 ; of the Central Districts, 25.5 ; of the East Districts, 22.1 ; and of the South Districts, 18.8. So that, again, Clerkenwell still holds its place at the head of its own group of crowded Central Districts, and of the East Districts with their sparse population; and the crowding of an ordinary population in an acre, always exerts a powerful influence upon the mortality of a District. It may be interesting to mention the population per acre in the various London parishes, for without attention to this particular comparisons of mortality may be very misleading. It is this:—In Paddington, 86 per acre; in Kensington, 74; in Fulham, 27; in Chelsea, 102; St. George, Hanover Square, 73; Westminster, 216; Marylebone, 103; Hampstead, 20; Pancras, 88; Islington, 91; Hackney, 47; St. Giles, 185; Strand, 78; Clerkenwell, 185; London City, 70; Shoreditch, 60 195; Bethnal Green, 168; Whitechapel, 176; St. George-inthe-East, 193; Mile End, 156; Poplar, 59; St. Saviour. Southwark, 167; Camberwell, 42; Lewisham, 6; &c. It is thus seen that Clerkenwell is among the most crowded parishes in the Metropolis; and this point should be well considered by those who are advocating the building of more enormous "model dwellings" within it. Surely the parish is overcrowded already. The law provides against overcrowding in a dwelling; why should it not do so in regard to a parish ? But the mortality of parts of a parish vary. It may be according to the nature of the dwellings, or it may be according to the habits of the tenants, which latter. I believe to be the main cause. Thus, while the general mortality of Clerkenwell amounts to 21.1 per 1,000, the mortality of the Farringdon Road Buildings amounts to only 14.1 per 1,000; and that of the Compton Buildings, to 16.5 per 1,000, all extra-parochial deaths being included. This might seem to show, that if you could place all the inhabitants in model dwellings, the mortality of the parish would be only about 15 per 1,000. But we have ample experience to prove, that where houses, which were formerly occupied by careful, orderly tenants, have become converted into "tenement" houses, everything becomes dirt, destruction, and disease. In 1884, when Mr. Gladstone was pressing-on the Municipal Bill, he tried to prove, in the House of Commons, that the establishment of central municipal institutions was the only means of bringing the worse to the level of the better districts. He compared, among other things, the district of St. Saviour, Southwark, where the death rate was 25, with that of Cavendish Square, where it was only 15 per 1,000. But the fallacy of the reasoning is at once evident. To produce a small mortality, you must select your population. This is what is done in the model buildings; the occupiers are orderly, trained persons; many belonging to the public service—policemen, post office workers, &c.; no rough population is admitted. The same applies to 61 Cavendish Square, where everything is luxury; no out of work, no overcrowding, ample means, laying up at once, whero slight cold, &c., might produce mortal disease; in fact, the comparison is preposterous—the argument is political ! The number of deaths arising from the principal zymotic diseases in the parish in 1885 was 229; being 7 less than in the preceding year. The number and the causes of the zymotic or infectious and contagious diseases occurring in Clerkenwell during tho last ten years are exhibited in the following table:— SMALL POX. MEASLES. SCARLET FEVER. HOOPING COUGH. TYPHUS. DIARRHOEA. TOTALS. 1876 2 48 34 41 12 73 210 1877 15 73 82 36 25 53 284 1878 1 39 41 56 25 73 235 1879 1 74 44 61 11 36 227 1880 2 26 51 87 14 65 245 1881 10 39 54 53 26 58 240 1882 0 61 60 81 18 40 260 1883 0 61 46 33 16 59 215 1884 6 48 27 69 7 79 236 1885 6 87 21 52 5 58 229 The average number of deaths arising from the principal zymotic diseases during the past ten years was 238; so that the number for 1885 was 9 below the average. 62 The zymotic diseases occurring in extra parochial hospitals of inhabitants of Clerkenwell amounted to 26, viz.: 19 from small pox; 1 from scarlet fever; 2 from diphtheria; 3 from typhoid fever; and 1 from diarrhoea. The number of deaths arising from small pox was 25. 122 cases occurred in the parish in the year, 97 of which were removed to the Asylums Board hospitals. Many of our cases occurred in the upper part of the parish, I fear from proximity to the parish of Islington, in which the disease very largely prevailed; the number of deaths being 134. I need scarcely say that none of these deaths should have occurred. If every one was vaccinated in infancy, and re-vaccinated at 14 years of age, no deaths from this foul disease would be heard of. It is interesting to notice that in consequence of the care taken in regard to vaccination, the younger members of the population comparatively escape, while the older ones suffer from this disease. Thus in the Metropolis, where the total number of deaths was 899, the deaths under 1 year were 116; between 1 and 5, 101; between 5 and 20, 213; between 20 and 40, 339; between 40 and 60, 102; between 60 and 80, 26; and above 80,1. But the epidemic we had in 1885 was indeed small compared with that in 1871, when the number of deaths in the Metropolis was 7,912. The deaths from measles were considerably more numerous than they had been for several years past. This, like the other infectious diseases, is spread by the admixture of mild cases of the disease among healthy children, through the carelessness of the parents. It is mostly an infantile disease, for of 2,928 deaths in the metropolis, 571 occurred in infants under 1 year of age; 2,145 between 1 and 5; 204 between 1 and 20; 6 between 20 and 40; 1 between 40 and 60; and 1 between 60 and 80. In this parish 26 deaths occurred in the St. James District; 19 in the Amwell; 14 in the Pentonville; and 28 in the Goswell 68 District. Careless domestic management causes the spread of infection, and coldness of the season produces the mortality. The disease was more prevalent and fatal in the metropolis than it had been for 50 years before. Scarlet fever was below the average. This dangerous disease is also spread through infection, especially the mild cases. A child may have the disease slightly, so that in a day or two it may appear nearly well, and be allowed to run about. Yet it may be capable of spreading the infection for a month or even six weeks. And it is difficult to confine a child, apparently well, to one room during this time. No death occurred from typhus fever. 3 deaths occurred from typhoid fever in the parish, and 3 in hospitals removed from the parish. It is marvellous to consider that among 70,000 persons, 6 only should die of this disease in a year. Its prevalence is usually considered par excellence a sign of bad sanitation, which surely cannot be said to exist in this parish. with such a result. Most truly did Sir Charles Dilke state that "your water supply and closets are your good points." The deaths from hooping cough were considerably below the average. The deaths from diarrhœa were below the average. Allowing a certain mortality from this disease among infants, the principal sufferers, arising from bad domestic managements, an excess will always be caused by increase of temperature. This especially occurs in the third or summer quarter, which in 1885 was below the average temperature. Hence the reduction of mortality from this disease. The zymotic diseases are largely spread through the agency of the London School Boards, the infectious, yet apparently healthy recent sufferers from these diseases being mixed with healthy children. Every School Board should have a medical 64 adviser, to examine these children which are temporarily kept from school, to determine their disease, and to define the proper period of their returns. The number of deaths from all causes in infants under 1 year of age was 372, 44 less than in the preceding year. In the table published by the Registrar-General, in which the intra and extra-parochial deaths in each parish are included, to form a correct comparison, the deaths under 1 year, in 1885, to 1,000 births were:—In Kensington. 162; in Chelsea, 169; St. George, Hanover Square, 124; Hampstead. 110; Islington, 144; Strand, 168; Holborn, 196; Clerkenwell, 157; Whitechapel, 166; St. George-in-the-East, 190; &c. So that in this respect, wrhich surely forms a fair test of general careful domestic management, Clerkenwell again takes a good place; above that of Chelsea and many other parishes. 202 deaths occurred at and above 60; 1 less than in the preceding year. 99 inquest deaths were registered in the year; 22 less than in the preceding year. Of these, 29 related to deaths occurring in the St. James Sub-district; 50 in the Amwell; 19 in the Pentonville; and 21 in the Goswell Sub-District. 8 deaths occurred in the House of Correction; 1 in the House of Detention. 26 deaths arose from violence; the number for 1884 being: 33. In 20 large English towns, the mortality in 1885 was: — London, 19.7; Brighton, 17.1; Portsmouth, 19.7; Norwich, 20.3; Plymouth, 22.3; Bristol, 19.7; A Wolverhampton, 20.2; Birmingham, 19.3; Leicester, 19.8; Nottingham, 19.9; Liverpool, 23.8; Manchester. 26.5; Salford, 21.1; Oldham, 22.0; Bradford, 17.7; Leeds, 19.9; Sheffield, 20.7; Hull, 17.2; Sunderland, 23.8; and Newcastle-on-Tyne, 26.1. 65 Slaughter-houses.—These were inspected by the Sanitary Committee and myself, on November 9th and the 10th. The slaughter-houses were 15; 6 in the upper wards, and 9 in the lower; and were kept by the same number of butchers. They were very clean, and in excellent order, a few defects in the paving being the only defaults. Cow-houses,—These were inspected at the same time as the slaughter-houses. They were 19; 11 in the upper wards, and 8 in the lower. They were kept by 17 cow-keepers. They were also in excellent order. The cows were 237; 113 in the upper wards, and 124 in the lower. The animals were very fine and healthy. Bake-houses.—These were inspected on July 6th and the 8th. They were 59 in number; 29 in the upper wards, and 30 in the lower. They were mostly in good order, and the defects found were all remedied. Artisans' Dwellings Acts.—In my 28th Annual Report I announced that the Yestry were taking legal proceedings in regard to 11 courts in the Parish, which I had previously condemned under Torrens' Acts. Of these, some have been improved, others domolished. Thus: Smith's Place, Bolton Court, Rhodes' Buildings, and Slade's Place have been emptied, and closed, or demolished; while Bishop's Court, Exmouth Place, Margaret Court, Fox Terrace, John's Place, and the 3 houses in Eagle Court, have been improved more or less. The whole proceedings coming far short of what was evidently intended by the Acts, viz., that these close unventilated slums should be swept away. But the case really seems hopeless; for 2 of the courts which I condemned in 1875, when the Acts first came into force, have been rebuilt in the same close and slumcondition, as that in which they originally existed; and this, it appears, is in accordance with the Building Act. It should be remembered that I condemned these courts in 1875. 66 Mortuary.—The continued usefulness of our excellent Mortuary is shown by the following details:—300 bodies were brought into it in the year. Of these, 89 were for inquest purposes, upon which 41 post-mortems were made; 115 were Holborn Union cases; and 185 were brought from the houses of parishioners, including 8 cases of fever and 2 of small pox. Had not the mortuary existed, these bodies would have been kept in dwelling rooms. House-to-House Visitation.—This has been continued during the year. At the end of January, the inspector of the upper wards gave up his appointment; that of the lower wards continuing. In August, two new inspectors were permanently appointed, both most able, energetic, and attentive men, one certificated. That they are so, will surely be admitted in consideration of the work they have done, which is as follows:— Nuisance in respect to which notices have been served, and work done to abate same, from September 21st to December 31st, 1885:— 147 water-closets provided with water supply. 43 water-closets provided with new pans or old ones cleansed. 42 defective drains reconstructed; 580 feet of drain pipe laid under personal supervision. 52 dirty houses cleansed. 30 gully traps in lieu of bell traps. 27 defective pavings remedied. 12 dustbins repaired. 7 defective roofs repaired. 8 illegal kitchens emptied or made to comply with the Act. 12 cases of overcrowding abated. 1 cesspool abolished. 5 accumulations of rubbish removed. 67 9 deficient water supplies increased. 1 animal-keeping nuisance removed. 1 smoke nuisance remedied. 20 fumigations after 9 cases scarlet fever, 4 typhoid, 3 small pox, and 4 cases diphtheria. 300 preliminary notices served. 73 statutory notices served. 12 summonses taken out under the Metropolitan Local Management Act, against 5 owners in respect of 12 houses having no water to W.C. Fines were inflicted and recovered, £45; 24s. costs. 2 summonses were taken out under Nuisance Removal Act. Fines and costs recovered, £2; 6s. costs. 25 samples were submitted to the Public Analyst, and 7 summonses taken out against the vendors of 7 articles. Fines recovered, £27 10s.; 12s. costs. W. J. BARTLETT.; Nuisances in respect to which notices have been [served, and work done to abate same, from August 25th, 1885, to December 31st, 1885:— 125 water-closets provided with water supply. 47 water closets provided with new pans or old cleansed, 51 defective drains reconstructed. 107 dirty houses cleansed. 29 gully traps in lieu of bell traps. 216 defective pavings repaired. 103 dustbins repaired or new provided. 31 defective roofs repaired. 14 illegal kitchens emptied. 68 31 overcrowdings abated. 5 cesspools destroyed. 12 accumulations of offensive matter removed. 8 deficient water supplies increased. 4 animals kept so as to be a nuisance. 1 smoke nuisance. 384 preliminary notices served. 20 statutory notices served. 6 summonses under Food and Drugs, I summons under Nuisance Removals and Metropolitan Local Management Acts. 31 samples were submitted to the Public Analyst. 6 scarlet fever. 2 diphtheria. 14 rooms fumigated. HUGH ROSS, Inspector, 4 and 5 Wards. In the disinfection of the houses, the streets, the gullies, &c., of the Parish, 1,120 gallons of carbolic acid, and 85 cwt. of carbolic powder, were used during the year, at a cost of about £170. I need hardly state that during the last 2 years, since the "bitter cry" was announced, a great work has been proceeding in the Parish, not only by the legal action of the Vestry, but also by that of the ground landlords, who seem to have discovered, or, at least, to have exerted, their powers in causing the dilapidations and ornamental repairs of tneir houses to be remedied and vastly improved, which must afford great comfort and pleasure to the occupants of the houses. It is to be hoped that they will carefully preserve and protect their houses, which have been so improved at a very large cost. 69 The Meteorology of the year was as follows:— 1885. Temperature. Average. Difference from average of 44 years. Humidity (Saturation= 100.) Height of Barometer. Rain in inches. Difference from average of 71 years. Year 48.6 -00.8 81 29.7 24.0 -1.28 First Quarter (Jan., Feb., March) 40.3 +0.3 83 29.7 5.2 +0.26 Second Quarter (April, May, June) 52.4 -0.5 75 29.7 5.8 +0.01 Third Quarter (July, Aug., Sept.) 59.1 -1.1 76 29.8 5.5 -1.80 Fourth Quarter (Oct., Nov., Dec,) 42.8 -1.7 87 29.7 7.3 +0.25 Hence the mean temperature of the whole year was somewhat below the average; the first quarter being slightly above, the other quarters below. This has an important influence upon the mortality; for a mild winter diminishes, while a cold winter increases, the deaths from pulmonary diseases; and a warm summer increases, and a cold summer diminishes, the deaths from diarrhoea. I have the honour to remain. Gentlemen, Your obedient servant, J. W. GRIFFITH, M.D. May, 1886. VESTRY OF THE Parish of St. James & St. John, CLERKENWELL. SALE OF FOOD & DRUGS ACT, 1875, REPORTS OF DR. REDWOOD, ANALYST, AND INSPECTORS, 1885-6. 72 REPORT OF ANALYST, For the Quarter ending June 25th., 1885. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS. 1885 1 June 17 Thain Bread C 66 Not adulterated 2 „ „ ditto Bread C 67 Not adulterated 3 „ „ ditto Pepper C 68 Not adulterated 4 „ „ ditto Pepper C 69 Not adulterated 5 „ „ ditto Mustard C 70 Not adulterated 6 „ „ ditto Mustard C 71 Not adulterated 7 „ „ ditto Tea C 72 Not adulterated 8 „ „ ditto Coffee C 73 Not adulterated T. REDWOOD. 17, Bloomsbury Square, W.C. June 25th, 1885. 73 REPORT OF ANALYST, For Quarter ending September 30th, 1885. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS. 1885 49 Sept. 15 Rose Milk A 2 56 Not adulterated 50 „ „ ditto Milk A 2 57 Not adulterated 51 „ „ ditto Milk A 2 58 Adulterated with 23 per cent. of added water 52 „ 17 ditto Milk A 2 59 Not adulterated 53 „ „ ditto Milk A 2 60 Not adulterated 54 „ „ ditto Milk A 2 61 Not adulterated 55 „ 29 Cheshire Pepper C 1 Not adulterated 56 „ „ ditto Mustard C 2 Not adulterated 57 „ „ ditto Patent Food C 3 Not adulterated 58 „ „ ditto Milk C 4 Not adulterated 59 „ „ ditto Milk C 5 Not adulterated 60 „ „ ditto Whisky C 6 Not adulterated 61 „ „ ditto Whisky C 7 Not adulterated 62 „ „ ditto Whisky C 8 Not adulterated 63 „ „ ditto Whisky C 9 Not adulterated 64 „ „ ditto Beer C 10 Not adulterated 65 „ „ ditto Beer C 11 Not adulterated T. REDWOOD. 17, Bloomsbury Square, W.C., 2nd October, 1885. 74 INSPECTORS' REPORTS, For the Quarter ending September 30th, 1885. To the Vestry of the Parish of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I beg most respectfully to report that during the quarter ending September 30th, 1885, I purchased and submitted to the Public Analyst 6 samples of milk, one of which was found to be adulterated with 23 per cent. of added water, and the vendor, John Pullen, 42, Warner Street, was fined 20s. and costs or 14 days (sample A 2.58). I am, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, HUGH ROSE, Inspector. To the Vestry of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, During the quarter ending September 30th, 1885, I submitted to the Analyst 11 samples of food and drink, none of which were found to be adulterated. I am, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, FREDERIC CHESHIRE, Inspector. 75 REPORT OF ANALYST, For Quarter ending 31st December, 1885. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OP ANALYSIS. 1885 66 Oct. 6 Bartlett Milk C 1 1 Not adulterated 67 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 2 Not adulterated 68 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 3 Adulterated with 90 per cent. of foreign fat 69 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 4 Adulterated with 85 per cent. of foreign fat 70 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 5 Adulterated with 20 per cent. of chicory 71 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 6 Adulterated with 75 per cent. of foreign fat 72 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 7 Not adulterated 73 „ 27 ditto Milk C 1 8 Adulterated with 22 per cent. of added water 74 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 9 Not adulterated 75 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 10 Not adulterated 76 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 11 Not adulterated 77 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 12 Adulterated with 85 per cent. of foreign fat 78 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 13 Not adulterated 79 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 14 Adulterated with 90 per cent. of foreign fat 80 „ „ ditto Gin C 1 15 Not adulterated 81 „ 28 Rose Milk C 2 1 Not adulterated 82 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 2 Poor Milk 83 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 3 Adulterated with 22 per cent. of added water 84 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 4 Not adulterated 85 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 5 Poor Milk 86 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 6 Not adulterated 87 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 7 Adulterated with 85 per cent. of foreign fat 88 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 8 Adulterated with 80 per cent. of foreign fat 89 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 9 Adulterated with 75 per cent. of foreign fat 90 „ „ ditto Epsom Salts C 2 10 Not adulterated 91 „ „ ditto Lard C 2 11 Not adulterated 92 „ „ ditto Mustard C 2 12 Not adulterated 93 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 13 Adulterated with 75 per cent. of foreign fat 94 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 14 Adulterated with 75 per cent. of foreign fat 76 REPORT OF ANALYST—continued. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS. 1885 95 Nov. 28 Rose Coffee C 2 15 Adulterated with 20 per cent. of chicory 96 Dec. 5 Bartlett Butter C 1 16 Not adulterated 97 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 17 Not adulterated 98 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 18 Not adulterated 99 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 19 Not adulterated 100 „ „ ditto Rum C 1 20 Not adulterated 101 „ „ ditto Rum C 1 21 Not adulterated 102 „ „ ditto Whisky C 1 22 Not adulterated 103 „ „ ditto Gin C 1 23 Not adulterated 104 „ „ ditto Rum C 1 24 Not adulterated 105 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 25 Not adulterated 106 „ 12 Rose Milk C 2 16 Not adulterated 107 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 17 Adulterated with 14 per cent. of added water 108 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 18 Not adulterated 109 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 19 Sold as a mixture 110 „ „ ditto Pepper C 2 20 Not adulterated 111 „ „ ditto Mustard C 2 21 Not adulterated 112 „ „ ditto Mustard C 2 22 Not adulterated 113 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 23 Not adulterated 114 „ „ ditto Gin C 2 24 Not adulterated 115 „ „ ditto Pepper C 2 25 Not adulterated T. REDWOOD. 17, Bloomsbury Square, W.C., 31st December, 1885. 77 INSPECTOR'S REPORT, For the Quarter ending December 31st, 1885. To the Vestry of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I beg most respectfully to report that during the quarter ending Christmas, 1885, I submitted to the Analyst 25 samples, consisting of 7 samples of milk, 10 of butter, 2 of coffee, 3 of rum, 1 of whisky, and 2 of gin. 5 samples of butter were found to be adulterated:— C 1.3. P. D. Pierie, 40, Penton Street, 90 per cent. of foreign fat, fined £5 and costs. C 1.4. T. Spalding, 52, Chapel Street, 85 per cent. of foreign fats, fined £5 and costs. C 1.6. G. Bruce, 4, Suffolk Street, 75 per cent. of foreign fat, fined £5 and costs. C 1.12. J. Williams, 68, Caledonian Road, 85 per cent. of foreign fat, fined £2 10s. and costs. C 1.14. J. Haynes, 51, Chapel Street, 90 per cent. of foreign fat, fined £5 and costs. One of the samples of milk found to be adulterated: C 1.8. J. Lewis, 150, King's Cross Road, 22 per cent. of added water, fined £5 and costs. One sample of coffee adulterated:— C 1.5. J. Hensman, 31, Chapel Street, 20 per cent. of chicory, dismissed. 18 of the samples were found to be pure. I have the honour to remain, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, W. J. BARTLETT, Inspector. 78 INSPECTOR'S REPORT, For the Quarter ending December 31st, 1885. To the Vestry of the Parish of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I beg most respectfully to report that during the quarter ending 31st December, 1885, I purchased and submitted to the Public Analyst the following samples, viz.:—milk 9, butter 7, Epsom salts 1, lard 1, mustard 3, pepper 2, gin 1, coffee 1, with the following results:— Julia O'Connor, 13, Bowling Green Lane, for selling milk adulterated with 22 per cent. added water, was fined £5 and costs or one month (sample C 2.3). Alfred Waller, 37, Clerkenwell Close, for selling butter adulterated with 80 per cent. of foreign fat, dismissed on a technical point (sample C 2.7). Ephraim Bradbeer, 31, Coldbath Square, for selling butter adulterated with 80 per cent. of foreign fat, dismissed on a technical point (sample C 2.8). Pietro Romar, 8, Coldbath Square, do.(sample C 2.9). David Thomas, 76, Compton Street, (sample C 2.13), for selling butter adulterated with 75 per cent. of foreign fat, was fined 50/- and costs or one month. George Dalton, 123, Goswell Road, (sample C 2.14), for a similar offence, fined 50/- and costs or one month. Charles Brown, 42, Corporation Row, (sample C 2.15), for selling coffee adulterated with 20 per cent. of chicory, was fined 20/- and costs or 14 days. David Morgan, 22, Compton Street, (sample C 2.17), for selling milk adulterated with 14 per cent. of added water" was fined £3 and costs or one month. All fines have been recovered and paid into the Vestry. I am, Gentlemen, your obedient Servant, HUGH ROSE, Inspector. 79 REPORT OF ANALYST, For Quarter ending 31st March, 1886. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS. 1886 1 Feb. 2 Bartlett Milk C 1 26 Not adulterated 2 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 27 Not adulterated 3 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 28 Not adulterated 4 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 29 Not adulterated 5 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 30 Adulterated with 14 per cent. of water 6 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 31 Adulterated with 20 per cent. of water 7 „ 6 Rose Milk C 2 26 Not adulterated 8 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 27 Not adulterated 9 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 28 Adulterated with 17 per cent. of water 10 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 29 Adulterated with 16 per cent. of water 11 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 30 Adulterated with 11 per cent. of water 12 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 31 Not adulterated 13 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 32 Not adulterated 14 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 33 Not adulterated 15 „ 20 Bartlett Coffee C 1 32 Not adulterated 16 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 33 Adulterated with 60 per cent. of foreign fat 17 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 34 Not adulterated 18 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 35 Adulterated with 80 per cent. of foreign fat 19 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 36 Adulterated with 20 per cent. of chicory 20 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 37 Adulterated with 80 per cent. of foreign fat 21 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 38 Adulterated with 30 per cent. of chicory 22 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 39 Not adulterated 23 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 40 Adulterated with 55 per cent. of foreign fat 24 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 41 Adulterated with 30 per cent. of chicory 25 Mar. 3 Rose Milk C 2 34 Not adulterated 26 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 35 Poor Milk 27 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 36 Poor Milk 28 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 37 Not adulterated 29 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 38 Not adulterated 80 REPORT OF ANALYST— continued. Consecutive Numbers. Date when received. Name of Inspector. Name of Article. Distinguishing Mark. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS. 1886 30 Mar. 3 Rose Butter C 2 39 Not adulterated 31 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 40 Adulterated with 80 per cent, of foreign fat 32 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 41 Adulterated with 70 per cent, of foreign fat 33 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 42 Not adulterated 34 „ „ ditto Rum C 2 43 Not adulterated 35 „ „ ditto Coffee C 2 44 Not adulterated 36 „ „ ditto Butter C 2 45 Not adulterated 37 „ „ ditto Rum C 2 46 Not adulterated 38 „ „ ditto Tinct. Rhubarb C 2 47 Not adulterated 39 „ „ ditto Mustard C 2 48 Not adulterated 40 „ „ ditto Pepper C 2 49 Not adulterated 41 „ „ Bartlett Coffee C 1 42 Not adulterated 42 „ „ ditto Rum C 1 43 Not adulterated 43 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 44 Not adulterated 44 „ „ ditto Coffee C 1 45 Adulterated with 30 per cent, of chicory 45 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 46 Not adulterated 46 „ „ ditto Milk C 1 47 Not adulterated 47 „ „ ditto Butter C 1 48 Adulterated with 70 per cent, of foreign fat 48 „ 29 Rose Milk C 2 50 Not adulterated 49 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 51 Not adulterated 50 „ „ ditto Milk C 2 52 Adulterated with 6 per cent, of water 17, Bloomsbury Square, W.C., 31st March, 1886. T. REDWOOD. 81 Inspector's Report for the Quarter ending March 25th, 1886. To the Vestry of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I beg respectfully to submit to you the proceedings taken under the Food and Drugs Act for the quarter ending Lady-day, 1886, I have submitted 23 samples to the Analyst:— milk 9, coffee 7, butter 6, rum 1. Two samples of milk were found to be adulterated : — C 1.30. Mrs.Wilson, 54, Margaret Street. Dismissed. C 1.31. John Goodenough, 29, Margaret Street, Fined £5 and 2s. cost. Five samples of butter proved to be adulterated C 1.33. T. Jones, 30a Lloyd's Row. Fined 20/and costs. C 1.35. E. Davy, 148, King's Cross Road. Fined 50/- and costs. C 1.37. H. Fordham, 91, Pentonville Road. Fined 50/- and costs. C 1.40. D. Treen, 22, Henry Street. Fined 20/and costs. C 1.48. Robert Tratt, 105, Rosoman Street. For adj udication. Four samples of coffee proved to be adulterated : — C 1.36. E. Davy, 148, King's Cross Road. Fined 50/- and costs. C 1.38. H. Fordham, 91, Pentonville Road. Fined 50/- and costs. C 1.41. D. Treen, 22, Henry Street. Dismissed. C 1.46. H. Graves, 2, Chadwell Street. For adjudication. I have the honour to remain, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, W. J. BARTLETT, Inspector. 82 INSPECTOR'S REPORT, For the Quarter ending March 25th, 1886. To the Vestry of the Parish of Clerkenwell. Gentlemen, I beg respectfully to submit to you proceedings taken under the Food and Drugs Act. For the quarter ending Lady-day, 1886, I have submitted to the Public Analyst 13 milks, 8 butters, 2 rums, 1 coffee, 1 mustard. 1 pepper, 1 tine, rhubarb. Four samples of milk were found to be adulterated:— C 2.28. Elizabeth Walton, 10, Little Sutton Street. Fined £5 2s. C 2.29. Mary Ann Bone, 25, Allen Street. Dismissed with caution, pleading poverty. C 2.30. Eliza Peagan, 27, Clerkenwell Close. Fined 22/- C 2.51. David Davies, 97, Goswell Road. Fined 20s. and 2s. costs. Two samples of butter were found to be adulterated:— C 2.39. William Hotson, 52, Warren Street. Fined 42/- C 2.40. Joseph Platts, 3, Great Bath Street. Fined 42/- I have the honour to remain, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, HUGH ROSE, Inspector. 83 VESTRYMEN Elected pursuant to the Metropolis Local Management Act, 18th & 19th Vict., cap. 120. WARD No. 1. All that portion of the Parish which lies north of a line drawn from the west boundary of the Parish at Battle-bridge, along the centre of Pentonville-road, to the east boundary of the Parish at the top of the City-road, thence up High-street and Liverpool-road to Sermon-lane, thence westward (according to the boundary of the Parish,) to Caledonian-road, including Nos. 61 to 77, and 68 to 100, in that road, and 6 to 17, Caledonian-crescent, thence to the western boundary at Battle-bridge, and all that portion of the Parish which is situate at or about Muswell-hill. to go out of office in Mr. CHARLES BATCHELDER 11, Baron Street Mr. GEORGE WILLIAM BETJEMANN 36 & 38, Pentonville Rd. 1887 Mr. ROBERT GILLARD 11, High Street Mr. GEORGE EASON 48, Henry Street Mr. JOSHUA PATTERSON 8, New Winchester Street Mr. SAMUEL AUGUSTUS BROOKS 10, Northampton Square 1856 Mr ALFRED GOAD 29, High Street Mr. JOHN BETJEMANN 36 & 38, Pentonville Rd. ( Mr. JAMES GIBSON 24, Penton Street 1889 Mr GEORGE MORRIS 17, High Street Mr. WILLIAM ROBERT YATES 1* Penton Street Mr. WILLIAM JOHN HOOPER 33, Penton Street WARD No. 2. All that portion of the Parish which lies within a line drawn along the centre of King's Cross-road, from Baker-street to Battlo-bridge, thence up Pentonville-road to the north-west corner of Claremont-square, thence down Am well-street and Rosomanstreet to Exmouth-street, along Exmouth-street and Mount-pleasant to the boundary, thence along the boundary of the Parish to King's Cross-road, bottom of Baker-street, including nearly the whole of the House of Correction. Mr. THOS. STANDING JENNINGS 159, Farringdon Road Mr. ANGELO BECK 29, Granville Square 1887 Mr. JOHN CHARLES MENCE 100, King's Cross Road Mr. JOHN DORE 23a, Holford Square Mr. FREDERICK GEORGE SCHEIB 55, Amwell Street Mr. JAMES JOHNSON 50, Baker Street Mr. WILLIAM JOHN JENNINGS 2, Tysoe Street 1888 Mr. WILLIAM ROBSON 19, Holford Square Mr. JOHN WALTER HOPKINS 21, River Street Mr. HENRY KNOTT 111, Pentonville Road Mr. ALFRED JOHN DIXIE 13, Wilmington Square Mr. ARTHUR THOMAS CATLEY 23, Lloyd Square 1889 Mr. WILLIAM PIERPOINT 240, St. John Street Mr. HENRY CHARLES LEETE 11, Amwell Street Mr. ROBERT CHARLES MURRAY 113, Pentonville Road 84 WARD No. 3. All that portion of the Parish within a line drawn along the Pentonville-road, from the north-west corner of Claremont-square, to the junction of the City-road and Goswellroad, thence down Goswell-road to corner of Spencer-street including Nos. 290 to 320 on the north east side of Goswell-road and Nos. 1 and 30, in Sidney-street, thence along Spencer-street, Myddelton-street, Rosoman-street and Amwell-street to the north corner of Claremont-square. to go out of office in Mr. DECIMUS ALFRED BALL 219 & 221, Goswell Road Mr. DANIEL COOKSEY 52, Amwell Street 1887 Mr. WILLIAM LEMON KELLAWAY 57, White Lion Street Mr. GEORGE ANTILL 43, Myddelton Street Mr. JOS1AH LEAVER 1, Rydon Crescent 1888 Mr NATHAN HARRIS 68, St. John Street Road 1558 Mr HENRY HILL 11, Cyrus Street Mr. JAMES DURRANT SPIRES 205, Goswell Road Mr. EDWARD SANS 3, Garnault Place Mr. ARTHUR WHITE 53, Myddelton Street 1889 Mr THOMAS KEYWORTH EVANS 327, Goswell Road Mr. REUBEN SQUIRE 37, Myddelton Square WARD No. 4. All that portion of the Parish within a line drawn from Goswell-road, along the centre of Spencer-street, Myddelton-street, Exmouth-street, Mount-pleasant, to the boundary of the Parish, thence along the line of the Old Fleet Ditch to New-street, opposite Clerkenwell-green, thence along Clerkenwell green (north side of Sessions-house) and Aylesbury-street to St. John-street, thence up the centre of St. John-street to Percivalstreet, along the centre ot Percival-street, and up Goswell-road to Spencer-street. fMr. S'lEPHEN WATERS 6, Myddelton Street Mr. JOSEPH SADD1NGTON 143, Farringdon Road 1887 Mr. WILLIAM KING 7, Gloucester Street 1887 Mr. CHARLES GILLETT PAYN 5, Myddelton Street Mr. ALFRED HASLEHAM 7, Clerkenwell Green Mr WILLIAM DAVIES 13, Claremont Square Mr. THOMAS WILDBORE 145, 147,149,Farringdon Rd. Mr. JOSEPH JOHN GOODE 48, Clerkenwell Green Mr. REDMOND DENIS LYONS 1, Newcastle Place 1888 Mr. JOHN FREEMAN 45, Rosoman Street Mr. JOSEPH WALTON 7, Upper Charles Street Mr. JAMES FRANCIS KELLY 21, Tysoe Street fMr. WILLIAM MORTIMER FOXCROFT 3, Holford Street Mr. WILLIAM HENRY McCARTHY 9, Mount Pleasant^ 1889 Mr. ELI HAVARD 19, St. John Street Road 1889 Mr. ROBERT STEBBINGS 18, Myddelton Street Mr. EDWIN GRIFFIN 35, St. John Street Road Mr. EDWARD PINN 235, Goswell Roadl 85 WARD No. 5. All that portion of the Parish which lies south of the southern boundary of Ward 4, sounded on the east by a line drawn along the centre of Goswell-road from Percivalstreet to Clerkenwell-road, on the west by the Old Fleet Ditch, and on the south by a ine drawn from Goswell-road down Clerkenwell-road, thence irregularly, accordingly to the boundary of the Parish, to the Old Fleet Ditch. to GO OUT OF OFFICE IN fMr. SAMUEL BENNETT 187, St. John Street Mr. WILLIAM MOTT 22, St. John's Lano 1887 Mr. GEORGE BYASS 169, St. John Street Mr. SAMUEL RICHES 52 & 53, Northampton St. Mr. ELI WILLIAM JAVENS 16, Clerkenwell Green fMr. JAMES HENRY WHITE 156, St. John Street Mr. JOSEPH WHITAKER 21, Great Percy Street 1888 Mr. ARTHUR MILLWARD 12, Albemarle Street Mr. FREDERICK HASLEHAM 44, Sekforde Strert Mr. CHARLES TAYLOR 4, Compton Street Rev. WILLIAM DAWSON, M.A. 59, Red Lion Street Mr. FREDERICK LOWE 26, Clerkenwell Road 1889 Mr. HENRY WALKER 30, Red Lion Street Mr. WILLIAM REASON 100, St. John Street Mr. WILLIAM JOLLY 20, Berkley Street Representative at the Metropolitan Board of Works, WILLIAM ROBSON, Esq., (Whose term of office will expire by effluxion of time on the second Wednesday in June, 1887). EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS. ST. JAMES'S. Rev. JOHN HENRY ROSE, m.a., Vicar Lloyd House, Lloyd Street Mr. WILLIAM M. FOXCROFT, 3, Holford Street Mr. WILLIAM L. KELLAWAY, Churchwardens ST. JOHN'S. Rev. WILLIAM DAWSON, Rector 59, Red Lion Street Mr. ARTHUR MILLWARD, 12, Albemarle Street Mr. JOHN JAMBS POTTS, Churchwarden 86 VESTRY COMMITTEES. FINANCE COMMITTEE. Time of Meeting :— First Tuesday in each Month at 7 p.m. Mr. W. ROBSON, Ex-Officio. Ward 1. Mr. R. GILLARD „ W. J. HOOPER „ G. W. BETJEMANN Ward 2. Mr. W. PIERPOINT „ J. JOHNSON, Vice-Chn. „ A. T. CATLEY Ward 3. Mr. D. COOKSEY, Chairman „ A. WHITE „ T. K. EVANS Ward 4. Mr. J. WALTON „ E. HAVARD „ C. G. PAYN Ward 5. Mr. A MILLWARD „ J.H.WHITE „ J. WHITAKER PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE. Time of Meeting:— Not fixed. Mr. W. ROBSON, Ex-Officio. Ward 1. Mr. J. PATTERSON „ G. W. BETJEMANN Ward 2. Mr. J. JOHNSON „ A. BECK „ R. C. MURRAY Ward 3. Mr. W. L. KELLAWAY „ J. D. SPIRES, Vice-Chn. „ T. K. EVANS Ward 4. Mr. J. F. KELLY, Chairman „ E. HAVARD „ S. WATERS Wakd 5. Mr. S. RICHES „ H. WALKER „ J. H. WHITE ASSESSMENT & APPEAL COMMITTEE. Time of Meeting:— First Wednesday in each quarter and at other times when necessary. Mr. W. ROBSON, Ex-Officio. Ward 1. Mr. C. BATCHELDER „ „ g. MORRIS, Chairman „ W. R YATES „ j. GIBSON Ward 2. Mr. W. pierpoint „ J. W. hopkins „ T. s. jennings „ w. j. jennings Ward 3. Mr. A. WHITE ,, „ D. A. BALL „ H. HILL „ ,, j. LEAVER, Vice-Chmn. Ward 4. Mr. j. J. goode „ t. wildbore „ w. h. McCarthy „ r. stebbings Ward 5. Mr. W. REASON „ W. JOLLY „ F. LOWE e. w. javens Ex-Officio Members of the Committee. Mr. W. M. FOXCROFT Church,, W. L. KELLAWAY wardens. „ J. D. SPIRES „ W. DA VIES „ J. PATTERSON „ J.F.KELLY „ A. T. CATLEY Overseers. 87 COMMITTEE of WORKS. Time of Meeting:— Every Tuesday at 11 a.m. Mr. W. ROBSON, Ex-Officio. Wabd 1. Mr. C. BATCHELDER „ G. MORRIS „ J. PATTERSON „ S. A. BROOKS Ward 2. Mr. A. T. CATLEY „ H. C. LEETE „ J. W. HOPKINS „ „ J. DORE Ward 3. Mr. G. ANTILL „ E. SANS „ H. HILL „ J. LEAVER Ward 4. Mr. W. DAVIES „ w. h. McCarthy „ r. stebbings „ e. griffin Ward 5. Mr. E. W. JAVENS, Chairmn. „ F. LOWE „ „ W. JOLLY, Vice-Chrmn. „ G. BYASS Wharf Rota— Chairman and Vice-Chairman and one from each Ward. AUDITORS of ACCOUNTS Appointed by the Ratepayers. Ward 1. Mr. J. B. LEWIS, 56, Pentonville-road Ward 2. Mr. c. DEBNEY, 16, Wilmington-sq. Ward 3. Mr. R. HAMPSON, 205, St. John-st.-rd. Ward 4. [road Mr. E. LENARD, 57, St. John-street Ward 5. Mr. g. W. TILLETT, 141, St. John-st. Vestry Hall, Clerkenwell* August, 1886. SANITARY COMMITTEE Time of Meeting:— First and Third Monday in each Month at 11 a.m. Mr. W. ROBSON, Ex-Officio. Ward 1. Mr. S. A. BROOKS „ J. GIBSON „ W. J. HOOPER „ W. R. YATES ! Ward 2. Mr. A. J. DIXIE „ A. BECK „ T. S. JENNINGS „ F. G. SCHEIB Ward 3. Mr. E. SANS, Chairman „ D. COOKSEY „ G. ANTILL „ N. HARRIS Ward 4. Mr. W. DAVIES, Vice-Chmn. „ T. WILDBORE „ E. PINN „ E. GRIFFIN wird 5. Mr. H. WALKER „ W. REASON „ A. MILLWARD „ G. BYASS TRUSTEES OF THE BANKING ACCOUNT. Mr. J. J. GOODE „ W.ROBSON „ J. GIBSON „ W. M. FOXCROFT „ W. PIERPOINT ROBERT PAGET, Vestry Clerk. 88 OFFICERS under The Metropolis Local Management Act, WITH THEIR RESIDENCES. Vestry Clerk. Mr. ROBERT PAGET, 19, Lloyd Square First Assistant Clerk. Mr. ROBERT ERNEST PAGET, 88, Osbaldeston Road, Cazeuove Road, N. Second Assistant Clerk. Mr. EDMUND PURDY, 28, Ham Park Road, West Ham Third Assistant Clerk. Mr. GEORGE RAY BROWN, 17, Ockendon Road, N. Fourth. Assistant Clerk. Mr. CHARLES ASHFORD HARRISON, 23, Oglander Road, East Dulwich Surveyor of Roads, Pavements, Lamps, Sewers, &c. Mr. WILLIAM IRON, 148, King Edward Road, E. (May be seen at the Vestry Hall, daily, from 10 till half-past 11 a.m. when and where all applications for Licenses for Hoardings, House Drainage, &c., must be made.) Surveyor's Assistant. Mr. PETER GORRINGE KILLICK, 7, St. Helen's Villas, Forest Hill, S.E. Wharf Superintendent. Mr. ISAAC GORE, Phoenix Wharf, Commercial Road, Lambeth Inspectors of Nuisances, Street Keepers, and Inspectors under the Adulteration Act. Works Department. FREDERIC CHESHIRE, 60, Rosoman Street Sanitary Department. Wards 1, 2, and 3.— WILLIAM JOHN BA.RTLETT, 47, Wharton Street Wards 4 and 5.— HUGH ROSE, 32, Cumming Street Assistant Inspector and Messenger. JOHN SAMUEL BISSMIRE, 5, Clerkenwell Close Solicitors to the Vestry. Messrs. BOULTON, SONS & SANDEMAN, 21a, Northampton Square Medical Officer of Health. J. W. GRIFFITH, M.D., 50, Camberwell Grove Analyst of Food, &c. Dr. REDWOOD, 17, Bloomsbury Square District Surveyor (under Metropolitan Buildings Act). Mr. ERNEST CARRITT, 3, Wilmington Square APPENDIX I. 90 At a Meeting of the Vestry, held on the 18th December, 1873. "The Clerk called attention to the fact that since "the Vestry had ceased to collect the Poor Rate, which "duty had reverted to the Guardians or Governors of "the Poor under the Local Act, and which Board had "been revived for the purpose in November, 1871? "there was no Poor-rate Account published, except "the remainder of those in collection by the Vestry "previous to that time, and suggested whether it would "not be desirable, by an agreement between both "Boards, to publish the Poor Rate Account of the "Guardians or Governors as an appendix to the Annual "Reports of the Vestry, in which case there would be "one and a half years' Poor Rate Account to be "appended to the Report about to be issued for the "year ended Lady-day last. "It was moved by Mr. Bamford, seconded by "Mr. Dore, and— "Resolved that such suggestion be approved and "adopted." (Extract from Board Minutes.) ROBERT PAGET, Vestry Clerk. The Poor Rate Account of the Guardians or Governors of the Poor for the year ending Lady-day, 1884, is annexed hereto accordingly. Guardians or Governors of the Poor of the Parish of Saint James, Clerkenwell, (under the local act). STATEMENT AND ACCOUNT OF THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF THE POOR RATE, For the Half-year ended Michaelmas, 1885. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. 1885. £ s. d. Balance brought forward 3422 11 10 April 28. C. H. Garland, Esq., Treasurer of the Holborn Guardians, Balance of Second Instalment of Precept 4141 0 0 Received on Rates as follows :— October, 1883— 1st portion 1 17 4 C. A. Bannister, Returning Officer's Expenses for Borough of Finsbury, proportion for Clerkenwell 86 3 3 2nd 3 5 10 5 3 2 April, 1884— l6t portion 16 6 0 W. J. Ironside, Commission, &c. to Lady-day 48 16 1 „ 2nd „ 50 7 1 G. A. Potter, do. 50 0 11 66 13 1 H. W. Holliday, do. 40 3 8 Octobcr, 1884— 1st portion 266 2 4 T. Powell, do. 41 16 0 „ 2nd „ 5256 18 5 W. J. Goode, Printing 3 10 0 5523 0 9 June 10. Receiver of Metropolitan Police District Police Rate per Warrant dated 1st January last 3470 9 7 Treasury for Government property— 1st portion 103 15 4 2nd „ 129 14 2 July 6. C. H. Garland, Treasurer, &c. on account of First Instalment of Precept 4000 0 0 233 9 6 April, 1885— 1st portion 8992 11 8 „ 21. R. Paget, Salary as Clerk to Midsummer 12 10 0 „ 2nd „ 8648 10 8 W. J. Ironside, Commission, &c. to do. 40 2 1 17641 2 4 G. A. Potter, do. 42 8 7 23235 19 4 H. W. Holliday. do. 36 8 2 Guardians of the Holborn Union, half-year's rent of College House Estate to Midsummer 150 0 0 T. Powell, do. W. J. Goode, Printing 42 1 7 16 2 0 Forward 27042 0 8 Aug. 11. C. H. Garland, Balance of First Instalmenl of Precept 3240 3 8 Forward 14297 15 2  £ d. £ s. d. £ s. d. 1885. £ s. d. Brought forward 27042 0 8 Brought forward 14297 15 2 Poor Rate made 1885— Sept. 15. C. H. Garland, on account of Second Instalment of Precept 6000 0 0 Given in charge at 1s. 5d. 24276 4 3 Arrears of former Rates 5976 15 10 „ 24. E. Heard, Gravel, Repairs of Churchyard, St. James, Clerkenwell 5 7 0 Errors in last book entries as irrecoverable, since collected 41 19 7 Advertisements, re Workhouse Site 20 4 3 „ 29. C. H. Garland, Treasurer, &c., on account of Second Instalment of Precept 3000 0 0 6018 15 5 R. Paget, Salary as Clerk to date 12 10 0 30294 19 8 24335 16 5 Balance carried forward 2706 4 3 27042 0 8 27042 0 8 Collected 53235 19 4 Losses— Allowed to owners 399 10 6 Empties 1172 5 0 Excused 51 5 0 Runaways 171 6 0 Reduced by appeal 2 7 5 Duplicate Assessments 228 13 10 2025 7 9 25261 7 1 Arrears carried forward 5033 12 7 ROBERT PAGET, Clerk to the Board, January llth 1886 I find the sum of two thousand seven hundred and six pounds four shillings and threepence to be the balance on this accoun against the Guardians or Governors of the Poor of the Parish e St. James, Clerkenwell. Dated this 27th day of January, 1886. H. LLOYD ROBERTS, Auditor. Guardians or Governors of the Poor of the Parish of Saint James, Clerkenwell, (under the local act). STATEMENT AND ACCOUNT OF THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF THE POOR RATE, For the Half-year ended Lady-day, 1886. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. 1885. £ s. d. Balance brought forward 2706 4 3 Oct. 20. C. H. Garland, Treasurer, &c.. Balance of Second Instalment of Precept 3018 0 0 Received on Rates as follows:— April, 1884— 2nd portion 4 0 10 Overseers' Expenses preparing Borough List 227 15 6 October, 1884— 1st ,, 2 2 0 „ 2nd „ 20 2 6 County List 16 18 0 22 4 6 Jury List 50 8 0 April, 1885— 1 st „ 222 18 0 295 1 6 „ 2nd „ 4474 7 11 Boulton, Sons & Sandeman, Expenses of Election of Vestrymen in May last 52 18 0 4697 5 11 Treasury for Government property— 1st portion 90 15 11 W. J. Ironside, Commission 51 5 6 G. A. Potter, do. 51 14 6 Do. 2nd ,, 129 14 2 H. W. Holliday do. 41 9 4 220 10 1 T Powell do 46 11 5 October, 1885— 1st „ 7651 13 2 Dec. 1. G. Wingrove, Repairing Hoarding round Workhouse, &c 3 11 2 „ 2nd „ 6844 13 5 4496 6 7 15 W. H. Eade, Property Tax on Workhouse to Christmas, 1883 7 3 9 19219 17 10 Guardians of the Holborn Union, half-year's rent of College House Estate to Christmas 150 0 0 21. Receiver of Metropolitan Police District, Police Rate due 1st July, 1885 3502 9 2 Willing & Co., Rent of Hoarding round Clerkenwell Workhouse Site from 17th January to L2th April, 1884 16 0 0 24. R. Paget, Clerk's Salary to date 12 10 0 1886. Tor, 11 C. H. Garland, Treasurer, &c., Balance of First Instalment of Precept 4312 13 8 Do. Payment in lieu of reinstatement of Hoarding 10 0 0 o ct 11 • XX* Forward 22322 12 2 Forward 11395 8 0  £ s. d. £ s. d. 1886. £ s. d. Brought forward 22322 12 2 Brought forward 11395 8 0 Sheriff of Middlesex, Fines recovered from Keepers of Disorderly Houses— Jan 19. W. J. Ironside, Commission ... 33 19 9 G. A. Potter, do. 36 16 10 Sanders, 146, King's Cross Road 10 0 0 H. W. Holliday, do. 29 11 4 Smith, 2, North Street 5 0 0 T; Powell, do. 32 6 9 Shields, 95, White Lion Street 25 0 0 W. J. Goode, Printing 5 0 0 40 0 0 Boulton, Sons & Sandeman, Prosecution of Brothels, re Saunders, 146, King's Cross Road ... 79 4 0 Less Sheriff's poundage 3 0 0 37 0 0 Poor Rate made October, 1885— re Smith, 2, North Street 48 12 2 Given in charge at 1s. 3d. 21638 11 3 re Shields, 95, White Lion Street 54 8 4 Arrears of former Rates 5033 12 7 182 4 6 Errors in last book entries as irrecoverable, since collected 18 3 11 Feb. 23. C. H. Garland, on account of Second Instalment of Precept ... 4000 0 0 Boulton, Sons & Sandeman, Prosecution of Brothels, re Barrett 40 19 6 5051 16 6 Mar. 24. C. H. Garland, Treasurer, &c., on account of Second Instalment of Precept 5000 0 0 26690 7 9 20756 6 8 22359 12 2 Balance carried forward 1003 5 6 22359 12 2 collected 19219 17 10 Losses— Allowed to Owners 367 15 10 Empties 829 12 2 Excused 48 3 3 Runaways 224 17 8 Reduced by appeal 13 16 11 Duplicate Assessments 337 9 3 1821 15 1 21041 12 11 Arrears carried forward 5648 14 10 ROBERT PAGET, Clerk to the Board. July 6th, 1886. I find the Bum of one thousand six hundred and three pounds Ave shilling* and sixpence to he the balance on this account against ttie Guardians or UoTernora of the Poor of the Pariah of Saint James, Clerkenwell. Dtted Ibla 6th day of JuJy. 1886. H. LLOYED Borerts Auditors INDEX TO MINUTES OF EVIDENCE IN APPENDIX II. 96 CLERKENWELL. Mr. Paget has been Vestry Clerk 28 years, Paget, 17,470, 17,471, 17,777. Since last December Vestry have had under their immediate consideration the question of applying tenement provisions, Paget, 17,472. Vestry of, in reply to letter from Local Government Board in December last, as to tenement provisions promised it their immediate consideration, Paget, 17,473. Vestry of, on the 2nd of May considered a second report from the Sanitary Committee on the question of tenement provisions, Paget, 17,474. Yestry of, were asked on 30th May by Local Government Board what action they intended taking under tenement provisions, Paget, 17,475. Local Government Board were told on 4th June, in reply to letter of 30th May, that their letter would be laid before the vestry of, Paget, 17,476. Local Government Board wrote again to vestry on 2nd July asking for reply to their letter of 30th May, Paget, 17,477. Yestry of, replied on 4th July that they could not yet answer to Local Government Board's letter of 30th May, Paget, 17,478. Yestry were again asked on 2nd August for a reply to Local Government Board's letter of 30th May, Paget, 17,479. Press of business has prevented vestry till now replying to Local Government Board, Paget, 17,480-17,482, 17,762, 17,763. The Yestry can now reply to Local Government Board's letter of 30th May, Paget, 17,482. Till Sir Charles Dilke issued his first circular, the vestry were not aware of the powers they had under 35th section, Paget, 17,483. Yestry of, not aware that tenement provisions were in operation in some districts, Paget, 17,484. Mr. Osborne is on most of the chiet committees of the vestry of, Paget, 17,485. Mr. Osborne owns property in Northampton Road, but not certain if he still holds any in Easton Street, Paget, 17,487, 17,488. Mr. J ennings is no longer a member of the Sanitary Committee, Paget, 17,489, 17,616-17,618. When vestry met on 2nd May to consider proposed tenement regulations, a certain clause being negatived, no further steps were taken, either by Mr. Jennings or any other member, Paget, 17,490-17,496, 17,758-17,761. 97 Mr. Jennings need hardly have construed from the fact of one clause being negatived that the vestry wanted to abandon tenement regulations, Paget, 17,490, 17,760, 17,761. Mr. Ross moved the rejection of the clause, which led to tenement regulations being dropped by the vestry of, Paget, 17,49717,498, 17,529-17,532. Mr. Paget cannot say what doubtful property in, belongs to Mr. Ross, Paget, 17,499-17,523. Mr. Ross states he does not possess much doubtful property of his own, but is simply an agent for others, Paget, 17,500. Mr. Ross has sometimes been called the dictator of, Paget, 17,528. Some members of the vestry thought the tenement regulations too inquisitorial, Paget, 17,533-17538. Sees no reason why Mr. Ross, although an owner of doubtful property, should be adverse to any reasonable tenement regulations, Paget, 17,534. Messrs. Martin, Hill, and Thaine, vestrymen, are owners of some tenement houses in doubtful condition in, Paget, 17,53917,542. Exmouth Place has been condemned as an unhealthy area, Paget, 17,542. Names of 13 members of the vestry, who possess tenement houses in doubtful condition in, Paget, 17,539-17,542, 17,54817,556, 17,627. Is not aware that there is an undue representation of the house farming interest on the vestry, Paget, 17,557. Owners of other property than tenement houses can stand as vestrymen if they like, Paget, 17,557. Yestry is composed of great number of people of various trades, owners of tenement houses are quite the minority, Paqet, 17,558. About 10 out of 72 members of the vestry are publicans, Paget, 17,559. 17,624. Publicans are the most heavily rated people in, Paget, 17,559, 17,560. Some of the most respectable men in, are publicans, Paget, 17,560. Publicans in, have lately sought election as vestrymen, Paget, 17,560. The vestry of, rejected the clause in the tenement regulations by 17 to 9 or 10, Paget, 17,561. Six or seven out of the 17 votes belonged to proporty holders, and three or four out of the 10, Paget, 17,561. Some of the vestrymen who hold doubtful proporty in, voted in the minority of 10, Paget, 17,562. 98 Mr. Ball voted in the majority against tenement regulations in. Paget, 17,504. It cannot be said that Mr. Ball is a leading member on the vestry of, Paget, 17,565, 17,566. Mr. Ball has only been vice-chairman of one committee during his 11 years connexion with the vestry of, Paget, 17,567. Mr. Ball is vice-chairman of a very important committee in, viz., the assessment committee, Paget, 17,568. Mr. Ball is highly esteemed in, Paget, 17,568. Vestry of, do not think it wrong to make Mr. Ball or any other respectable man chairman of their committees, Paget, 17,568. Vestry of, in electing chairmen of committees look to their fitness for the work, and do not inquire whether they own property, Paget, 17,568. As Mr. Ball holds his property in, under the Marquess of Northampton, if necessary repairs are not done, is not the remedy in the Marquess' own hands? Paget, 17,569. Mr. Ball is no now tenant of the Marquess of Northampton; is it only now discovered that he does not do repairs ? Paget, 17,570. Vestry of, abate overcrowding and bad sanitation when found out, without having tenement regulations, Paget, 17,571, 17,572, 17,576, 17,702, 17,729, 17,731. If Mr. Bates had reported the case of overcrowding on Mr. Ball's property to the vestry of, it would have been stopped at once, Paget, 17,571-17,576. Overcrowding would not be more easily abated if tenement regulations were adopted in, Paget, 17,572. Vestry serve a printed circular on owner immediately overcrowding ia reported to them, Paget, 17,576, 17,729. Yery likely Mr. Ball's property in Spencer Place is in bad condition, Paget, 17,577. Have the complainants of overcrowding in, ever lodged a complaint at the Yestry Hall? Paget, 17,578. Complaints of smells have been made at the Yestry Hall, but not of overcrowding, Paget, 17,579. Sanitary inspectors take a general survey of the several districts of, irrespective of any complaints, Paget, 17,580. Sanitary inspectors are expected to visit places about once a fortnight or once a month, Paget, 17,581. The vestry believe that Clerkenwell is not so bad as represented, especially if the death-rate is any criterion, Paget, 17,582. The death-rate put forward was a corrected death-rate, Paget, 17,583, 99 The internal death-rate within tho parish is 16.9, and making every allowance cannot exceed 21 at the very outside, Paget, 1 583. Medical officer does not believe that the death-rate is as high as 21 in, Paget, 17,583. Believes the article in the "Lancet" on the death-rate of, was founded on a misconception, Paget, 17,583, 17,584. Medical officer of, made one report against Wynyatt cottages, but has not done so latterly, Paget, 17,585. Wynyatt cottages, were included in a scheme, Paget, 17,586. The condition of small houses like Wynyatt cottages must depend upon the sort of people who inhabit them, Paget, 17,586. In a return made 20 years ago of the death-rate in metropolitan parishes, Clerkenwell stood within nine or ten of the top, Paget, 17,588. Is healthy, not bacause of its high situation, but from good sanitation and constant watching, Paget, 17,589, 17,590. Some portion of, lies high, but a great deal of the parish lies very low, Paget, 17,590, 17,878. The medical officer's report upon the death-rate of, gave the divisions of the parish as well as the average, Paget, 17,591. Does not believe the death-rate in any one division of, was as high as 40, Paget, 17,592-17,594. At the first visitation of cholera in, the death-rate was 10 per 10,000 ; at the second, 7 per 10,000 ; and at tho last was only 6 per 10,000, Paget, 17,594-17,599. Tho return as to deaths at each visitation of cholera in, being as yet unpublished is therefore not evidence, Paget, 17,599. Brunswick Place, is not specially bad, Paget, 17,601-17,603. Brunswick Place, to Mr. Paget's recollection, has not been reported to the vestry as very bad, Paget, 17,604. If overcrowding in Northampton Street, had been reported at the Yestry Hall, it would have been stopped at once, Paget, 17,608. The vestry get very few intimations of overcrowding from other sources than their own staff, Paget, 17,608, 17,738. Only one representation as to overcrowding in, was received from the sisters occupying the "Retreat," and that was looked into at once, Paget, 17,609-17,611. Mr. Jennings was chairman of the sanitary committee, at tho time of his examination, Paget, 17,615. Houses in bad repair, if known to the sanitary committee would soon bo visited and remedied, Paget, 17,620, 17,621. 100 Whether a large number of the vestry are interested in doubtful property depends upon what constitutes doubtful property, Paget, 17,622. Interest is taken in the elections of the vestry in, Paget, 17,625. At the vestry elections in, sometimes 80 people vote, and sometimes 200 or 300, Paget, 17,626. When no poll takes place, the vestry elections in, are carried by comparatively few, Paget, 17,626. No polling took place when Mr. Ball was elected on the vestry, Paget, 17,626. When there is opposition, a groat many people vote at vestry elections in, Paget, 17,626. Not many families occupy single rooms in, there may be some cases, Paget, 17,629-17,633. Thinks families in, as a rule have at least two rooms, Paget, 17,631. Medical officer would look after and endeavour te stop the occupation of single rooms by families, Paget, 17,633. Sanitary inspectors and parish surveyors are appointed by the vestry, Paget, 17,634. Some years ago the vestry discharged an inspector and surveyor for neglect of duty, Paget, 17.638-17,641. The vicar of, is ex-officio chairman of the vestry when he attends, Paget, 17,642. The vicar always attends vestry meetings on Easter Tuesday, but not on any other day, Paget, 17,644, 17,645. The vicar of, is an elected clergyman, Paget, 17,646. The vicar is not a member of the sanitary committee, and would not attend unless invited, Paget, 17,647. The vicar of, is simply ex-officio chairman of the vestry, and is not a member of any of the committees, (Paget), 17,648,17,649. Denies Mr. Brighty's statement that the vestry do not act when the private property of members is concerned, Paget, 17,652. Regular meetings of the vestry are held, Paget, 17,653, 17,654. Seldom found necessary to call together the committee, as most cases can bo dealt with by the medical officer or sanitary inspectors, Paget, 17,654. Sanitary committee would view the place if considered necessary by medical officer, Paget, 17,654. There would bo no difficulty in getting the sanitary authority to move in, Paget, 17,655-17,657. Is not prepared to say that vestrymen who own property attend more regularly than other members, Paget, 17,658, 17,660. The average attendance out of the 72 vestry members, is from 25 to 30, Paget, 17,659. 101 The works committee is a very important one, Paget, 17,662, 17,670. Ten out of 14 vestrymen mentioned as property owners are on the works committee, Paget, 17,663. The unusual number of property owners on the works committee only shows they are thought fitter for the work than other members, Paget, 17,664, 17,665. The works committee look after roads, &c., and has nothing to do with house property, Paget, 17,665, 17,667. The works committee does not form the nucleus or centre of the vestry, Paget, 17,666, 17,667. Seven of the 14 vestrymen holding property are members of the appeal and assessment committee, Paget, 17,668, 17,671. There is nothing in the functions of the works committee to encourage house owners to become members, Paget, 17,670. If so many property owners are members of the assessment and appeal committee, it is because they are thought the best judges of assessment questions, Paget, 17,671. The vestry honestly selects for its various committees, men considered best and fittest for the duties, Paget, 17,672. Three sanitary inspectors are employed in, Paget, 17,674. The third inspector is also coroner's officer, sexton of the church, messenger to the vestry, and assistant sanitary inspector, Paget, 17,675-17,677. The third sanitary inspector was engaged to relieve the other two from the work of delivering summonses, Paget, 17,67517,677. The third inspector is sometimes employed to assist the other two in their work, Paget, 17,676-17,678. The third sanitary inspector in, was formerly in the jewellery trade, Paget, 17,679, 17,687. The third sanitary inspector requires no special training for the work he has to do, Paget, 17,680. The third sanitary inspector when surveying acts under the medical officer and the other inspectors, Paget, 17,681. The third sanitary inspector is not to take upon himself any personal responsibility, Paget, 17,681. Regular practised inspectors are employed to visit the homes of the people in, Paget, 17,685. The third sanitary inspector is a very useful officer, Paget, 17,687. The vestry did not discharge the sanitary inspector solely on account of neglect of duties, Paget, 17,688-17,697. Lord Compton's statement, that the visits of sanitary inspectors are infrequent and merely formal, is unreliable, as he can know nothing personally about the matter, Paget, 17,69817,701, 17,873, 17,874. 102 In thousands of cases, nuisances have been removed as the result of the activity of the sanitary inspectors, Paget, 17,705. The vestry almost daily are reducing overcrowding, whitewashing, improving dwellings and drains in, Paget, 17,707-17,714. Volumes could be furnished giving instances of the health improvement works done by the vestry in, Paget, 17,712, 17,713. Was in a terrible state till the vestry came into operation, Paget, 17,715. That there will be and are defects in, cannot be denied, Paget, 17,715. Has greatly improved since the passing of the Metropolis Local Management Act, Paget, 17,716. Has gone down hill in its social status, but not in its sanitary state, Paget, 17,716. The members of the vestry are as good, if not better than the generality, Paget, 17,720. The vestrymen are men who have the most interest in, and are most eligible for parochial business, Paget, 17,719. The best men that present themselves are elected on the vestry, Paget, 17,720, 17,771. Vestrymen on whose property nuisances existed, would be pounced upon more sharply than a private owner, Paget, 17,722, 17,723. Vestrymen are more severely dwelt within regard to assessment than private persons, Paget, 17,723. The vestry would soon deal with Mr. Ball and Mr. Ross, if any conspicuous nuisance existed on their property, Paget, 17,724. Does not believe that either Mr. Ball or Mr. Ross own any property which can be called conspicuous nuisances, Paget, 17,725. Everyone knows the vestry is the sanitary authority, and if nuisances are not reported, it is not the fault of the vestry, Paget, 17,730. The vestry, as far as possible, find out for themselves when nuisances exist, Paget, 17,730. The vestry are always glad to be informed of the existence of any nuisance, Paget, 17,730. Any overcrowding reported to the vestry would be immediately abated, Paget, 17,731, 17,739. The allegation that overcrowding exists to an enormous extent in, can scarcely be accepted, Paget, 17,731-17,733. If terrible overcrowding does exist in tenement houses, it has been very carefully kept from the vestry, Paget, 17,733. If Mrs. Bates had reported the overcrowding in Allen Street to the vestry she would have done a very wise thing, Paget, 17,734, 17,735. 103 The large number of property owners on the vestry's committees has nothing to do with few complaints of overcrowding being received, Paget, 17,738. Tenents in overcrowded houses should first apply to the landlord to abate, and if refused then to the vestry, Paget, 17,739. Messrs. Ball, Hill, and Ross, collect their own rents, and must therefore know the state of each tenement, Paget, 17,74017,750. Owners finding their tenements in bad condition would not need to report to vestry, the remedy is in their own hands, Paget, 17,743. Owners who are guiltily aware of the bad condition of their tenements would not be fit men to manage parish affairs, Paget, 17,751-17,754. The rejected clause in the tenement regulations would have specially affected the class of property held by Mr. Ross and others, Paget, 17,755. With some modifications the rejected clause in the tenement regulations might have been accepted, Paget, 17,760, 17,761. The tenement regulations are suspended, Paget, 17,759. Sanitary inspectors are not influenced in their duties by the fact of so many vestrymen being property owners, Paget, 17,767, 17,768. Sanitary inspectors being appointed by the vestry tends to quicken the removal of nuisances on any property of vestrymen, Paget, 17,767. Has a clear recollection of, when the Act of 1855 came into operation, Paget, 17,778. Population in was 1861 65,000, it is now 69,000 odd, Paget, 17,780. Some wretched property and some tolerably good property were removed for the formation of Clerkenwell road, Paget, 17,780. Many hundreds of people were displaced by the Clerkenwell road, Paget, 17,780. Gross value of the 221 houses pulled down for Clerkenwell road 6,604/., and rateable value 5,485l., Paget, 17,780. Seven or eight large blocks of model dwellings have been built in, containing many thousands of inhabitants, Paget, 17,780. The population of the Peabody buildings just opened in Pear Tree court is over 1,000, Paget, 17,780. The substituted accommodation would more than hold both those displaced and the increase of population which has occurred since 1861, Paget, 17,780. It is not credible that greater overcrowding exists in, than in 1855, Paget, 17,780. 104 An immense improvement has taken place by the removal of unfit dwellings and the re-constitution of others in, Paget, 17,781. Demolitions for the Clerkenwell road took place partly under Torrens' Act, Paget, 17,782. Torrens' Act was put in force in 1869 in, and some demolitions and re-building took place, Paget, 17,782. Courts in, would have been dealt with under Torrens' Act, had it not been intended to sweep them away for Clerkenwell road, Paget, 17,782. Every attention was given to the sanitary condition of courts in, pending their removal, Paget, 17,782. The misery among the poor would have been increased by blindly applying Torrens' Act, during the exceptional demolitions for the Clerkenwell road, Paget, 17,786. Several sites are being dealt with under Torrens' Act as amended in 1882, Paget, 17,787. Mr. McCullagh Torrens has never interfered personally with the working of his Acts in, Paget, 17,802. Mr. McCullagh Torrens four or live years ago with the vicar's assistance inquired into the condition of things in, Paget, 17,803. It is not true the vicar has shown entire indifference to the condition of the people, Paget, 17,804, 17,805. The vicar has not shirked the duty of investigating the condition of the people, Paget, 17,804, 17,805. Does not believe any clergyman in, would refuse his assistance to the vestry if asked, Paget, 17,806-17,808. Beginning with Lord Northampton, there are four or five very large property owners in, Paget, 17,809. Large property owners are as much responsible for neglect in, as small owners, Paget, 17,810. Numbers of houses formerly occupied by one family have since been let by large owners to those who make a trade of subletting, Paget, 17,811. Large owners or their agents must know when lessees make a trade of sub-letting, Paget, 17,812. Where houses have been re-leased for sub-letting purposes each one has charged the cost of a new lease to the individual lessee, Paget, 17,813. Respectable families and employers have been refused renewal of leases in order to let the houses to middlemen, Paget, 17,814. Is so much the poorer by middle class people leaving through being refused renewal of leases, Paget, 17,815, 17,816. 105 Driving middle class people out, by refusing renewal of lease increases the difficulty of obtaining suitable vestrymen, Paget, 17,817. The vestry could not have prevented owners from refusing renewal of leases to respectable families, Paget, 17,818, 17,819. Has been an inconsiderate use of large property in, Paget, 17,820. Fear of adding to the burden of rebuilding has restrained the vestry from undertaking new works, Paget, 17,821. The jewellery and watch making trade of, has declined very materially, Paget, 17,833, 17,834. The decline in trade has depreciated wages and reduced the number of people employed, Paget, 17,835. Some trades and employments have left altogether, Paget, 17,835. The vestry are not responsible for the decline in trade, Paqet, 17,836, 17,839. The feeling in, is against excluding men from the vestry, because they carry on a particular trade, Paget, 17,847. Mr. Gillard, a publican, is a member of the vestry, and one of the most respectable men in, Paget, 17,850, 17,855. Mr. Gillard is very highly rated, Paget, 17,851. Mr. Thurston, a publican, is a member of the vestry and a most respectable man, Paget, 17,852, 17,855. Mr. Thurston is rated above 300l. a year, Paget, 17,853. Difficulty exists in getting sufficient people wholly disinterested in local money making to become vestrymen, Paget, 17,862. The difficulty in getting middle class people on the vestry might, perhaps, be lessened, if Holborn, Bloomsbury, and, were combined under one local authority, Paget, 17,863-17,867. The sanitary inspectors keep a diary of each day's work, to lay before the committee at their meetings, Paget, 17,871, 17,872. The diary of the sanitary inspectors is not always laid before the committee, they do not always insist upon seeing it, Paget, 17,872. The diaries might possibly refute Lord Compton's statement as to neglect of duty by the sanitary inspectors, Paget, 17,873, 17,874. The vestry ask that the following documents may be appended to the Commissioners' report. 1. Letters addressed on 20th March and 7th July to Sir Charles Dilke, answered certain allegations. 2. Death-rate for each year from 1856 to 1883. 3. Rough proof of annual report tor 1883 of medical officer's on sanitary condition of the parish, Paget, 17,877. 106 The Commission decided to print documents 2 and 3, Paget, 17,877. Pentonville portion stands high, but other portions of, are verylow, Paget, 17,878. Taking the level of the Pentonville portion, nearly the whole of St. Pancras and Islington stand higher than, Paget, 17,879. Death-rate of, is better than that of Islington and St. Pancras, Paget, 17,880. Statement showing gross amount of poor rates made during 14 years before and since the amalgamation of, with the Holborn Union, Paget, 17,881. Since the amalgamation of, with Holborn Union, rates have been 19,000l. a year more, Paget, 17,881. The present heavy taxation in, must deter the vestry from carrying out new and expensive work, Paget, 17,881. APPENDIX II. 108 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. At No. 8, Richmond Terrace, Whitehall, Friday, August 8th, 1884. TRIRTY-SEVENTH DAY. Present:— The Rt. Hon. The Earl Brownlow. The Rt. Hon. The Lord Carrington. The Rt. Hon. Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, Bart., M.P. Mr. W. T. McCullagh Torrens, M.P. Mr. Henry Broadhurst, M.P. Mr. George Godwin, F.R.S. Mr. John Edward Courtenay Bodley (Secretary). The Rt. Hon. Sir CHARLES WENTWORTH DILKE, Bart., M.P., in the Chair. Mr. Robert Paget, Clerk to the Vestry, Parish of Clerkenwell, examined. 17,470. The Chairman.—You are Vestry Clerk of Clerkenwell? —I am. 17,471. How long have you been Vestry Clerk?— Twenty-eight years. 17,472. A good deal of evidence has been given before the Commission upon the subject of Clerkenwell, as Clerkenwell was included in a district which the Commission took as a test district, namely, the metropolitan government district of Clerkenwell, St. Luke's, St. Pancras, and Holborn, having reference especially to the wholeof St. Luke's and Clerkenwell, to the southern portion of St. Pancras, and to the eastern portion of Holborn, districts which lie together. The Vestry of Clerkenwell have since December last had under their immediate consideration the question of provisions with regard to tenement houses, have they not ?— Yes. 17,473. After the 35th section of the Sanitary Act was put in force by the Local Government Board as regards the whole metropolis, it not having previously been in force in Clerkenwell, a letter was written by the Local Government Board in November 109 or December last to all parishes, and in the month of December Clerkenwell promised immediate consideration of that letter, I think?— Yes. 17,474. Am I right in believing that on the 2nd of May the Vestry considered a second report from the Sanitary Committee upon that subject?— They did. 17,475. The Vestry made no communication, I think, to the Local Government Board with regard to these reports of the Sanitary Committee, or with regard to the action which they were going to take; and they were written to on the 30th of May to ask what answer they would give ?—Yes. 17,476. On the 4th of June, I think, you answered, promising to lay our letter before the Vestry ?—Yes. 17,477. On the 2nd of July the Local Government Board wrote again, asking a reply, did they not ?—Yes. 17,478. And on the 4th July you replied that the Committee had not yet reported what answer they wished to be made to our letter of the 30th of May?—Yes. 17,479. On the 2nd of August we again wrote for a reply to our letter of the 30th of May ?—Yes. 17,480. Therefore I am justified, I think, in saying that we have not received from you any statement upon the subject up to the present time?—That is so. I may say that in the letter that I wrote yesterday or the day before I stated that the recommendation was on the businoss paper of the Yestry, from the Committee to whom the matter was referred, as to what reply should be sent, but that that item had not yet been reached. 17,481. It seems a long time, does it not?—It does, rather; but we have been very busy of late, and we have had a great deal of business, more than we can get through. 17,482. You wish us to take it as your answer that it has been press of business which has prevented any reply being sent to us up to the present time?—That is so really ; but I am now in a position to give a reply, and I shall do so in due course. We only came to a decision last night. 17,483. Amongst those who have given evidence before us, the first witness who mentioned Clerkenwell was Lord William Compton. When he was asked at question 618 with regard to these tenement provisions in Clerkenwell, he stated that Mr. 110 Osborne, one of the Vestrymen, got up and said (I am quoting Lord William Compton's own words), "that perhaps I was un"aware that up to the time Sir Charles Dilke had issued his first "circular the Vestry had not been aware of the powers they "possessed," that is to say the powers under the 35th section. Was that the case?—They had never turned their attention to it. Of course it was upon our Acts in the office, but they had never turned their attention to it, and consequently they had never considered the effect of that particular clause. 17,484. Were you aware that the provisions with regard to the tenement houses were in operation in some districts of the metropolis, for instance, in Chelsea?—No, I was not. 17,485. Mr. Osborne, who is here mentioned, is on all the chief Committees of the Vestry, is he not?—On most of them. 17,486. He is a broker, auctioneer, house agent, and rent collector, is he not?—I believe he is. 17,487. Do you know whether he still holds the property in Easton Street, as to which Lord William Compton gave evidence?—I am not quite certain whether he has parted with it or not. 17,488. You doubt whether he has lately sold his property in Easton Street, Easton Place, and Northampton Road?—He has some in Northampton Road, but I am not certain whether he holds that property in Easton Street or not. 17,489. Another witness, who spoke a good deal to us upon this subject, was Mr. Jennings, who was at that time the Chairman of your Sanitary Committee, but who has since, I believe, been left out of the Committee in the recent re-elections of your Committees?—Yes. 17,490. Mr. Jennings at question 2942 was asked:— "On what "occasion has the adoption of the 35th section been considered by "your Vestry while you have been a member of it?" and he replied that it had not been considered. He was then asked in the next question whether it was only lately that the Vestry had become alive to its importance; and he then said:—"It was "only since the communication from the Local Government "Board giving the intimation that you have declared that in "operation that we have considered it." He was then asked what steps had been taken to make byelaws during the last few months, and he made the following reply:— "The question was "referred to the Sanitary Committee. The Sanitary Committee 111 "held four meetings, and considered very minutely the suggested "regulations sent on from the Local Government Board; and I, "as chairman, moved that a special meeting should be held by "the Vestry to consider these regulations. When the meeting "assembled, before I could move the adoption of the regulations, "a member of the Board got up at once and moved that the "question should be adjourned without listening to any statement "on my part whatever. Of course I felt that that was merely "to shelve the question. However, I fought somewhat hard "against it, but they were successful in getting it referred back "to the Sanitary Committee to reconsider. Of course that has "materially delayed the question. The Sanitary Committee have "already met twice again to reconsider tho question. We "brought up a report very much in harmony with the suggested "regulations, making some modifications, and we had a meeting "last night upon the question. We shall have another meeting, "and I do not think we shall be able to make very many "alterations as regards our first recommendation. It seemed to "me at the time, and I cannot but feel now, that it was merely "an effort to shelve the question." Have you anything to say upon that statement?—I should say myself that Mr. Jennings hardly need put that construction upon the fact of one clause not having been acceptable. 17,491. Since that time, however, I understand that the Vestry have rejected those resolutions?—I fancy you are speaking of what Mr. Jennings perhaps would call the rejection of them. 17,492. No, I am speaking of since the time when he was under examination. You not having answered my letter I am not certain what you have done and I go by newspaper reports; but I understood that the Vestry had rejected the resolutions?—I can hardly say that the Vestry have rejected them. They negatived a certain clause, and that clause having been negatived, no further steps were attempted to be taken, even by the Chairman of the Sanitary Committee. It was quite open to him or to any other member of the Vestry if that clause proved unacceptable to move that it be referred back for further consideration. 17,493. Was it on tho 2nd of May that that clause was rejected?—Yes, they only debated one clause. 17,494. Was the vote taken by a show of hands?—Yes. 17,495. There was no division called for?—I would not be certain; I think there was a division. 112 17,496. Have you with you a list of the members who voted in that division?—I have not. 17,497. You will probably remember fairly well, I suppose, from sitting there and watching the proceedings on these repeated occasions when the matter has been considered, the loading persons upon both sides. Mr. Jennings, at question 2947, was asked this, "You have a groat number of persons on the Vestry who are interested in bad or doubtful property, have you not?" And his reply was, "Yes." He was then asked in detail with regard to some 13 such gentlemen. I have already referred to Mr. Osborne. Then he was asked with regard to Mr. Ball, but his evidence with respect to Mr. Ball was less detailed than that of other witnesses to whom I will come presently. He was then asked with regard to Mr. Ross, at question 3016, and there Mr. Jennings states that the first proposal to adjourn the consideration of the regulations was proposed by Mr. Ross?—Very likely. That would be before any modification was brought up. 17,498. But since the modification has Mr. Ross supported it? —I believe Mr. Ross moved the rejection of the particular clause when the modified Report was brought up of the 2nd of May; I would not be certain, but that is my impression. 17,499. Mr. Ross is a very largo owner of houses in a doubtful condition, is ho not?—I cannot say. He is the owner of some houses; but I have not looked into the books to see what he holds, or what he does not. 17.500. You have not looked, at the rate book?—No; I know ho does hold some houses, but he has declared that he does not hold much on his own account, but simply as collector of rents—or as agent for other people. 17,501. But would his name appear on the rate book if he is only a collector of rents or agent for other peoplo?—No. 17,502. But you are aware that his name appears on the rate book for a large number of houses?—I am not aware of that. I have not looked at the rate book. 17,503. You are not aware that ho owns about 33 of these very doubtful houses in Clerkenwell, besides some in Shoreditch, some in St. Luke's, some in St. Pancras, and some in Holborn ?—I am not aware what he holds in other parishes, nor was I aware what he hold in Clerkenwell. 113 17,504. I should not mention the places in other parishes were it not that some of them were very close to Clerkenwell, for instance, Bartholomew Square ?—Yes. 17,505. Two out of his 33 houses, I am informed, are houses which would not come under the general description of "doubtful houses." I do not wish to prejudge the question absolutely, but No. 23, Baker's Row appears to be a workshop, and one house in Bath Street appears to be a public-house; but excluding those, I am informed that Mr. Ross is the owner of 31 tenement houses in Clerkenwell, besides those of which he collects the rents?—He may be; I would not dispute it. 17,506. From your knowledge of the parish do you know those houses which are spoken of in answer to question 2973, do you know numbers 4, 5, 5½ to 11, and 22 to 24, Bath Street?—I know Bath Street very well. 17,507. There are some tenement houses in Bath Street of a doubtful description, are there not ?—Yes, I think there are. 17,508. Are you not aware that Mr. Ross owns those houses? I know that he owns some, but how many I do not know. 17,509. Do you know whether he owns No. 2, Bath Row?—I believe he does. 17,510. Do you know any property of his in Bath Court?—I cannot say that I do. 17,511. Do you know any property of his in Little Warner Street ?—I cannot say that I do. I have not looked at the books to see. I may have heard so, but it is only hearsay. 17,512. Do you know his property in Baynes Court?—No. 17,513. He has sold the worst of it lately to an Italian called Comitti, has he not?—I am not aware. I believe that some months ago some of it was bought by some Italian organ grinder, but that was some time ago. 17,514. Evidence was given about Baynes Court before Sir Richard Cross' Committee in 1881; have you seen the report of that Committee?—I have seen the report but I cannot distinctly call to mind that particular instance. 17,515. You do not remember the evidence that was given in answer to question 1612 in 1881?—No, I do not. 114 17,516. Do you know Mr. Ross' property in Lanes Court?— Yes. 17,517. That is dirty and badly repaired, is it not?—It was when we saw it. It was inhabited by some Italian organ grinders, and they are, as a rule, a very dirty set of people, and perfectlyindifferent as to the state in which they live. 17,518. Do you know Nos. 1 to 9, Little Bath Street?—I know Little Bath Street, but I have not the property in my mind at the present moment. 17,519. You do not remember Nos. 3, 6, 7, and 9, Little Bath Street ?—No, I cannot say that I do. 17,520. Does Mr. Ross own some property in Jerusalem Court ? —I am not aware that he does. 17,521. There was evidence given with regard to that in the year 1881 in answer to the questions 1624, 1626, 1629, and 1643, but you do not know about that for certain?—No. 17,522. One witness stated that Mr. Ross owned that property, but possibly that is the property of which he collects the rents, but which he does not himself own?—Possibly. 17,523. It is of no use for me to ask you with regard to his property in the Italian colony in Holborn, I suppose?—No. 17,524. With regard to that quarter, is there not a great accumulation of dust between the parishes of Clerkenwell and Holborn, and some doubt as to whom it belongs?—There is a large place called Red Lion Yard, which was a mews, a stable yard. 17,525. Do those Italians throw things out of their back windows on to a piece of land as to which there is a doubt whether it is yours or not?—They used to do so. 17,526. Have you stopped that? We tried to do so; but I believe that that court is now abolished as a stable yard, and is now occupied, I think, by a Post Office contractor. 17,527. Then, although you know generally speaking of a certain amount of Mr. Ross' property, you are not aware of the fact that he owns 31 tenement houses in your parish besides collecting the rents of a great number of others?—No, I have never looked into the matter. It is no business of mine to do so. 17,528. Mr. Ross has sometimes been called the dictator of Clerkenwell, has he not?—Yes. 115 17,529. At all events Mr. Ross moved the adjournment of this question and the reference back to the Committee, did he not?— I think not. 17,530. He moved the rejection of the clause, did he not ?- I think, if my memory serves me rightly, that when the regulations first came up it was Mr. Brighty, a member of the Sanitary Committee, who moved the reference back. 17,531. I am taking the statement from Mr. Jennings, who says that Mr. Ross moved it?—It was Mr. Brighty who moved that it be referred back for further consideration, and that in the meantime the clerk obtain information as to what other parishes were doing. 17,532. But when it came back it was Mr. Ross who moved the rejection of the clause, was it not?—The rejection of one particular clause. That one clause having been rejected no further steps have since been taken. 17,533. But you are not aware that that has changed Mr. Ross opinion as to the desirability of having such regulations; you do not think that Mr. Ross is in favour of them?—Probabty not unless they are somewhat modified. I think he was like some of the other members and thought that the regulations were rather too inquisitorial. 17,534. Do you think that Mr. Ross, owning this large amount of doubtful property and being interested in other doubtful property as rent collector, both in Clerkenwell and in other parishes, would be likely to be very friendly to regulations of this kind?—I do not see any reason why he should be averse to them, if they were of such a character as would not be objectionable in certain particulars, but some of the regulations appear to be of rather too inquisitorial a character. 17,535. Mr. Broadhurst.—What was that clause?—Unfortunately I have not a copy in my hands, I forgot to put it in my pocket; but I think it was the clause with regard to houses let out in tenements and occupied by more than one family; that all houses, two thirds of which were occupied by lodgers, should be included; all houses let out entirely in tenements, where the landlord was not residing on the premises; and all property not exceeding £20 rateable value under the Assessment Act of 1869. 17,536. The Chairman.—All property not exceeding £20 in value, provided that it was occupied by lodgers?—No; all property. 17,537. But the regulations only apply to houses let out in lodgings?—Or occupied by more than one family. 17,538. But you said all property under 20l.; it would not 116 apply to all property under 20l.?—Not if it was only occupied by one family; but, as a rule, I daresay there are lodgers in the small tenements as well as in the large ones. 17,539. Besides Mr. Ross and Mr. Osborne, what generally would be the votes on that occasion of the property owners on your vestry? Perhaps the most convenient course would be for me to put to you the questions that have been put to other witnesses. I have already read what Mr. Jennings said in answer to question 2947. Mr. Jennings, besides being asked with regard to Mr. Osborne and Mr. Ross, was asked with regard to Mr. Martin; he has a good many houses of that kind, has he not?- He has several, I believe. 17,540. Mr. Henry Hill has several, has he not?—He has several, I believe. 17,541. What do you say as to Mr. Thaine?—I believe he does hold some. 17.542. Mr. Thaine was the owner of Exmouth Place, was he not, which was condemned by the vestry as an unhealthy area? —Yes. 17,543. But he has thrown it up?—I do not know. 17,544. Has Mr. Mortyn any houses of this class?—I do not know that he holds any. 17,545. Mr. Jennings said that he did?—I am not sure. He may. It is not my business to inquire what property people hold; I do not trouble my head about it. 17,546. I am afraid we are obliged to do so, because the statement has been made (and it seems a likely statement upon the face of it) that where a very large number of the members of the vestry, the chairman, and vice-chairman and some of the members of the chief committees of the vestry and persons taking a leading part in the parish are interested in property of this kind, their possession of such property would influence them?— I believe it is generally felt that those who hold property and have something at stake in the parish are the most suitable men to be elected to administer its local affairs. 17,547. But there is property and property; and property of the kind held by Mr. Eoss, and Mr. Ball, and some other members of the vostry is property which is peculiarly touched by regulations of tho kind of which we are speaking?—I cannot say that their property more than anybody else's is peculiarly touched by those regulations. I should say that the regulations would apply to poor property generally in the inferior parts of the parish by whomsoever it is held. 17,548. Does Mr. Sans hold somo of this kind?—I believe he does. 117 17,549. And Mr. Abrahams?—I think he does own several. 17,550. And Mr. Hasleham?—I believe he does own some, but very little. 17,551. And Mr. Eustace?—Yes, he did formerly, though Mr. Eustace never attends now. 17,552. Has Mr. Coker any?—I believe he holds some little. 17,553. Mr. Squire has only two, has he?—Only two, that I am aware of. 17,554. Has Mr. Gribson any?—He is the agent for the Penton estate. 17,555. But he has a good many houses of his own, has he not, besides the Penton houses?—I am not aware. I believe he has some, but I do not know what. 17,556. Mr. Javens?—I should say he owns some, but I do not know what; he has one, or two, or three. In fact, I should say that most of the people on the local boards are men of property somewhere or other. 17,557. In some way or other; but there are a very large number of persons in the parish of Clerkenwell who have places of business, shops and works, and manufactories, large and small; and there are a large number of people who own their own houses, and people who live in a whole house. I hardly expect you to answer that question, but might it not be argued, and have you not heard it argued by some, that there is an undue representation in the case of this particular parish of this special kind of interest which is known as house farming?—I am not aware that there is. It is just as open to people owning another class of property to become members of the local board as to any others. 17,558. But these gentlemen appear to interest themselves more in these little unknown elections than other people, and they are returned by a very small number of votes?—I am not aware that it is so. There are a great number of people of other trades on the vestry; these you refer to are quite the minority. 17,559. There is a great number of publicans, is there not?— Yes; I do not know a parish where there are not publicans, and as a rule they are the heaviest rated. 17,560. We know some parishes where the publicans are most admirable members of the board: for instance, in the adjoining parish of St. Pancras, the gentleman who is known as the "King of Diamonds" is an instance; but in Clerkenwell you have more than in other parishes, have you not?—I am not aware what other parishes have, but we have some of the most respectable men in the parish as publicans, and as I have already said the publicans aro the most heavily rated people in the 118 parish, and have the greatest interest at stake. Hence it is that they have sought lately to come and represent the constituency. 17,561. I will not ask you about the publicans; I have nothingspecial to say about them; but with regard to the 13 gentlemen that I have mentioned, do you remember, generally speaking, in which way they voted?—If I remember rightly, on that occasion when the clause was rejected, the voting was 17 to 9 or 10. I was looking at it one day, and I think I could make out about six or seven property holders out of the 17, and three or four out of the 10. 17,562. Did any of the 13 gentlemen that I have named vote amongst the 10?—Yes. 17,563. Who?—Mr. Squire. If I had the names before me I could tell you. 17,564. I had rather forgotten Mr. Ball, as to whom we have had a great deal of evidence. Do you remember which way Mr. Ball voted?—I believe he voted in the majority, if I remember rightly. 17,565. We have had a great deal of evidence about Mr. Ball from Lord William Compton, from Mr. Boodle, from school board visitors, and from some of the clergy. At question 623 Lord William Compton was asked this: ''One of the largest "holders under Lord Northampton is Mr. Decimus Alfred Ball, "is he not?" and his answer was, "I believe he is. (Q.) "He is the vice-chairman of the assessment and appeal com"mittee of the parish, is he not?—(A.) I have been told so." He is a very leading man on your Vestry, is he not?—We have not a quieter or more retiring man on the Vestry. 17,566. But he taken a leading position, does he not?—I cannot say that he does. 17,567. He has been vice-chairman of one of your most important committees?—During all the 10 or 11 years that he has been on the Vestry he has only been vice-chairman of one committee. 17,568. And that is a very important committee, is it not?— Yes, the assessment comuittee is a very important committee. Mr. Ball, if I may venture to say so, is a very highly esteemed man in his ward, and highly esteemed in the Vestry, and they do not think it anything wrong to make him, or any other respectable man, chairman or vice-chairman of a 'committee. They do not inquire what property gentlemen hold who happen to be appointed chairmen or vice-chairmen of committees. The Vestry look at the fitness of the men and their Probable knowledge of the work that they would be called upon to see to. 17,569. You have said that Mr. Ball is very highly esteemed 119 in the parish, and we know that ho has held an important position in the vestry. At question 628 Lord William Compton was asked: "Do you know the state, for instance, of any of the "property that Mr. Decimus Ball holds under Lord Northamp"ton," and his answer was "Yes, I have been into almost all "the places." Then question 629 is "He has done a great deal "of sanitary work upon those houses since you have yourself "been looking into them, has he not," and the answer is "It is rather difficult to say what sanitary work is. I do not "think that his work is at all good." Then Lord William Compton was asked in definite terms about Wynyatt cottages and Wynyatt Court, and he stated, in answer to question 633, that Wynyatt cottages, which were held by Mr. Ball, were in a very bad condition indeed. Then Lord William Compton, when he was asked with regard to the. raising of rents by Mr. Ball, said that he had acquired the property and broken up houses which had been occupied by whole families, and that they were now occupied in single rooms. "Then speaking of Chapel Row one of the properties which is held by Mr. Ball, Lord William Compton was asked, question 644, whether the rents had been raised, and he said "I imagine that it has ; at all events the people com"plain of it."b He then went into details with regard to a particular case of the raising of rent in answer to question 645; and at question 649 he was asked this : "I believe that you have been into the figures of what Mr. Ball, for instance, pays, and "what he receives, and you find that he makes considerable "profits;" and Lord William Compton's answer was: "This "profit is perfectly enormous, if he does not do any repairs." "Then question 650 is this: "The repairs are done irregularly, "are they not," and the answer is "I think that in some cases "they are not done at all." Then at question 651 he was asked this. "He will make repairs in one year, and then he will "make no repairs for several years, is not that so ?" and his answer was, "I think that is the principle upon which he has "gone. He say himself that he has done repairs, and that the "the people themselves destroy the repairs as soon as he has "done them." Then at question 658 Lord William Compton was asked "Have you come across cases in which Mr. Decimus "Ball raises the rent if it is not paid on Monday morning? "A.) He certainly threatens to do so. When I taxed him with "it he positively denied that he had ever done it, but he said "that he always had to threaten it?"—As to doing the necessary repairs on the property that Mr. Ball holds under the Marquess of Northampton, is not the remedy in the Marquess' own hands, under his leases? 120 17,570. We went into that question with Mr. Boodle, and Mr. Boodle said that he had a very high opinion of Mr. Ball originally when he let the houses to him, but that he had since been very greatly disappointed?— Has this only been found out very recently then? Mr. Ball is no new tenant of the Marquess of Northampton. 17,571. Apparently from the evidence the state of things has got worse of late; but at all events Lord William Compton's attention, as he himself frankly stated to us, was only called to the matter in the course of last autumn, and he took the matter up very warmly indeed. Some of the school board visitors who were examined with regard to overcrowding also gave evidence as to Mr. Ball's property. At question 1,410 Mrs. Bates was asked this by Mr. Lyulph Stanley: "In Northampton Court do "you know of one case where eight persons are living in one "room," which the witness answered in the affirmative. Then at question 1,412 she was asked, " Do you know whom that house belongs to?" and she replied that it belonged to Mr. Ball, a vestryman. The witness was unaware of the fact that we had heard of Mr. Ball before, and stated it as a new discovery. That is a house with two rooms and 12 persons living in the two rooms. I suppose as vestry clerk of the parish you are aware that those tenement regulations would give you power to abate overcrowding of that kind?— Yes, but we abate overcrowding where we find it out, even without any regulations, under clause 19 of the Sanitary Act, 1866. 17,572. But you would abate it more easily, would you not, if you had them? I think not. We never have any difficulty in abating overcrowding, where we find it out. If Mrs. Bates had come to the vestry Hall, and made us acquainted with the fact, our medical officer would have seen to it, and it would have been put a stop to immediately. 17,573. You are not prepared to deny, are you, that there is an immense amount of overcrowding in Clerkenwell? Query what is overcrowding. 17,574. I suppose you would call eight people in a room, the size of the rooms in these houses, overcrowding? I daresay 1 should. It depends upon the size of the rooms. Query, are the people members of one family or of different families? Probably of one family. Then again, query, does not the overcrowding take place even without the owner of the property being aware of it? 17,575. It is no doubt augmented at night, but this was day overcrowding? Possibly in a case like that the family might have had visitors calling upon them. Did Mrs. Bates make 121 herself acquainted with the fact of whether they were all members of one family, and whether they lived there day and night ? 17,576. She had in some cases, but in this particular case she was not asked that question ? At any rate that would have been remedied by our being made acquainted with it at the Vestry Hall. We have had printed circulars for many years at the Vestry Hall, one of which is served immediately on the owner, and the overcrowding is remedied if our attention is called to it. 17,577. Then at question 1,426, Mr. Lyulph Stanley asked questions of the same witness as to the condition of the houses in Spencer Place, and the witness stated that those houses, the bad description of which was stated at length, also belonged to Mr. Ball?— Very likely. All houses are bad at times until the time arrives for their being renovated and improved, and that is so in the case of the smaller class of property more particularly. 17,578. Then in 1,428 Prime's Buildings was stated in the question by Mr. Lyulph Stanley to be a very bad class of property and in the next question, 1,429, it was said to be very much overcrowded, and the school board visitor said that that was so; and in answer to question 1,430 she said that that property also belonged to Mr. Ball?— Did these complainants ever lodge a complaint at the Vestry Hall, which is the proper place to make any complaints, or to give notifications of this kind ? *17,579. At question 1,415 this witness was asked : " Has the "attention of the sanitary authorities of Clerkenwell been called "to the state of these places," and her answer was, "Yes, some"time back. (Q.) "Who called their attention to it ? {A.) I did. "(Q.) Did they take any notice at the time ? (A.) They did "not, at least no further than this : I asked the people in the "house if they had been, and they said ' Yes,' and all they said "was, 'Oh, throw a little water down.'" But that was with regard to a particular case of smell, and not with regard to overcrowding, of which I have spoken. You are not aware of the working of the regulations under the Sanitary Acts ; for instance, in the parish of Chelsea?— No; but I have had a copy of them recently. 17,580. Do you know that the officers of the Vestry to which I belong make an immense number of visits without any complaints being made at all?— So do ours. We expect our sanitary inspectors to take a general survey of their several districts from time to time, irrespective of any complaints. 17,581. But then your objection that the state of those cottages ought to have been described to the Vestry rather falls to the ground, does it not, because your sanitary inspectors 122 ought to have kept you informed of it themselves?— They go round periodically; they are expected to pay a visit to the place about once a fortnight or once a month. 17,582. In the course of last autumn I had occasion, after great public attention had been called to this matter, to pay several visits to all the parishes in the metropolis, and I certainly, after looking all round the metropolis, and having been in all the parishes of the East End, came to the conclusion, having known nothing previously about Clerkenwell or about St. Luke's, that the central parts of London, including parts of St. Luke's, nearly the whole of Clerkenwell, the southern part of St Pancras, and the eastern part of Holborn, were by very far the worst parts of London, both as regards the structural condition of the houses, and also as regards overcrowding. Would not such an opinion be rather an argument in favour of you, above all other parishes, needing the best regulations that you could get ? I believe I may say that our Vestry are generally of opinion that Clerkenwell is not so bad as it is represented or made out to be, and especially if the death rate is to be taken as any criterion, and most people hold that to be at least some criterion. 17,583. The death rate which has been put forward as the death rate of Clerkenwell has been examined in an article in the "Lancet," which I daresay you noticed, and which pointed out that it was not a corrected death rate?— It was a corrected death rate. Our intra-parochial death rate, within the parish, is 16.9; and making allowance for everything else, our doctor says that he cannot bring it up to above 21 at the very outside, and he says that it is too high. 17,584. Then your opinion is that that article in the "Lancet" was founded on a misconception?— I think so. I think the fact that our internal death rate was only 16.9 was altogether overlooked. I am speaking from memory. 17.585. At question 1 431, the witness was asked this: "Then "we come to Wynyatt cottages; will you just describe the state " of things there ?" and her answer was: "The court is entered "by an archway, and you go down 12 or 15 steps from the street '' level." Then the next question is: " The lower rooms are like "cellars then? "and her answer was: "Yes, the rooms are very "dark and unhealthy; almost every room is inhabited by a "family." Then question 1433 was: "Four or five people "inhabiting each room?" and the answer was : "There would "not be four or five in every room, but there are families of four "or five in some of the rooms." Those rooms were dark and almost underground rooms, which, I think, your medical officer 123 reported against?— I think he did so once, but he has not done so latterly. 17,586. It was included in a scheme, I think?— Yes. These little places depend very much upon the way in which they are kept by the occupants. A good many people can live in small cottages and keep them nice, while other people keep them like pigsties. 17,587. If you remember the situation of these cottages, down steps, you will remember that they are very damp and dark ?— They are rather low. 17,588. At question 1434 Mrs. Bates was asked to whom that property belonged, and she answered, "To Mr. Ball." I do not know that I need enlarge much upon evidence of this kind about Mr. Ball's houses. Similar evidence was given by Mr. Dawes and one or two other of the clergy who have lived in the neighbourhood for some time?— Before you leave that, may I just say with regard to the death rate of Clerkenwell, that our medical officer some years ago in his annual report gave a return made by the Registrar General of the death rate of the various parishes in the metropolis, and there, singularly enough, Clerkenwell was within 9 or 10 of the top. That was 20 years ago. 17,589. Clerkenwell has been always famous from its great height for its very healthy situation, has it not ?— That may be alleged as regards any parish that happens to be in a healthy state. We say it is from good sanitation. 17,590. But you stand very much higher than some of the neighbouring parishes, do you not?— Some portion of the parish does, but a great deal of the parish lies very low. We say that it is good sanitation and constant watching over the condition of the pariah. 17,591. (Mr. Godwin). Did the medical officer divide that report upon the death rate of Clerkenwell in any way; did he show the various divisions of the parish, or did he merely give the average?— He gave the average; he gave the divisions as well. 17,592. Do you remember what was the highest death rate in one of the divisions?— I could not say at this moment. 17,593. Have you heard that it was nearly 40?— No, I have not. I do not think it is possible. 17,594. Are you prepared to say that it was not?— No, I would not without the documents before me. Let me make one further observation. It happened to come to the knowledge of the Vestry last night that a report had just been presented to the Asylums Board, giving the deaths per 10,000 from cholera 124 during the last three visitations. It happened that at the first visitation in Clerkenwell the rate was 10 per 10,000; at the second visitation it was 7 per 10,000, and in the last visitation it was only 6 per 10,000. I humbly submit that if any argument or inference is to be drawn from that, we may fairly claim that Clerkenwell has gone on improving from years gone by. 11,595. (The Chairman). May I ask you whether at the same time you looked at the total number of deaths in London in each of those visitations ?— I have not got it, but I mean to get it. 17,596. Was it not the case that the first visitation was much more severe than the second, and the second far more severe than the third?— But it was so much per 10,000. 17,597. But through the whole of London the epidemic of 1866 was nothing like so violent as that of 1848, was it?— Taken altogether, I am told that the report is very favourable to Clerkenwell. 17,598. I have not seen the report, and therefore I am not able to cross-examine you upon it; but there is the notorious fact that the epidemic of 1866 was less violent than the epidemic of 1848; and I believe that the epidemic of 1848 was less violent than the first visitation; and if so, it would only show that Clerkenwell was as lucky, perhaps, as the rest of London ? —It is said that this return shows Clerkenwell in a very favourable position as compared with other metropolitan parishes. 17,599. (Mr. Broadhurst.) But this return is not yet published and therefore it is not evidence?— No, I am not putting this in as evidence, but only making a passing observation. 17,600. (The Chairman.) Amongst those of whom we spoke just now is Mr. Martin; do you know Mr. Martin's houses in Queen Street?— Yes, I know he has some there, but I could not tell you what number there are. 17,601. Do you know Brunswick Place?— Yes. 17,602. That is a very queer place, is it not, containing very doubtful property?— I cannot say that it is doubtful property, except in the sense that all small property is doubtful. 17,603. You do not think it is specially bad ?— I do not think so. 17,604. Has it not been mentioned at your vestry as being very bad ?I cannot say that it has to my recollection They are small cottages, but they are very tidy cottages if they are well kept. 125 17,605. They are partly owned by Mr, Ball, and partly by Mr Martin, are they not?— Partly by Mr. Ball, partly by Mr. Martin, perhaps, and partly by somebody else some distance away. 17,606. Do you know the property owned by Mr. Henry Hill whom I mentioned just now in the courts out of Smith Street? —No, I cannot say I do. I know both Mr. Henry Hill and Mr. Martin too as very respectable people. 17,607. Mr. Henry Hill has property in Northampton Street, has he not ?— I think he has. 17,608. One of the school board visitors was asked with regard to Northampton Street at question 1414: "In one of the houses "in that street have you found a family of nine persons living "in one room?" She replies in the affirmative, and speaks of the bad condition of that property, and states that that particular house belonged to Mr. Hill, a member of the Vestry?— It might be; I cannot say. Again, did that school board visitor come or send and lodge a complaint at the Vestry Hall of the existence of overcrowding? If so, it would have been remedied at once. As a matter of fact we have exceedingly few intimations given us from other sources than our own staff of the existence of either overcrowding, or nuisances, or defects of any kind. 17,609. Do you know the sisters who work in St. Luke's, in St. Mary's, Charterhouse, on that side of your parish under Mr. Dawes ?— No. 17,610. You do not remember their making a representation to you?— No. I know some sisters who occupy some premises in Lloyd Square, called " the Retreat." They once called my attention to some sanitary defect or overcrowding in a mission house or somewhere where they were in the habit of visiting in Easton Street or Easton Place, and I immediately caused that to be examined and looked into, and one committee visited the place from house to house. 17,611. That is the only representation from them that you remember?— That is the only one that I remember, and there it was found that it was the people's own fault that there was anything to complain of. 17,612. Do you know Mr. Coker's property on Clerkenwell Green ?— Yes. 17,613. Do you know some houses there, the bottom parts of which are used for workshops, and the top rooms of which are very much crowded ?— No, 1 do not. 17,614. The houses are in a very bad state of repair, are they not ?— I do not know. 126 17,615. (Lord Carrington.) Mr. Jennings was the chairman of the sanitary committee I think in March last when he was examined before us ?— Yes. 17,616. Does he hold that position now?— No. 17,617. When was his re-election opposed, and how was it carried; can you give us the names on the division list?— No, I cannot. 17,618. Have you no minutes of the division lists?— Yes, but I have not got them with me here, I could easily produce them. 17,619. Have you brought with you the minutes of the vestry during the last three or four months ?— No; in fact I may say that I only knew last night that I should have to appear here this morning, and therefore crave the indulgence of the Commission, and to express a hope that I may be favoured with another opportunity of producing evidence or answering questions for which I am not prepared at this moment. 17,620. At question 2915 Mr. Thomas Jennings was asked this question: "Do you also find that many of the houses in your "parish are in a very bad state of repair," and his answer was this: "Yes, very bad; some of the places could not have been "attended to or cleaned for years, Easton Place for instance." Is that the fact or not?— I do not think that it is quite the fact, though I am not in the habit of going round to these places daily or weekly myself, and therefore I am scarcely prepared to speak positively upon the subject, but all I know is, that if it had come to the knowledge of our sanitary committee they would very soon have visited it and remedied it. 17,621. Then you cannot give an answer to that question?— I cannot say that I can. 17,622. At question 2947 Mr. Jennings was asked this : "You "have a gteat number of persons on the vestry who are interested "in bad or doubtful property, have you not;" and his answer was "Yes." Do you deny that?— It is a question then of what is bad or doubtful property. That may be a matter of opinion. Some people might think a very good class of house a bad and doubtful piece of property; others may have a very different opinion. The question is what class of property are the poor expected to be able to obtain and live in? Naturally the smaller, poorer, and inferior class of property I take it. 17,623. Do you consider a vestry clerk's a good opinion of what is bad and doubtful property? The vestry clerk could form his own individual opinion; but as to an official opinion I do not feel myself called upon to give one. 127 17,624. In answer to question 2968, Mr. Jennings stated that there are 10 publicans on your Vestry; is that so within your knowledge?— I should say that there are; that would be only 10 out of 72. 17,625. At question 2971 he was asked: "Is there much "interest taken in the parish in the elections of the Vestry? " and his answer was "No, very little," Do you think that much interest is taken in the elections to the Vestry ?— Yes. 17,626. (The Chairman.') How many people vote?— It all depends upon the circumstances. Sometimes we have 80 or 90, and sometimes we have 200 or 300. At other times when there is no poll, elections are carried by comparatively few. For instance, in the case of Mr. Ball, who was stated to be elected by 13 "at the head of the poll," it so happened that there was no polling at the election of Mr. Ball, but simply a show of hands; and as I have already said Mr. Ball is, I think, very much esteemed in his own ward, and he had no opposition to meet. When there is opposition we have a considerable amount of excitement and sometimes a great deal of activity in coming to the poll. Sometimes things pass off very quietly where there is no opposition. 17,627. (Lord Carrington.) In answer to question 3021 the witness stated in March last there were on the Vestry 13 or 14 house owners; is that the case?— I should think that is very likely. As I have already stated, a great many men try to get a little property together, a little house property amongst other things, and they think it no crime, or no disparagement to their eligibility for seats on public boards. 17,628. At question 3091 the witness was asked : " Have you ''ever known any inspection of those houses made by the agents "or sub-agents of any of the freeholders during the leases, or "has any report been made to them as to overcrowding or "want of repairs?" and his answer was "No." Has it ever come to your knowledge that such inspections have been made by the landlords, or the agents of landlords, such as Mr. Boodle?— No, it has not. At least I have never heard of it until just recently. 17,629. At question 3174 the witness was asked: "Do you "know that, in fact, throughout a large part of Clerkenwell "families are residing in single rooms ?" To which he replied in the affirmative. Do you think that there are many such cases? —I should say not, decidedly. There may be cases. 17,630. (The Chairman.) Do you doubt that fact ?— I doubt it. 128 When you say a large part of Clerkenwell I presume you mean the major part of it. 17,631. There was no denial made of that statement by Lord Northampton's agent, or by Lord William Compton?— I am not aware of it. I think that, as a rule, they have at least two rooms, a day room and a sleeping room. 17,632. I suppose it turns upon what we mean by a large part of the parish. I suppose you do not doubt that there are a great number of cases in Clerkenwell in which people have but one room ?— It may be so if the rooms are of sufficient size. 17,633. I am afraid it is so without that qualification ?— It may be. I know that our medical officer, as a rule, looks after these things, and where he finds that such a case exists he makes a note of it, and endeavours to stop it, especially if it assumes anything like a feature of overcrowding, where the law can reach the owner. 17,634. (Lord Carrington.) Who appoints the sanitary inspectors and the parish surveyors ?— The Vestry. 16,635. Is that, in your opinion, satisfactory'?—Yes. 17,636. That mode of election leaves them perfectly free to act independently, in your opinion?— Perfectly. I do not know what you mean by independently. It leaves them I should say, to study and act in the best interests of their employers, the vestry. 17,637. And in the best interests of the poor inhabitants of the tenement houses as well?— Yes. 17,638. Turning to question 3921, have you ever known an inspector discharged for neglect of duty ?— Yes. 17,639. Can you give us the name?— I think his name was W.; an inspector who was discharged some years ago. 17,640. Is that the only instance that you can bring to mind ? —I think I may say that we discharged a surveyor some years ago 17,641. Can you give any name?— C. was his name. He did not give satisfaction to the vestry, and therefore he was called upon to resign. 17,642. The vicar of Clerkenwell is, 1 believe, ex officio chairman of the vestry when he attends, is he not ?— Yes. 17,643. Does he ever attend?— Yes. 17,644. Up to last March had he ever attended or taken any interest in the vestry?— Yes, he always attends upon Easter Tuesdays, but with that exception he seldom interferes or meddles with parochial affairs. 17,645. ( The Chairman). That is the usual custom, is it not ? It 129 is the custom in my own parish that the vicar always attends upon Easter Tuesday, but never on any other day ?— Yes, that is so. 17,646. The vicar of Clerkenwell is an elected clergyman, is he not?— Yes. 17,647. (Lord Carrington). Then you do not agree with this answer that was given to question 3306:— "He" (that is to say, the vicar)" has never, as I have already said, visited with the "committee when they have been out inspecting upon sanitary "questions. He has never attended the meetings, that is to say, "the sanitary committee meetings?"— The vicar is not a member of the sanitary committee, and, therefore, he does not even know when the sanitary committee meet; and it would not be expected that even if he knew when they met he would intrude himself uninvited. 17,648. But he happens to be an ex officio member of all the committees of the Vestry, does he not?— No, certainly not; he is simply ex officio chairman of the Vestry. 17,649. And he is not ex officio a member of all the committees of the Vestry, according to the evidence which we had given in answer to question 3304?— Not of any committee. He is not even on any committee. 17,650. Do you know Mr. Brighty ?— Yes, very well. 17,651. He has been on the Clerkenwell Vestry for 12 years, I believe?— I believe he has. 17,652. Mr. Brighty, in answer to question 3,418, says : "The "Vestry, as a rule, do not care to do anything that will disturb "themselves and their immediate friends." Is that the case ?— I do not agree with it. I say no. 17.,653. He says that years ago during his time, that is to say, within 12 years, the Vestry had had no regular meetings ; was that the case?— No. It is an extraordinary statement. 17,653a. You always since your time had regular meetings? —Certainly. 17,654. Is it the case that if anyone complained of a gross case at any time the committee was called together and would view the place, and that it might be remedied, but that there was no regular system of inspection ?— It is not the case. On any such case being made known at the Vestry Hall, if it was a case requiring the committee's inspection, the committee would be called together to view it; but inasmuch as we have a medical officer of health who makes it a special duty to attend to any such complaint, and also sanitary inspectors, it would be very seldom necessary to specially call the committee together unless the 130 medical officer after inspection thought it desirable that the committee should be called together, and in that case they would be called together. 17,655. You have never, I think, made it your business to inquire whether the vestrymen hold this questionable sort of property or not, but you have given a considerable amount of valuable evidence upon this point. At question 3419 the witness is asked this: "It has been stated that a considerable number "of persons upon the vestry are interested themselves in pro"perty of a bad or doubtful kind; is that the case ? " and the answer is: "Yes, that is so. There are several who hold houses "in our own immediate neighbourhood in Clerkenwell, and "some of them have houses in the surrounding neighbourhood "and district, St. Luke's, and other parts; and it is difficult to "get a man to move when he is personally interested." Do you contradict that?— I do not agree with it. I do not understand such a statement. 17,656. You do not agree with it, but you do not contradict it?— I do not agree with it. I think it is exaggerated. I should like to ask what is meant by "a difficulty to get a man to move." 17,657. The expression is "It is difficult to get a man to move." I suppose it means to get the sanitary authority to work?— I do not know what it means really. Certainly there would be no difficulty in getting the sanitary authority to move. If that is what is meant to be implied I should contradict it, most decidedly. 17,658. Passing to question 3421, can you give us any idea whether the gentlemen who are largely interested in this sort of property are more regular attendants than the other 72 members of the Yestry?— I am not prepared to say that they are more regular attendants than other tradesmen are who form the Yestry. 17,659. What is the average attendance out of the 72 ?—I should say that the average, taking the year round, would be from 25 to 30. 17,660. (The Chairman.) You say that these property owners, by whom I mean those 13 or 14 that we have been talking of to-day, are not more regular in their attendance than the other members of the Vestry. As compared with tho other of the 72 members of the Vestry those 14 gentlemen are on more committees than the rest on an average, are they not ?—I could not say that they are ; that has never struck me, 131 17,661. That was the calculation that I made in looking through the lists of your committess appointed this year, it struck me that those 14 well-known names figure there very largely. Have you with you a list of your committees appointed this year?— Yes (producing a list). I have jotted down the business of each committeeman as far as I know it. How it will work out I do not know. 17,662. The works committee is a very important committee, is it not?— Yes. 17,663. I find out that 10 out of the 14 gentlemen, of whom we have spoken this morning, are on the works committee; that is very much higher than the average, is it not?— It might be so. 17,664. That is extraordinarily high, is it not?— But if they are on the works committee in unusual number it is only because they have been thought more fitted for that committee work than other members. 17,665. It is a remarkable fact that being all of them owners of this particular kind of property they are considered more fitted for the work of the works committee than anybody else?— I do not think that you can draw such a conclusion. The fact is that the works committee has nothing whatever to do with house property; the works committee has simply to look after the state of the roads and such matters as that. 17,666. It is generally considered the committee which forms the nucleus or centre of the Yestry, is it not?— Certainly not. 17,667. It is so in my own vestry?— It is not so in mine. Being on that committee they are on it perfectly disinterestedly, because it does not touch their property in any way. 17,668. Let us take the assessment and appeal committee, which you said yourself was a very important committee ; I find that seven out of these 14 gentlemen are on that committee; that is higher than the average, is it not?— No, I cannot say that it is. 17,669. Half of these gentlemen are on that committee, but half the vestry are not on that committee?— I think that you will find that these committees take in most of the members of the vestry. 17,670. But this particular committee is, as you say, a very important committee. You rejected the works committee as not being important enough?— I do not say that the works committee is not an important one, but I say that it has nothing at all to do to encourage house owners to be upon it for interested purposes, 132 17,671. The assessment committee most undoubtedly has an immense deal to do with small house property, and I find that half of these gentlemen are on that particular committee?— Then, if so, it is because they have been thought by the vestry to be the best judges of assessment questions. 17,672. I have no doubt that they thoroughly understand their own business, but outsiders might be disposed to think that they might be slightly prejudiced by their possession of this kind of property?--Perhaps it might be open to ridicule if men of certain trades were put upon this committee, most unlikely to form a particular judgment upon the duties appertaining to the committee. As I say, I thoroughly believe that all round the men are honestly selected for the various committees who are considered the best fitted to discharge the duties. 17,673. You cannot be very much astonished if people draw the opposite conclusion, can you?— Perhaps not; but I oannot see why they should. 17,674. (Mr. Broadhurst). You have three sanitary inspectors in Clerkenwell 1 understand?— Yes. 17,675. Is it true that one of them is also coroner's officer and sexton of the church?— Yes. 17,676. What sanitary inspection does he do in addition to those duties?— He was coroner's officer and sexton of the church before he was appointed inspector under the vestry. The reason of his being employed at all by the vestry was this: that we used to employ our other two sanitary inspectors as messengers to take out all board summonses and committee summonses, which took up some considerable part of their time; and I was in favour of their being relieved of that, and of their being enabled to look more immediately after their particular duties. That led to a messenger being appointed for the express purpose of taking out the board and committee summonses, and relieving the other two inspectors from that work. But, in addition to his appointment as messenger, he was also appointed assistant sanitary inspector, so that his services might be called into requisition when occasion required to assist the other two. 17,677. Then your third sanitary inspector is sexton of the church, coroner's officer, messenger to the vestry, and assistant sanitary inspector?— Yes, occasionally he is an assistant sanitary inspector. 17,678. Is he described officially in your parish as sanitary inspector?— No, we do not recognise him as a sanitary inspector to take any proceedings. We sometimes employ him to assist the others in going round and surveying premises in general, to see what state they are in, and to see if he can find any 133 nuisances, and, if so, to report them to the other inspectors and get them removed. 17,679. In what business was this man before he was church sexton, coroner's officer, sanitary inspector, and messenger ?— I almost think he was something in the jewellery trade. 17,680. Do you think that the jewellery trade is a specially beneficial training for sanitary inspection ?— No, but for the duties that we require of him he needed no particular training; for instance, a messenger would not require a very high training. 17,681. But if he is employed in surveying would he not require training?— Then he acts under the medical officer of health and the other inspectors. He is not expected to take upon himself any personal responsibility. 17,682. Would you mind giving your opinion as to what training would be most suitable for the sanitary inspectors ?— I do not know that any special training is required. If a man was endowed with good common sense I think that would be about as good a training as he could have. 17,683. If you were going to buy a house for yourself and you wanted to know the sanitary condition of it, so as to ensure the safety of the health of your family, whom would you employ ?— I should employ a surveyor. 17,684. Does it not necessarily follow that the sanitary inspector to be fit for his business must have some practical knowledge of building and surveying ?— Not necessarily. 17,685. Would it not be as necessary to have a practical man to inspect the sanitary condition of the homes of the people as it would be, say, for the home of any member of the Commission ? — We have our regular practised inspectors for that purpose who know their duty well, and it is very soon picked up and acquired after a very short instalment into office. 17,686. But the knowledge of building construction, and drains, and the science of ventilation is not picked up, is it, as a rule ?— That knowledge is very soon picked up so far as a sanitary inspector will be required to exercise it; but as a rule a surveyor would be resorted to in all questions of that kind. 17,687. At any rate your third sanitary inspector was trained as a jeweller?— I think that was his trade, but I will not be certain. All I know is that he is a very useful officer, so far as we require his services, whatever his original trade was. 17,688. I think I understood you to say that you had known a case in your parish where the sanitary inspector was discharged ?— Yes. 134 17,689. That is one case in 28 years?— Yes, for neglect of duty. 17,690. Could you tell us what the neglect was; was it too much activity or too little?— Too little. 17,691. You have no recollection of what the omission of duties consisted of, or what were the allegations?— It was misconduct in more ways than one. I do not think the actual neglect of duty would have led to his dismissal if there had not been some other misconduct attached to it. 17,692. Is there any reason Why you should not state the misconduct for which he was discharged?— I hardly think it necessary, nor do I think I could accurately state it. (The Chairman.) I think it would be desirable that we should strike out the name, but that you should state the misconduct for which he was discharged, though of course I shall not press it in any way. 17,693. (Mr. Broadhurst.) Itwould be very interesting to know for what the sanitary inspector was discharged?— For general inattention and negligence of duty for one thing. The misconduct was sometimes leaving his duty without leave, and therefore letting his duties remain unattended to, which, of itself, was, perhaps, a breach of discipline. 17,694. You said just now that you did not think he would have been discharged for neglect of duty?— I think that might have been overlooked if there had not been anything else to back it up. 17,695. What else was there to back it up?— He was not the most sober of men for one thing. 17,696. Then we are to understand that he was discharged for drunkenness?— Not altogether, but both together led to his dismissal. 17,697. You mean that this inspector had an accumulation of bad habits, but that one of the chief allegations was not his want of inspection of bad property?— Yes, he had an accumulation of bad habits, but his chief fault was inattention to his duties. 17,698. Lord William Compton, in answer to question 660, says, "By the accounts of the poor people it seems to me that "no sanitary inspector ever went into any of the rooms. The "sanitary inspector used to walk through the passage into the "back court, and then walk out again, if he went at all. I be"lieve he used to go sometimes, but my opinion is that he did "next to nothing up to within the last six months?"— I do not think that Lord William Compton could be in a position to give such an opinion, speaking with all deference. He could not 135 possibly have any personal knowledge of the action of our inspectors. 17,699. In answer to question 661, he further says, being asked whether any long period had elapsed since the last sanitary visit. "That I cannot answer except upon the testimony "of the people. In some places they said that the sanitary in"spector came once a year, and in other places that he came "occasionally; they could not tell me how often., but I do not "think that his visits ever resulted in anything? "—I altogether dissent from such evidence and the conclusions to be drawn from it. 17,700. You think that Lord William Compton knew nothing about it?— Yes, I do. 17,701. And that is your verdict on his evidence?— On that particular piece of evidence it is, that is my opinion. There might have been some solitary case of the kind, but as a matter of fact and practice I dissent from it altogether. 17,702. You were good enough to say that if reports as to overcrowding and bad sanitation were properly lodged with your vestry they would have attention, and the evils complained of would be remedied ?—Yes. 17,703. Can you tell the Commission of any successful operations of the vestry in removing nuisances and improving sanitation that have been instituted upon the report of their sanitary inspector?—I could tell you plenty, but verbally here of course it would be a difficult thing. It embraces such a wide range that it is very difficult to condense anything into a brief statement ; but that operations have been so practically carried out I unhesitatingly aver. Nuisances have been removed and overcrowding has been abated ; that I most unhesitatingly say. 17,704. But surely having regard to the fact that you have have been vestry clerk for 28 years there cannot have been much done on the vestry without your having considerable knowledge of it ?— No. 17,705. Can you not remember any single instance in which a nuisance was removed from your parish as the result of the activity of your inspectors ?— Hundreds and thousands. 17,706. Can you describe any one particular case?— I would not like to commit myself to any one particular case, because I could put my finger upon the actual facts. 17,707. How long is it since you had anything like the removal of a nuisance?— Almost every week something of the kind occurs. 17,708. Clearing out overcrowded dwellings and the reconstruction of drains, and so on?— Whenever they come to our 136 knowledge they are attended to at once; the reconstruction of drains and the clearing out of overcrowded dwellings, certainly. 17,709. But you have not yet told us of any particular instance; in the 28 years surely you can call to mind one or two?— It is as easy to call to mind two or three hundred as to call to mind two or three. It is a constant daily practice, and therefore to ask me to put my finger upon one particular case is almost too much. 17,710. Are we to understand that it is the daily practice of your vestry to reduce overcrowding, to cause whitewashing, the general improvement of dwellings, and the improvement of drains?— Yes. 17,711. You are doing that constantly?— Yes, whenever it comes to our knowledge, and our sanitary officers think it necessary, it is carried out. 17,712. Could you undertake to give us the work of the last two years, or the work of the last twelve months, or both, I mean health improvement works carried out hy your Yestry?— I could furnish you with volumes of reports containing instances of that kind, hut I do not happen to have them here. It is a part of our daily customary usual work of the parish. I could give you volumes of them. 17,713. Do you mean volumes of improvements in dwellings? — Removal of nuisances, cleaning up, including abating of overcrowding, and such like. 17,714. And you have been doing that constantly?— Yes, it has been part of the ordinary work of the Yestry ever since the Yestry has been established. 17,715. Then it naturally follows, if one might take the liberty of saying so, that Clerkenwell must have been in a terrible condition a few years back, if you have been constantly doing that by your local operations, and yet the condition of things still exists, as to which we have had so much evidence before the Commission?— Clerkenwell was in a terrible state at one time, before the Yestry came into operation; but it has been improving, in my opinion, ever since. That there will be and are defects there can be no denying, and I am afraid that there always will be defects requiring attention. 17,716. (The Chairman.) Of course, I do not for an instant question your statement as to the number of nuisances removed by the Yestry, and so forth; being familiar with vestry work myself I understand how that part of the business of a Vestry is carried on. But with regard to the general statement which you have just made, that Clerkenwell has greatly improved since 137 the passing of the Metropolis Local Management Act, we have had evidence from five or six different witnesses to the effect that Clerkenwell and not the parish of Clerkenwell only, but the surrounding parts of London, part of St. Luke's, part of Holborn, and part of St. Pancras, have been exceptions to the general improvement; that whereas the east end of London generally has improved very much of late years, Clerkenwell on the whole from various causes (I am not speaking of the action of the vestry in particular) has gone back. All the witnesses who have given evidence with regard to Clerkenwell have concurred upon that particular point. You yourself are the first witness who has gone in the opposite direction by saying that the condition of Clerkenwell has improved. Mr. Boodle, both times that he was examined. Lord William Compton, Mr. Jennings, Mr. Brighty, and five clergymen, I think, who spoke of Clerkenwell have all said that the parish in their time has gone down hill?— I admit that it has gone down hill in its social status, but not in its sanitary status. I admit that, instead of having a good proportion of respectable residential people in the parish, the greater number of them have gone to live further away, and their houses are filled up with an inferior class of people. That part of it I admit. 17,717. With regard to the sanitary condition of the parish, that is of course a very difficult thing to test in detail; but if you are relying upon the improvement in the death rate in Clerkenwell of course you would be aware that the death rate has improved every where throughout the country?— I hope so; I am glad to hear that some of the larger towns in the country have almost approached London in the smallness of its death rate. 17,718. But they have improved more rapidly; that is to say, that they were very much worse many years ago?— Yes. 17,719. (Mr. Broadhurst.) You seem to think that the class of men of whom we have been speaking are the men who, above others, should naturally take the lead in local government in your parish?— I do not quite say so. I say that taking the members of the Yestry altogether they are quite as good as, if not better, than the generality. I mean to say that they are all of them of the class of men who have the greatest interest in watching over such matters, and who, therefore, are the most eligible, if one man is more eligible than another, to take part in the administration of local affairs. I am not prepared to say that there are not better men who ought to come forward and take part in parochial work; but if wo cannot get them what are wo to do? 138 17,720. So that in Clerkenwell you get the best men that present themselves?— Yes. 17,721. Your words were something like these : that the men of property were the men naturally to take an interest in parish affairs?— Yes. 17,722. But do you think it generally a desirable thing that the owners of nuisances should be the men who should sway the local government of the district in which their nuisances exist?— I do not think that they should be the men to sway the government of the district in which the nuisances exist; but other tradesmen are "owners of nuisances" sometimes as well as those you refer to, and I believe that if one of the vestrymen was found to have a nuisance existing he would be pounced upon much more sharply than another person who was not a member of the vestry. 17,723. Has that been your experience?— Yes; and even in regard to assessments I have known vestrymen more severely dealt with than people who are not vestrymen. 17,724. Are Mr. Ball and Mr. Ross, and other gentlemen similarly situated, pounced upon more severely than others?— I think they would be if a conspicuous nuisance came to be known. 17,725. Do you not consider that they own a great deal of property which might fairly be described as conspicuous nuisances?— No, I cannot say that I am of opinion that they do. 17,726. Do you not think that house after house in which four, five, and six people are crowded into one room, those houses being in a very dilapidated condition, the drainage being in many cases bad, the water supply being bad, are nuisances which are dangerous to the health of the parish?— I should think so, if it existed ; but the property itself would not be the nuisance ; it would be its being allowed to be occupied by more persons than should occupy it. 17,727. You split the distinctions so very finely that I fear I can scarcely follow you. A house that has four rooms and six people in each room would be a nuisance ; if the people were out of the rooms you think it would not be so much of a nuisance?— Certainly. 17,728. But then the property would not be held if the houses were empty?— But you asked me just now whether I did not think that the property held by these people constituted a nuisance in itself, as I understood your question. My answer to that is this, that the property itself, no matter how extensively it is held, would not constitute a nuisance. A nuisance might 139 arise out of it, but that would depend upon how the property was used. 17,729. The property is used by Mr. Ball, Mr. Ross, and some others. It is let by them in a manner which results in our finding four, five, and six persons in one 100m. Taking the property and the inhabitants together, it constitutes a nuisance?— If that came to our knowledge our medical officer would visit the place, and if he found that there was overcrowding, a notice would be at once served upon the owner; and if it was proved to exist in breach of the law, the case would be carried to the police court. But, as I have already said, whenever it comes to our knowledge that a place is proved to be overcrowded we have never found any difficulty in abating that overcrowding. 17,730. But, by some means or other, very few of the nuisances seem to come to the knowledge of the vestry; how is that?— Everybody in the parish knows that there is the vestry, and they know that the vestry is the sanitary authority, and if a nuisance or defect exists and the vestry are not made acquainted with it, it is not the vestry's fault, but it is the fault of those who ought to come and inform the vestry and have it remedied. Generally speaking, as far as is practicable, the vestry inspect and find out these things without being so informed, but we are always anxious and glad to receive information of such things were they exist. 17,731. But the Chairman has read to you a long list of places, giving you the names of streets, yards, and courts in which there is most disgraceful overcrowding, and although within your parish you have three sanitary inspectors and a medical officer of health none of this has come to your knowledge?— That is a genezal question which I can scarcely answer. I say that if overcrowding was brought to our knowledge it would be immediately abated. But 1 can scarcely accept a broad allegation that overcrowding and the like does exist to an enormous extent. 17,732. But here are the facts that by some means or other this nuisance is in existence in your district?— What nuisance? 17,733. The nuisance that has been over and over again described, of the terrible overcrowding of tenement houses?— I cannot say that they exist generally. As I have already said, if they do, we are very carefully kept in the dark. 17,734. Let me read to you the description of one house as an illustration, from the evidence of Mrs. Bates, a school board visitor. At No. 1403, the following question was put to her: "Taking Allen Street, can you give us any information about "the state of crowding in rooms in Allen Street? (A.) 140 "Yes; in one house there are eight families. (Q.) How "many rooms do they generally occupy? (A.) One room."— Each family? 17,735. Each family.—Has Mrs. Bates ever come and lodged that complaint at the Vestry Hall, in her very great anxiety that the poor should be relieved from this oppressive state of things?—I should say, No; and in my opinion she would have done a very wise thing if she had done so at once. 17,736. Mrs. Bates is employed by the school board to attend to the school attendance of the children; you have two sanitary inspectors besides this church sexton and coroner's officer and exjeweller. Do you not think that it would be more their duty than a school board visitor's to look after this sort of thing?—So it is; but what an immense aid the school board visitors would be to the sanitary authorities if in the course of their ordinary peregrinations when they came across nuisances of any kind, and especially overcrowding, they called the attention of the sanitary authorities to such cases as you describe! What great public good they would do, and what valuable aid they would give to the sanitary authorities if they would come and give us a little information about it! 17,737. Would you mind following the questions for a little time, and then we will have your lecture or remarks on Mrs. Bates afterwards. You admit that this state of things is very deplorable, and that it constitutes a nuisance?—Where it exists undoubtedly it is a nuisance. 17,738. You say that you do not often have complaints; do you think that the extraordinarily large proportion of these small property owners on the various committees has anything to do with that?—No. 17,739. Do you think it is very likely that people would generally present a complaint about a certain class of property to the men who own that property, or to their friends who own other property of similar character?—I should say that the occupier who has a grievance should at first go to his landlord, who has the power to remove that grievance; and if the landlord does not remove it, he should at once come to the authority who could and would remove it. 17,740. May I ask whether, from your general knowledge of the habits of small property owners such men, for instance, as Mr. Boss and Mr. Ball, and Mr. Hill, they would, as a rule, collect their own rents?—I should be inclined to think that they would; Mr. Ball does. Mr. Ross, I believe, collects rents for a good many people besides himself, and, therefore, I should say that he would collect his own. 141 17,741. Therefore, if they collect their own rents they visit these wretched hovels weekly?—I daresay they do, especially as far as the front door is concerned. Whether they generally look over the whole premises I should very much doubt; unless their attention was called to something special that required special looking after. 17,742. If a man collected his own rents you would imagine, would you not, that he would look through the property occasionally to see how it was being used, and whether his tenants were knocking it about or not?—Yes. 17,743. If he does that he must be acquainted with the wretched condition of these terrible places; and do you not think that if these owners did their duty properly they would report them to the vestry?—But where would be the need of their reporting to the vestry when they have the remedy in their own hands? they are the people whom the vestry would look to if these cases were reported to the vestry. 17,744. Then does it amount to this: that we must reasonably assume that these men do know the wretched condition of this property, that they are taking every week the outside penny from these poor people in the way of rent, that they make no statement of the condition of the property to the local authorities, and that they do not attempt to improve it themselves?—I cannot say what they do. I cannot answer a broad statement of that sort. 17,745. But it naturally follows that if a man collects his rents weekly himself he must know the condition in which the property is?—You would expect so, but as a rule I should say that a man going round on the Monday morning to collect his weekly rents would make all the haste he could from house to house and from door to door. I very much question whether a man would stop on such an occasion to look over the house floor by floor and room by room; but the thing that would meet his eye would be from simply going within the street door or, say, into the parlour, or something of that sort. 17,746. I do not think that rather special way of excusing them is good in this respect; that in these houses there are four, five, and six rooms, and four, five, and six tenements, so that as a consequence there is a tenant in each room. This Mr. Ball, and Mr. Ross, and Mr. Hill, and others could not possibly collect all tho rents from the six tenants at the one front door, they would have to go into the rooms, would they not?—When the house is wholly let out in tenements, certainty. 17,747. All those house of which wo are complaining are let out in tenements. It naturally follows, does it not, that the 142 owner must go through the house when he collects the rents?— Yes. 17,748. Then would you think that the man who holds this property, and who regularly deals in this class of property, and who must be perfectly well acquainted with the fact that it is in a condition which not only violates the law of the land but violates all good taste and good feeling, is a fit person to take a public position on the governing body of that district; do you think that, especially when the vestry contains 12 or 14 such members, or something like that number, they would constitute an authority to which the sanitary inspectors would be very anxious to present reports as to the bad condition of the property?—But you must first prove the man to be a regular delinquent. I should not say that if ho was a regular delinquent he was an eligible person to take part in parochial affairs ; but your question is so general that if I answered it it would be a wholesale condemnation of some one or other, which I am not prepared to pronounce unless the man is proved to be a delinquent. But I have heard of such things as owners of property going round to collect the rents, and doing the places up frequently, and laying out a very large sum of money, and then I have it on evidence again that in two or three weeks time the place has been as bad as ever again. I have frequently heard of instances of that sort, and I could prove them. 17,749. Things of that kind exist in Clerkenwell as a sort of theory. They are things that have been heard of but not seen, are they not?—Not so much theory ; they are too substantial for theory. 17,750. I do not want to generalize but to particularize. Here are owners of property of the class of which I have been reading a description. They collect their rents every week, and to collect their rents they must go to the door of each tenement-room ; therefore they must positively be acquainted with the condition of these tenements ?—Yes. 17,751. Then if the owner, knowing this state of things, fails either to put his house in order or to report its condition to the proper authorities, he is clearly, from your own reasoning, a man who would be unfit to take part in the management of the affairs of the parish?—The question is too general to be answered. 17,752. I think it is very specific?—I could not give a Yes or a No to a general question of that kind. If a man was proved to be guilty of omitting to do what was his plain and distinct duty, and what he felt that his tenants expected him to do, and what was necessary to be done for the tenants' good, and his tenants did not abuse what he choose to do for them, then 143 I should say that ho would bo decidedly to blame. But then there is another side to even that question, and that is how far the tenants encourage an owner to do what you seem to shadow forth that they ought to do, and whether the owners are not too often discouraged by the conduct of their tenants. 17,753. I fear that we have had very little evidence of their doing too much, and of the tenants not appreciating it. However, you admit all I want, namely, that a man who is guiltily aware of the condition of property of this kind, and does not take steps to improve it, is not a fit man to take part in the parish affairs; is that so?—It is all a question of degree; it is a question whether the neglect amounts to guilt or not. It is all a matter of opinion. One man may go into a house and say, "This house requires doing up from top to bottom; "another may be of a very different opinion, and may say, "This will last "for another six months or twelve months before it requires "doing up." This is all a matter of opinion, and I could not pronounce upon it positively. 17,754. The question whether the room is in good repair or in bad repair does not affect the fact of there being more persons in one room than any decent owner of property would like to see crowded into his property ?—No. 17,755. You said that Mr. Ross objected to a clause in the proposed regulations; is it not a fact, from your general description of the clause, that this was the special clause that would, above all others, affect the class of property owned by Mr. Ross, Mr. Hill, Mr. Ball, and others?—Yes, if you say "others." 17,756. The other 12 or 14?-I rather object to answer a question applying to this man or that man or the other. If you will put the question with reference to the class of property of which there is a good deal more than is held by Mr. Hill, or Mr. Ball, or Mr. Ross, then I will deal with it, but I cannot be made to cast a slur on this or that member of the Yestry when they are no more guilty than are owners of the same class of property, perhaps nearly all over the parish. 17,757. I have only been led to mentioning their names, because their names have been very prominent?—I am aware that their names have been made very prominent elsewhere, but I object to being made the medium of making them prominent. 17,758. This particular clause which was objected to was the very clause which would have affected this class of property, was it not?—The clause was open to modification, and they might have accepted the class with modification, but no modification was ever proposed. The clause was moved for adoption, but on being put to the vote its adoption was negatived. Nothing 14 4 further was done. It was quite open to the gentleman who brought up the report and moved its adoption, if he thought proper, to move that the clause be referred back for reconsideration, and with some other modification it might have proved acceptable; but no such step was taken and therefore the thing has remained without any further action upon it. Whether that can be construed into a determination to reject and to have nothing to do with the regulations, I am not prepared to say. I am sorry that I have not the clause before me, because if I had it I could speak more positively upon it. 17,759. The result of it is this, that the regulations are, if not dead, suspended?—Yes, they are suspended at any rate. 17,760. And there is a majority against them?—Yes, but do not misunderstand me. There was a majority against the adoption of that particular clause. Beyond that I cannot commit myself excepting that I cannot put such a construction upon the whole thing as to say that the regulations have been altogether rejected with the determination to have nothing to do with them; I am not prepared to say that, but I am only prepared to say that on that clause being moved for adoption it was negatived, and no steps have been taken since to revive it. 17,761. But that particular clause was the chief enacting clause, was it not?—It might have been, and I still say that it might have been acceptable with some further modifications. 17,762. I have nothing to ask you upon the question of why replies have not been sent to the Local Government Board ; that is no part of my business, but it would be very interesting to know the business that has occupied the time of the vestry so severely since May 30th; have there been lengthened reports from your sanitary inspectors and medical officer?—I think I may say that there has been more than the average amount of business of late, and we have had more than the average amount of talk in the transaction of that business, and therefore there has been unnecessary delay in getting that business off the agenda, and in arriving at this particular question. 17,763. You cannot describe the sort of business?—No; it is general. 17,764. (Mr. Godwin). I think I understood you to say that you consider the present mode of appointing the sanitary inspectors satisfactory ?—Yes. 17,765. But do you think so after what has taken place this morning?—Yes; I have heard nothing to shake my opinion. 145 17,766. One witness has said to us in respect to these sanitary inspectors and the work that they have done, that ho thought they did very little for the salaries they got; and he was asked if it was his opinion that if they were too active in the case of a vestry on which there were a large number of owners of small property, they would not be so welcome and popular with the owners of that property as they were. Would you believe that the fact that what they said would not be palatable does affect their statements?—No; I do not acquiesce in that answer. 17,767. But from your knowledge of human nature do you not think it very likely to be true?—No, I think rather the contrary. I am inclined to think that the inspectors being appointed by the vestry, if any vestryman had a property that required to be dealt with by the sanitary inspector, a friendly word or two from the sanitary inspector to that member of the board would be quite as likely to have an effect as a stranger going and taking legal proceedings. I thing sometimes a good deal more is done by a little amicable dealing with people than by drawing a hard and fast line by the law. 17,768. More than one witness has said, speaking with regard to these sanitary inspectors, and the sort of reports that they made, "It is very likely that they may be influenced by the "owners of property." Do you agree with that?—I do not think that they would be influenced to the extent of their neglecting their duty. I do not agree with the answer at all. It is an answer which is calculated to prejudice the officers, and which I entirely dissent from. 17,769. Do you think that the present mode of appointing the vestries themselves, which lets in the owners of the kind of property which we have heard about, and which is no doubt allowed to be in a very unsatisfactory condition, doing a great deal of mischief to those who inhabit it, is a satisfactory mode of appointment?—I should be sorry to see anything brought about that should constitute the vestry of men who had not a penny to call their own, and who were destitute of property. I am inclined to think that men of property are the most suitable men to be elected on local boards. I do not care what their property is, whether it is house property, or property in the funds, or any other property, but give me men who have something at stake in the parish. 17,770. But are those men who have property which it is proved here is allowed to remain in a most deplorable condition the proper people to bo on the vestry; and is an arrangement which allows them to become members of the vestry a 146 factory one?—I cannot see how you can avoid it, and how you could exclude them. Why should they be branded as men unworthy to be elected to take part in the administration of local affairs because they happen to be owners of house property? If so the Marquess of Northampton himself would not be eligible as a member for the local board, or Captain Penton, or anybody else. 17,771. Are they members of the local board?—No, unfortunately they are not; I wish they were ; but they will not condescpnd to it, and therefore we must come to the next best class of men that we can get, namely, those who have the next largest stake in the parish. I would rather have a man on the board who is worth £10,000 in house property than I would one who had not a penny to call his own. 17,772. You said very early in your examination that you scarcely knew what overcrowding meant; has not your attention been directed of late years to tho very frightful evils that result from overcrowding without requiring any definition?— If I have said in my evidence that I did not know what overcrowding meant I trust that answer will be struck out. I never said so intentionally. 17,773. (Mr. Mc Cullagh Torrens.) You meant to say that you did not know what was meant by overcrowding?—Yes. Some people may consider one thing overcrowding, and some may consider another thing overcrowding. 17,774. (Mr. Godwin). I have not understood you to evince that dislike and almost terror which some of us have manifested on hearing of the actual condition of rooms in Clerkenwell. We hear, say, of a house with four rooms with six or seven persons living in each room, and you do not seem to express that dislike for such a state of things which I should have desired to hoar from an officer in your position?—If it is to be understood that six or seven people sleep and live in one room only, and that a comparatively small one and without divisions in it, I should most decidedly object to it. I should call that overcrowding which ought at once to be abated. 17,775. You would feel certain that it would lead to immorality and to bad health ?—Certainly. 17,176. And, therefore, you would not defend those men who permit such things to go on year after year in your parish?—If a great number of people like that were living in one room and there was no division, and it led to anything approaching indecency or immorality, I should be one of the first to condemn it. 147 17,777. (Mr.McCullaghTorrens.) You have been for 28 years vestry clerk?—Yes. 17,778. And I presume that you have a clear recollection of the condition of the parish when the Act of 1855 came into operation ?—Yes. 17,779. I do not ask your opinion, but as as matter of fact, is it true that Clerkenwell is in the same condition with regard to house accommodation as it was in 1855?—In what respect? 17,780. In respect to the overcrowded tenements of the poorer part of the parish?—I can only go by this. The population of Clerkenwell in 1861 was 65,000 odd; it is now 69,000 odd; but in the meantime we have had a considerable amount of property, some of the smallest and most wretched courts, besides some tolerably good property, removed for the formation of the Clerkenwell road, which swept away many hundred of people. The property which I referred to as having been pulled down amounted to 221 houses of a gross value of £6,604, the rateable value being £5,485. I have not got the number of persons displaced by the removal of that property, but the number must he very considerable. Of those 221 houses many were of the smaller kind. You can form your own estimate as to what would be the average population. Amongst them were many of the wretched courts in Turnmill Street, which we had a great deal of trouble with at that time of day. But against so large an amount of property being swept away and a large wide road being formed on the site of it, we have had a large quantity of model dwellings introduced into the parish. I do not know how many now, but I should say seven or eight or more very large dwellings containing many thousands of inhabitants. We have just had the Peabody Buildings opened in Pear Tree Court, the population of which I believe is considerably over a thousand of itself. Those buildings would give accommodation for so many more than this property would which has been removed that it would allow, in my opinion, of an increase of population from 65,000 to 69,000 without there being necessarily any greater overcrowding in the remaining house property than existed in 1855. If there is greater overcrowding in the parish I can scarcely make out where it is, taking the census as my guide, because 69,000 with these model dwellings instead of 65,000 with the small class of property which formerly stood upon the site, does not account to my mind, for the great overcrowding that is now complained of. 17,781. It was stated to the Commission by Lord Shaftesbury, speaking of London generally, that in his time an indescribable improvement had taken place in the removal of unfit dwellings, 148 and the re-constitution of others; and he instanced spoeially his recollection of many of the alloys in Clerkenwell, some of which you have named. Do you agree in that estimate?—Most decidedly I do. The improvement has been immense. 17,782. These demolitions for the Clerkenwell Road party took place under the Metropolitan Board and partly under what other Acts?—In some measure under your own Act— Torrens' Act. That was putin force in 1869, and some property was removed and rebuilt there. The whole of those courts would have been dealt with under your Act, but it was known that they would shortly be swept away for tho formation of this road, and therefore tho vestry hold thoir hands a bit at the time, bocause they hardly know what would become of tho poor if they were swept bodily away; and in the moantime they gave every attention to thoir sanitary condition ponding thoir removal. 17,783. It has been somotimos stated, to the Commission and in tho press, that tho Clerkonwell authorities wore indisposed to put my Acts in operation, is that correct?—No. 17,784. Is it true that they did put them in operation until they were induced to hold their hands partly by the exceptional causes you have stated, and partly by other considerations?— Yes. 17,785. If tho Metropolitan Board had not thought it necessary to make these groat demolitions in the parish of Clerkenwell and its immediate surroundings, do you believe, or can you state as a matter of your own knowledge, that the operations under my Act would havo continued, judging from tho experience which you havo had of thoir proceedings?—I am inclined to think that the Yestry held their hands in consequence of the Metropolitan Board not feeling justified in moving, as they felt. If a Board like that cannot move and sweep away the property and displace the poor, querry, how can wo ? It must involve not only the outlay of a considerable sum of money but a very great displacement of the poor. 17,786. Would it not have been a serious aggravation of tho misery of the poor if the Yestry had gono on blindly applying my Acts which were intended for general use while these exceptional demolitions were in progress?—I think it would. 17,787. (The Chairman.) As regards the present day, have you put Mr. Torrens' Acts in force since the amendment of tho law in the year 1882?—We are just now doaling with several sites. 17,788. Have you considered the compensations under the Act of 1882, and do you think that that Act will be in that respect a satisfactory one?—I think so. 140 17,789. You think that the compensation will he greatly reduced by its effect?—I should hardly like to answer that question as I have not fully studied it. We are just about arriving at that. 17,790. (Mr. Mc Cullagh Torrens.) Applying your attention strictly to the question asked you by the Chairman; since the amending Act of 1882, has it formed a subject of consideration at the Vestry whether some of the improvements which they desired might not be made by the Metropolitan Board of Works, the burden being thereby extended over the town?—The general feeling of the Vestry no doubt was this: that the whole of this work might become a metropolitan and not a local matter. 17,791. As regards charge?—As regards charge. 17,792. But as regards choice?—As regards choice I think that the local authorities should very properly have a voice. 17,793. Some persons in local authority would like to have the choice and to leave the town the charge?—The local authority would like to have the suggestion at least as knowing the locality best. (The Chairman.) The local authority has the suggestion under Sir Richard Cross' Act; but probably it would not be found that the suggestion was enough to get tho thing done. 17,794. (Mr. McCullagh Torrens.) As a matter of fact, have the Metropolitan Board of Works to your knowledge in any instance since tho passing of Sir Richard Cross' Act adopted the smaller improvements which, in their alternative jurisdiction, they were empowered to adopt?—The only one that they have adopted in our parish is the Pear Tree Court scheme. 17,795. But that was far before. Let me recall your attention to the difference between the two Acts. Parliament determined that they would give an alternative power and right to the Metropolitan Board of Works in case of neglect by the local authorities to take up the work and do it, and charge the amount first to the town and eventually as a penalty to the locality?— Yes. 17,796. Acting upon that amended scheme, which was supposed by Parliament to give an alternative, do you know of any instanco in which the Metropolitan Board of Works have applied the powers so vested in them?—Certainly not in our parish. 17,797. Or in any other parish?—Not that I am aware of. 17,798. Did you ever hoar that they had applied those powers?—No. 17,799. Have you hoard that they have refused to apply them ? —I believe 1 have. 150 17,800. Have you any doubt in your mind that the systematic policy of the Metropolitan Board of Works is to refuse to apply such powers, and to cast back the whole charge as well as choice upon the localities ?—I believe so. 17,801. Therefore if it were proposed to transfer not the appellate but the direct choice and charge to the Metropolitan Board of Works, do you think that would work?—I should hardly like to say. 17,802. With respect to the delinquencies charged against the owners of property I wish you would tell the Commission for my satisfaction, if not for your own, that since I have been connected with the locality as its representative I have never interfered personally in any matter connected with the working of my Acts ?—No; certainly not. 17,803. I have never suggested or endeavoured to control the choice or the judgment of the Vestries, but that being so you are, I believe, aware that with the assistance of the vicar of Clerkenwell, I took considerable pains to ascertain the condition of things some four or five years ago?—You did. 17,804. Did you ever hear until you heard it to-day that the Vicar of Clerkenwell had shown entire indifference to the condition of the people and had shirked his share of the duty of investigation?—Certainly not. 17,805. Is it true?—No, I should say not decidedly; I am astonished to hear it. 17,806. Is it true of any other clergyman of the many that there are in Clerkenwell that they have shirked their share of the duty of investigating the condition of the people ; have you ever known their assistance sought in investigating the condition of the very miserable or having been sought, have you ever known it refused?—Sought by whom? 17,807. Sought by your authorities or sought by the persons complaining to the Vestry?—If the assistance of any of the clergymen of the parish was sought by the Vestry in any way I do not think it would be refused for one moment. 17,808. Have you ever known it refused?—No. 17,809. With regard to the owners of property are there some four or five very large owners of property in Clerkenwell?— Yes. 17,810. Carefully excluding any invidious or personal reference, I wish to know whether it is your experience that the aggravation of the evils, whatever they are, of overcrowding or of insufficient dwellings, ought not fairly to be laid to the door of the large owners of property as well as of the small owners; has there been neglect on the part of great owners as well as on 151 the part of small owners?—If you ask me my opinion I should say decidedly yes. Let me be perfectly clear as to what your previous question was. I should say that they should share the responsibility. 17,811. Is it not true that numbers of houses that 25 years ago were inhabited by one family each living respectably have since been leased out by the large owners to those who make a business of subletting?—Great numbers. 17,812. Is it not certain that that must have been known to the managing agents of those estates if not to the proprietors?— Most decidedly; it could not be done without their knowledge. 17,813. Is it true that in many cases in your parish where houses of this kind in a street that once was what is called respectable have been re-leased out notoriously and avowedly for the purpose of subletting?—That is what I hear continually. 17,814. Is it true that many of the respectable families that once gave distributive employment in their various walks of life to persons in clerkenwell of the labouring class have been refused tho renewel of their leases in order that the houses might be let to tenents who make a trade of it?—I have heard of such cases. 17,815. Where have the persons gone to who once occupied this middle-class position; have they gone out of the parish?— Many of them have gone out of the parish, and some, but very few, have gravitated to other parts of the parish. 17,816. Is not the parish thereby so much the worse?— Yes. 17,817. Is not the difficulty of getting suitable and proper persons to serve as members of the local authorities so much increased?—Most decidedly. 17,818. Who is to blame for all that ? First of all is the Vestry to blame ? —Certainly not. 17,819. Could the Vestry have prevented any of these evils? —No. 17,820. Has there not been what some people call the abuse, but what I will call the inconsiderate use of large property? — Yes, that is my opinion. 17,821. Clerkenwell has a circumscribed area with a comparatively poor population; do you think that the fear of adding to the burden of rebuilding, which must be heavy in a comparatively small area, and with a dense population with a declining trade, has been a restraining cause or a cause of caution to the Vestry in undertaking new works ?—Yes. 17,822. Do you believe that the operation of the Acts which bear my humble name, the Act of 1868, with the amendments 152 of 1882 and the other changes which took place in 1879, ought to be measured by demolition and re-erection, is that the only use of those Acts?—I very much question whether they should be measured by total demolition, I think they may be advantageously dealt with by way of improving and making good what already exists rather than bodily sweeping it away. 17,823. Is it not known to your Vestry that the policy of these Acts as adopted by Parliament was twofold: first to put a pressure upon improvement and correction of evils, and only as a last resource to resort to demolition?—Quite so. 17,824. Therefore if it be stated either here or elsewhere that the failure so called of these Acts is to be measured by the demolition of houses which can be tabulated in a schedule, is that a fair estimate of the working of these Acts?—No. 17,825. Which of the two courses is the better: the pressure to produce repairs and to bring owners to a consciousness of what is due to their tenants, or a wholesale demolition turning out great numbers of people, and leaving to chance when they may be housed again?—I think, as I have already said, that it would be to the advantage of all if the pressure of the Act was brought to bear upon owners to improve that which already exists instead of sweeping it away. 17,826. I presume that the Yestry for whom you are speaking here think that gradual improvement and gradual pressure is very much to be preferred to sudden and per saltum pressure?— Yes, decidedly. 17,827. Have you any doubt that that was the policy advocated by the authors of these Acts, and that the Yestry knew that that was the object of these Acts when they were passed?— I have not the slightest doubt of it. 17,828. With regard to overcrowding, will you tell the Commission what, in your opinion, after 28 years' experience, is at the bottom of the overcrowding ; why is it that a number of poor people prefer to huddle in miserably insufficient rooms rather than try to get what are called better dwellings at a higher price; what is the tendency which leads them to prefer to continue to huddle together in that way?—I believe they prefer one another's company and what would be called sociability even at a little sacrifice of room and space to occupying a large room and more space. 17,829. Would you not be prepared to go further and say that partly through ignorance—no doubt they run the risk of ill health and disease in their anxiety, in the first place, to save something out of their wages for other enjoyments or comforts, 158 and also for the cause you have stated—that they like to keep together?—Yes. 17,830. Therefore, when it is stated to this Commission that there were still existing side by side with many miserable dwellings, lodgings unlet, does that surprise you ?—No. 17,831. Is not that natural?—Quite. 17,832. Is it not inevitable?—Quite so. 17,833. The Trade of Clerkenwell, which was once vigorous and brisk in jewellery and watch making, has declined, has it not ?—Yes. 17,834. Has it much declined?—Very materially. 17,835. What has been the direct consequence of that upon wages and upon the amount, of people employed?—It has depreciated the wages very materially as well as the number of people employed; some trades and employments have already ceased and gone. 17,836. Is the vestry accountable for that?—No. 17.837. Would it be fair to blame the vestry by insinuation for that ?—No. 17,838. Is it true that the vestry are responsible?—Certainly not. 17,839. Could they have prevented it?—They could not possibly have done so. 17,840. Does it not amount to this, that overcrowding in a poor district is the result of poverty and depression?—Undoubtedly. 17,841. And consequently, as was stated to this Commission by one of our best witnesses, Miss Octavia Hill, that you can do nothing effectually except gradually?—No. 11,842. And consequently if any means can be found by which the vestry can be induced to adopt gradual pressure for repairs and cleanliness, that is not only their duty, but their first and best duty?—Yes. 17,843. Is it possible for the vestry or any other corporate body to infuse into people suddenly habits of cleanliness?—It is absolutely impossible. 17,844. Or an appreciation of the value of cleanliness?— No. 17,845. Is not overcrowding essentially an evil because it conduces to the contrary, that is to say, to dirt and disease?— Yes. 17,846. Is the vestry responsible for that?—No. 17.847. When you expressed your opinion sometime ago to this Commission, in answer, I think, to a question from Mr. Broadhurst, that you did not see that people ought to be ex- 154 cluded from the local authority because they carried on a particular trade, do you think that is the general opinion of the parish ?--I think so. I am quite sure of it. 17,848. Is it not true that some of the people who carry on the victualling trade are about the best local authorities that we have?—I am convinced of that. 17,849. That they are free from personal blame although they are heavily rated?—Yes. 17,850. Can you give us an instance or two? I do not ask you to indicate names where it is reproachful but where they are examples of good citzenships, I have no hesitation in asking you to name to me two or three of the publicans?—I will give you two or three instances. One of the members of our board is a Mr. Gillard of the "Peacock Tavern" near to the "Angel," High Street, sometimes called the "Angel," Islington. He is one of the most respectable men we have in the parish, and is and has been for some time churchwarden of one of the district churches. 17,851. Is he highly rated ?—Very highly rated. 17,852. Is he a punctual attendant at the vestry?—Very good indeed. I would specially mention another of our best men on the board of that class, and of the class altogether, another publican, a Mr. Thurston, of Pentonville, a most respectable man, very highly rated; and I could instance also a Mr. Spires and many others. 17,853. Mr. Thurston is rated above £300 a year, is he not? —Yes. 17,854. Do you think that the fact that a man who is rated above £300 a year sells a particular article which the legislature recognises is a reason for disfranchising him or excluding him from the local authority?—Certainly not; rather the contrary, I should say. 17,855. Is either of these men a man to be distrusted?—No, quite the contrary. 17,856. Is there any reason that you know of why men occupying such a position should be excluded from the Government of their parish, when distillers and brewers are not excluded from the House of Commons?—I cannot see the reason at all. 17,857. Have you any doubt that the same selfish influences may prevail in both cases; I do not say they do?—If there are any selfish influences at all in the matter I should say that they would apply to the one as much as to the other. 17,858. Take another trade, the trade of money lending; money lending is a trade which is not very high in popular 155 mation; you have had, I believe, in the Vestry some money lenders?—We have. 17,859. Have they neglected their duty?—No. 17,860. Have they been oppressors of the poor?—No. 17,861. Have they been as disposed as other people to do their duty as local government authorities?—Quite so. 17,862. Is not your great difficulty in local elections for a small parish like Clerkenwell to get a sufficient number of persons wholly disinterested in local money making to act as members of your Vestry?—Yes. 17,863. Would that difficulty be lessened supposing that Clerkenwell, and Holborn, and Bloomsbury were added together and formed one combination for the purposes of local authority ? —I should question it unless it was constituted under some other form and rendered dignified and attractive. 17,864. Would it not be easier to get a sufficient number, and would there not be a greater inducement to persons of the middle class to serve?—Am I to understand that supposing the same number of men that now constitute the Clerkenwell Yestry were constituted into a board representing a much larger area the difficulty of obtaining proper men to serve would be lessened by the total number being lessened ? that is to say that, supposing there were 72 members to constitute the board for a much larger area than Clerkenwell, would the difficulty be less in getting better men to make up that 72 than it now is in Clerkenwell ? 17,865. Yes?—That is very difficult to answer. 17,866. Is it not a fact that in Holborn and in Bloomsbury there are perhaps two score men who are specially fitted for such duties and specially active?—Yes. 17,867. If you added them to the same number in Clerkenwell would you not have a better body than you have now, being obliged to go lower and resort to men who are less eligible?—I am inclined to think that we should. Out of a large number of men there will always be a certain number who will take a very inactive part, and a certain number who will take a more active part. If the active parts of two or three boards were put together they would be a more efficient board than a board constituted out of an active and inactive part. 17,868. I think you know something of the management of the neighbouring parishes of Islington and St. Pancras?—Yes, a little. 17,869. Is it not a matter of notoriety that in Islington, which is not complained of, there are on the Vestry men of these various callings that we have been speaking of?—Certainly. 156 17,870. Did you ever hear that they were had or unworthy members of the Islington Vestry?—Never; on the contrary one of the best members of the Islington Vestry that I ever heard of, who was churchwarden successively for many years, but who is dead now, happened to be Mr. Vousley, a publican. He was one of the most efficient and respectable men in public work that I ever knew. 17,871. (The Earl Brownlow.) With regard to sanitary inspectors, are they required to keep a journal of what places they visit?—They are expected to keep a diary of how they are employed every day. 17,872. Who examines the diary?—It is supposed to be laid upon the committee table at the time that they meet. That is not always done; the committee do not always insist upon seeing it. 17,873. You stated that you thought Lord William Compton was not competent to give evidence as to the neglect of duty on the part of the sanitary inspectors in Clerkenwell; but I suppose that if you have those diaries in your possession you would be able to produce documentary evidence to refute Lord William Compton's statement?—Possibly, if dates and particulars were given. 17,874. Do you happen to have the diaries with you?—No, I have not, but I spoke merely generally when I said that Lord William Compton could not be peisonally acquainted with the matter which he referred to. 17,875. (The Chairman.) I wish first to supply the deficiencies in my examination in which I alluded to statements of witnesses without actually quoting them. That statement with regard to Mr. Ross' property in St. Bartholomew Square by Mr. Dawes the vicar of St. Mary, Charterhouse, is in answer to question 3878. As to that you stated that you did not know ?—I did. 17.876. Then the statement made by Mr. Boodle with regard to Mr. Ball is in answer to question 3637, and the words in his answer are, "What I complain of in Mr. Ball and others is not "that they have not done the work originally "(that is to say, the work required under the leases) "but that they have since "neglected the houses, and that in many cases they are very "extortinate in their demands against the occupants." That would not be your opinion ?—No. 17,877. There is only one other matter about which I wish to ask you. Some prejudice has, perhaps, been raised against the vestry of Clerkenwell by what Lord William Compton has described in answer to question 724 as the extraordinary violence of their language. Have you anything to say upon that point ? 157 —I can only say that I believe if it was Lord William Compton who said that he is quite right there. I think we hear language sometimes there which is very regrettable, and which certainly does the vestry a great deal of harm in the public estimation. As to how far it affects its real work is another matter; but it certainly cannot raise the vestry in the public estimation when such language is frequently seen to be used. We have some few noisy ones, which we cannot help; but those we are obliged to put up with and make the best of. I was desired by the vestry to hand in a few documents, and to express the hope that you will see fit to append them to your report as an appendix. These documents contain a letter which was addressed to yourself, Sir, on the 20th of March as containing some attempt at least to answer certain allegations. There is another letter, addressed to you, of the 7th of July. Then there is the deathrate of the parish for each year from 1856 to 1883 as stated by the Medical Officer of Health, and there is a rough proof of the Annual Report of the Medical Officer of Health as to the sanitary condition of the parish for the year 1883. May I ask you, in justice to the vestry, to append these documents to your report. The Commission deliberated. (The Chairman). The decision of the Commission is to print the report of the medical officer and the return of the death rate. 17,878. (Mr. Mc Cullagh Torrens.) Some impression has been created, I think, out of doors (I am not sure whether it has been produced upon the minds of the Commission) that the parish of Clerkenwell is singularly fortunate in being placed on high ground. It is quite true that the Pentonville portion is pretty high, but you have yourself stated that other portions of the parish, as I myself know, are very low?—Very low. 17,879. And even taking the level of the Pentonville part which is the highest, is it not, as a matter of mere topography true that very nearly the whole of Islington and the whole of St. Pancras is higher than Clerkenwell ?—Certainly. 17,880. And yet the death rate you claim is better then theirs ? —Yes. With reference to the expenditure that has been incurred in carrying out your Acts, supposing that demolition were to ensue, I am inclined to think that the ve3try have been somewhat slow in putting the Act into operation on account of other heavy charges. 17,881. You mean the demolition part of it?—Yes. 158 I have a document here which is a return made by me, in 1882, ordered by our Board, of a comparative statement showing the gross amount of the poor rates made during 14 years before and since tho amalgamation of Clerkenwell with the Holborn Union. These figures show that during the 14 years since the amalgamation with the Holborn Union tho poor rates raised and expended in Clerkenwell, included the allowance from the common poor fund (which was designed in aid of the poor rate), have been about £19,000 a year more than when Clerkenwell stood by itself, or nearly double. This excessively heavy taxation, together with the recent increased taxation by the school board, must necessarily and does have a somewhat deterrent effect upon the vestry in carrying out new and expensive works and improvements which they would otherwise like to do. I should be glad to hand that document in if I may be permitted to do so in the hope that it also may be printed in the Appendix to the Report of the Commission. 17,882. As a supplement to that can your furnish the Commission, either now or within a few days, with an accurate return of the amount of money spent on indoor and outdoor applications for relief in Clerkenwell?—No, I could not do that. I am vestry clerk and not clerk to the guardians of the union, to whose department that matter belongs. The Witness withdrew. Memo.-“The Annual Report of the Medical Officer of Health for the year 1883 above referred to as handed in, and printed in the Evidence being printed in Vestry's Annual Report for 1883-4, is not repeated here The letter of 20th July, referred to as addressed to Sir Charles Dilke, are in the previous Reports. 159 REPORT of Mr. D. Cubitt Nichols to the Home Secretary, of his Enquiry into the Sanitary condition of the Parish of Clerkenwell. 3, Howard Street, Strand, 27th February, 1886. 3 Sir, THE PARISH OF ST. JAMES AND ST. JOHN, CLERKENWELL. In pursuance of your instructions that an inquiry should be made is to the immediate sanitary requirements of the Parish of Clerkenwell, in accordance with the recommendation of the Royal Commission m the Housing of the Working Classes, and that I should hold such nquiry, I have the honour to report that I placed myself in communication with the Vestry Clerk, and also with Mr. Robson and Mr. Goode, the gentlemen nominated by the Vestry to co-operate with me in such inquiry; and gave notice to the Vestry Clerk and to the Mansion House Council on the dwellings of the people, that I should proceed with such inquiry at the Vestry Hall, Clerkenwell, on the 28th October, 1885. In pursuance of the above notice, I attended at the place named, and proceeded with the inquiry, Mr. Robson and Mr. Goode being present. Mr. Robert Paget, the Vestry Clerk, and Mr. J. W. Griffith, M.D., Medical Officer of Health, appeared on behalf of the Vestry of Clerkenwell. Mr. E. Lewis Thomas, Barrister, Executive Officer to the Council ; Mr. Parkes, M.D., Medical Adviser to the Council, and Mr. Conder, Member of the Council, appeared on behalf of the Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the People. At this Meeting it was arranged that an inspection should be made of the alleged sanitary defects in the houses referred to in a list which has been forwarded by the Mansion House Council to the Local Government Board, and that after such inspection a public inquiry should be held for the purpose of taking evidence. I then proceeded to inspect the houses, referred to in the abovementioned list, being accompanied by Mr. Robson and Mr. Goode ; Dr. Griffith, the Medical Officer of Health, and the Sanitary Inspector on behalf of the Vestry; and by Dr. Parkes, on behalf of the Mansion House Council. During the inspection an amended and enlarged list of houses was put in by the Mansion House Council ("A" herewith). 160 In the last named list some of the houses in Mount Pleasant, the houses in Back Hill, Faulkner's Alley, White Horse Alley, and Pump Court, included in the first list, were omitted as being outside the Parish of Clorkenwell. I also inspected other houses not included in the lists above referred to, but in which I was informed sanitary defects might be found. The list first supplied by the Mansion House Council comprised 234 houses, and the amended list 277 houses, the sanitary defects alleged to exist in such houses being:— Want of water supply to closets. Defective pans aud defective water apparatus to closets. Deficient water supply and defective or uncovered cisterns. Untrapped or defective yard gullies. Untrapped or defective sinks. Unpaved or badly paved yards. Want of dustbins and dilapidated and defective dustbins. Dilapidated houses, e.g., defective roofs, damp walls and ceilings, broken flooring, &c., overcrowding. The following is a statement of the streets and houses inspected, and the sanitary defects found to exist in some:— Names of Streets, Courts, &c. Number of Houses Inspected. Remarks. South of Vestry Hall Aylesbury Place 29 A cul de sac Bakers Row 11 Bath Court 1 Bath Row 1 Baynes Court 2 Berkley Court 3 A cul de sac out of Berkley Street Bishop's Court 12 A cul de sac Bowling Green Lane 2 Caroline Place 4 A cul de sac entered under house in Goswell Road Chapel Row 9 Coburg Street 1 Compton Passage 9 Corporation Row 5 Defects now being remedied Crawford Place Defects remedied Crawford Passage 2 Douglas Place 5 All defects remedied Easton Place 10 A cul de sac entered under house in Easton Street 161 Names of Streets, Courts, &c. Number of Houses Inspected, Remarks. Exmouth Place 1 A cul de sac. Represented by Medica Officer Farringdon Rd. Bldgs. 1 Fletcher's Row 1 Francis Court 7 A cul de sac out of Berkley Street Great Bath Street 19 Hooper Street 2 John's Place A cul de sac with narrow entrance tinder house in John Street. Represented by Medical Officer Jerusalem Passage 2 Kemp Place 4 A cul de sac. One w.c. for all Lane's Court 1 Little Bath Street 6 Dilapidated and unfit for human habitation Little Sutton Street 12 Houses dilapidated. No domestic water supply to one house Lock's Gardens 9 Margaret Place 4 A cul de sac entered under house in Margaret Street, and represented by Medical Officer Mount Pleasant 4 New Buildings 5 A cul de sac Northampton Place 6 A cul de sac. Defects remedied Northampton Row 5 Defects remedied Northampton Road 4 Oldham Gardens 11 Pine Street 9 Plumber's Place 8 Providence Place 1 A cul de sac. W.C.'s under front garden of cottages Rosoman Street 7 Rosoman Mews 2 St. James' Walk 1 St. James' Buildings 1 St. John's Square 2 Stratton Place 3 Tysoe Place A cul de sac with narrow entrance under house in Tysoe Street Union Place 7 A cul de sac entered under house in Clerkenwell Close. Two closets for use of all 162 Names of Streets, Courts, &c. Number of Houses Inspected Remarks. Vineyard Gardens Vineyard Walk 4 2 Warden's Place 4 Warner Street 8 No. 43 very bad Wilmington Place 2 North of Vestry Hall— Charlotte Court 11 Chapel Street 9 Chapel Place 1 Claremont Place 3 A cul de sac entered from Liverpool Road East Place 3 A cul de sac Emmen's Buildings 2 i J Hamilton Place 2 A cul de sac Merlin's Place 1 Mount Cottages 5 A cul de sac Mount Sion 9 Dilapidated floor below level of street Noble Street 21 Paved Place or Spencer Place 24 A cul de sac entered under house in Goswell Road, part below level of road Prime's Buildings 3 A cul de sac entered under house in Wellington Street, and 13 steps down from same Russell Place 10 A cul de sac St. Helena Place 29 Seabrook Place 3 Spring Street 2 Southampton Street J Taylor's Court 6 One w.c. for six cottages Taylor's Row 14 Dilapidated houses. Footway in front 5-ft. 6-in. below roadway Union Square 15 A cul de sac out of Chapel Street Victoria Place 6 A cul de sac. Two-room cottages Wellington Place 3 A cul de sac entered under house in Wellington Street, and 13 steps down from same Wellington Street Houses dilapidated. Now under repair Whito Lion Buildings 2 A cul de sac entered under house in White Lion Street 183 Names of Streets, Courts, &c. Number of Houses Inspected. Remarks. White Lion Street 2 Wynyatt Cottages 5 A cul de sac entered under house in Wynyatt Street, and 12 steps down from street York Buildings 5 Houses dilapidated York Street 1 York Valley 6 Houses unfit for habitation 475 In the above 475 houses there were at the time of my inspection the following sanitary defects:— Water closets without water supply 294 Water closets with defective pans or apparatus 52 Defective cisterns 32 Dust-bins wanting or defective 106 Defective gulleys and sinks 32 Defective drains 10 Defective paving to yards 117 And a large number of dirty and dilapidated houses, particularly the houses formerly occupied by one family, but now let out in tenements. With some few exceptions the whole of the houses inspected were occupied by tenants paying weekly rentals, in which the landlords were non-resident. The following information was supplied by the Officers of the Vestry:— Total number of premises in the Parish (including warehouses) chargeable with Poor Rate 8300 Included in the above are about 1200 tenements in Model Dwellings. Houses 2/3ds of which let in lodgings 3058 Tenement houses 583 Cottages of from two to four rooms 1059 Total number of tenement houses and cottages, in which landlord is non-resident but liable for repairs, rates and taxes 1642 Total houses to which Regulations under Section 35 of the Sanitary Act of 1866 might be made to apply 4700 164 Area of lands included in the Parish 380 acres Total length of public paving under control of Vestry, about 20 miles Total population last census 69076 Estimated present population 66000 Corrected Death-rate including deaths in Workhouses and Hospitals 22 per 1000 Death-rate for the Metropolis 20 per 1000 On the 11th and 14th November last I held a public inquiry at the Vestry Hall. Mr. Thomas, Barrister, appeared on behalf of the Mansion House Council. Mr. Philbrick, Q.C., appeared on behalf of the Vestry. In support of the contention of the Mansion House Council, the following gentlemen were examined. Dr. Louis Parkes, Medical Officer of the Council. Dr. B. A. Whitelegge, Medical Officer of Nottingham. Dr. Day, of Chapel Street, Pentonville. The Rev. A. T. Fryer, Curate of St. Philip's, Clerkenwell. Mr. H. L. Noel Cox, Honorary Secretary of Local Committee of Mansion House Council. Mr. Hugh Rose, Sanitary Inspector to the Vestry, And in support of the contention of the Vestry, Dr. Griffith, the Medical Officer of Health. The contention of the Mansion House Council was that the sanitary defects found to exist in the houses must be considered nuisances injurious to health, and that the remedy was within the power of the Vestry. 1st.—In enforcing the laying on of water to several closets under Section 81 of "The Metropolis Local Management Act, 1855." 2nd.—In requiring a constant water supply to all lodgings and tenement houses under Section 11 of "The Metropolis Water Act, 1871." 3rd.—In adopting the suggested regulations of the Local Government Board, under Section 35 of "The Sanitary Act, 1866." 4th.—In exercising the powers given by the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Act, 1868 (Torrens' Act). 5th.—In providing galvanized iron pails with covers as receptacles for dust (it being alleged that the dust-bins were broken up by the occupants). 6th.—In a better supervision by, and an increase in number of the Sanitary Officers of the Vestry. The contention of the Vestry was— 165 1st.— That as to the laying on water to the closets, this could not be enforced unless a nuisance was proved; and that the present system of hand-flushing was better adapted to the habits of the occupants. 2nd.—That as to a constant water supply, no complaint had been made of insufficient supply by the occupants of the houses. 3rd.—That as to the adoption of the suggested regulations of the Local Government Board—Regulations had been prepared under the 35th Section of the Sanitary Act, by the Sanitary Committee, and submitted to the Vestry, but the Vestry had decided not to adopt them. 4th.—That the powers under Torrens' Act had been exercised when necessary—the following places having been dealt with under the Act,viz.:— John's Place Exmouth Place Defects reported by Bishop's Court Fox's Terrace Surveyor and in Union Place part remedied Eagle Court Smith's Place Slade's Place Rhodes' Buildings Demolished Bolton Court Margaret Court and in addition several detached houses have been dealt with under the Act. 5th.—That as to the provision of receptacles for dust, the present bins and tubs were considered sufficient, as, if galvanized iron pails were provided, they would be otherwise used or sold by the occupants of the houses. 6th.—That as to better supervision by, and an increase in number of the Sanitary Officers, two Sanitary Inspectors, and an assistant had been employed for some time in a house-to-house inspection, and as this was completed, it was considered two Sanitary Inspectors (lately appointed) were sufficient for the purpose. Since the inquiry I have received a letter from Mr. Paget, the Vestry Clerk, with accompanying documents (marked "B" herewith) in reference to the supply of water to closets, the non-adoption of the Regulations, and the action taken under the Artizans' Dwellings Act. I have also received the Minutes of Vestry Meeting of the 17th December last, at which it was resolved (page 275) "that it be an order of this Vestry that water, with a proper flushing apparatus, be laid on to all w.c's in this Parish." 166 On consideration of the evidence, and as the result of my personal inspection of the Parish, I am of opinion it is desirable that additional sanitary precautions should be adopted by the Vestry. 1st.—As regards the supply of water to all closets this has already been ordered by the Vestry—See Minutes of Meeting of the 17th December last. 2nd.—As regards the desirability of a constant water supply, Section 11 of " The Metropolis Water Act, 1871,"provides that a constant water supply may be required in case it appears "that by reason of the insufficiency of the existing supply of water in such district, or the unwholesomeness of such water in consequence of its being improperly stored, the health of the inhabitants of such district is or is likely to be prejudicially affected." It is quite true but one or two complaints were made to me of defective supply, but many of the storage cisterns were too small to provide a proper supply under the present system; and the use of water butts common in the Parish is I think objectionable. I am of opinion that such a supply should be required to all houses to which regulations, under the 35th Section of "The Sanitary Act, 1866," might be made to apply. 3rd.—As regards the adoption of the Regulations suggested by the Local Government Board. The Local Government Board at the end of the year 1883, informed the Vestry they had put in force Section 35 of the Sanitary Act, 1866, and Section 47 of the Sanitary Law Amendment Act, 1874; the effect being that the Vestry were empowered to make regulations subject to the confirmation of the Local Government Board, with respect to houses let in lodgings, or occupied by members of more than one family, with respect to the following matters:— 1.—Por fixing the number of persons who may occupy a house or part of a house which is let in lodgings or occupied by members of more than one family. 2.—Por the registration of houses thus let or occupied. 3.— For the inspection of such houses and the keeping the same in cleanly and wholesome state. 4.—For enforcing therein the provision of privy accommodation and other appliances, and means of cieanliness in proportion to the number of lodgings and occupiers, and the cleansing and ventilation of the common passages and staircases. 5.—For the cleansing and lime whiting at stated times of such premises. By the Act of 1874, the regulations may extend to ventilation of rooms; paving and drainage of premises; the separation of the sexes; and to notices to be given, and precautions to be taken, in case of any dangerously infectious or contagious disease. 167 It is stated there are in the Parish 4,700 houses to which the regulations might be made to apply, of which 3,058 are houses in which the landlords are resident and liable for repairs, rates and taxes, as to these some discretion would bo required in placing them under the regulations, but as to the remaining 1,642 houses and cottages in which the landlords are non-resident I am of opinion it is most desirable they should be placed under the regulations; as many of the houses are dirty and dilapidated, e.g., among others the houses in Rosoman Street, Warner Street, Great Bath Street, Little Bath Street, Bath Place, St John's Square, and Little Sutton Street. There is no doubt the condition of the houses is to some extent due to the dirty and destructive habits of the occupants, but, if placed under the Regulations, it would be to the interest of the landlords to insist on the tenants adopting better habits, or to replace them by others. The adoption of the Regulations would also enable the Vestry to fix the number of occupants in each house. 4th. As regards the neglect by the Vestry to exercise the powers under the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Act of 1868. These powers have to some extent been put in force, but I am of opinion it is desirable further action should be taken amongst others to the houses in Little Bath Street, Great Bath Street, Little Sutton Street, Taylor's Row, Paved Place, Victoria Place, Mount Sion, Prime's Buildings, Wellington Place, York Buildings, and York Valley. 5th. As regards the provision of galvanized iron pails with covers, for the storage of dust. I am of opinion such a provision is most desirable for all houses where the yards can only be entered through the living rooms, or where a common dust-bin cannot be provided by the Vestry. 6th. As regards the necessity for the better supervision by, and an increase in, the number of Sanitary Officers. There has, no doubt, been some neglect in the past, but the present Inspectors appear to be energetic men, well acquainted with their duties, and I am of opinion that two should be sufficient to exercise a proper supervision. With reference to the reasons advanced by the Vestry to explain their having taken no steps to secure a constant water supply, viz.:— that no complaints have been made, and generally as to the Sanitary requirements, I beg to submit that as the Vestry, through their Inspectors, are acquainted with the actual condition of the houses in the Parish, and the sanitary requirements, it seems to be their duty to take the initiative without waiting for complaints. Complaints can hardly be expected either from the owners of unsanitary houses on whom the cost of improvements will fall; or from tenants who are too often indifferent to considerations of health or cleanliness, and in any case would fear to offend their landlords by complaining. 168 It also seems of importance that the Vestry should encourage their Inspectors to make to them recommendations of necessary improvements, and should let it be known that such recommendations shall receive prompt attention and wherever practicable be carried out. Although I think it most desirable some additional sanitary precautions should be adopted, I do not consider the Parish to be in a bad sanitary condition. On my inspection I found the public pavings in a good condition, and so far as I could judge, the sewers and private drains ; and a very good mortuary and Coroner's Court have within the last few years been erected by the Vestry. In the course of the inquiry I received the most valuablo assistance from Mr. Robsonand Mr. Goode, and my thanks are due to the Vestry for the use of the Vestry Hall, and also to their Officers who have ungrudgingly supplied me with all necessary information. I forward herewith list of houses supplied by the Mansion House Council (marked "A") letter from the Vestry Clerk, Mr. Paget (marked "B"), and documents referred to therein (viz. Reports of the Vestry for years ending March 1867, 188-1, and 1885, and Report of Medical Officer of Health for 1884), and Minutes of Vestry Meeting of the 17th December, 1885 (marked "C"). I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient Servant, (Signed) D. CUBITT NICHOLS. Having been present throughout the enquiry we concur in the foregoing report. (Signed) WILLIAM ROBSON. (Signed) JOSEPH J. GOODE.