 Section 76 of London Labour and the London Poor, volume 2 by Henry Mayhew. This LibriVox recording is in the public domain. Recording by Gillian Henry. Of the management of the sewers and the late commissions. The corporation of the City of London may be regarded as the first commission of sewers in the exercise of authority over such places as regards the removal of the filth of towns. In time, but at what time there is no account, the business was consigned to the management of a committee, as are now the markets of the city, markets committee, and even what may be called the management of the Thames, navigation committee. It is not at all necessary that the members of these committees should understand anything about the matters upon which they have to determine. A staff of officers, clerks, secretaries, solicitors, and surveyors save the members the trouble of thought or inquiry. They have merely to vote and determine. It was stated in evidence before a select committee of the House of Commons on the subject of the Thames steamers, that at that period the chairman of the navigation committee was a bread and biscuit baker, but a very firm-minded man. In time, but again I can find no note of the precise date, the committee became a court of sewers, and so it remains to the present time. Commissions of sewers have been issued by the Crown since the 25th year of the reign of Henry VIII, except during the era of the Commonwealth, when there seems to have been no attention paid to the matter. As the metropolis increased rapidly in size since the close of the last century, the public sewers of course increased in proportion, and so did commissions of sewers in the newly-built districts. Up to 1847, these commissions, or court of sewers, were eight in number, the metropolis being divided into that number of districts. The districts were as follows. One, the city. Two, the tower hamlets. Three, St. Catherine. Four, Poplar and Blackwall. Five, Auburn and Finsbury. Six, Westminster and part of Middlesex. Seven, Surrey and Kent. Eight, Greenwich. Each of these eight commissions had its own act of parliament, its own distinct, often irregular, and generally uncontrolled plan of management. Each had its own officers, and each had its own patronage. Each district court, with almost unlimited powers of taxation, pursued its own plans of sewerage, little regardful of the plans of its neighbour commission. This wretched system, the great recommendation of which, to its promoters and supporters, seems to have been patronage, has given us a sewerage unconnected and varying to the present day in almost every district, varying in the dimensions, form, and inclination of the structures. The eight commission districts, I may observe, had each their sub-districts, though the general control was in the hands of the particular court or board of commissioners for the entire locality. These subdivisions were chiefly for the facilities of rate collecting, and were usually western, eastern, and central. The consequence of this immethodical system has been that until the surveys and works now in progress are completed, the precise character and even the precise length of the sewers must be unknown, though a sufficient approximation may be deduced in the interim. To show the conflicting character of the sewerage, I may here observe that in some of the old sewers have been found walls and arches crumbling to pieces. Some old sewers were found to be not only of ample proportions, but to contain subterranean chambers, not to say halls, filled with filth into which no man could venture. While in a sewer in the newly built district of St. John's Wood, Mr. Morton, the clerk of works, could only advance stooping half-double, could not turn round when he had completed his examination, but had most painfully, for a long time feeling the effects, to back out along the sewer, stooping or doubled up as he entered it. Why the sewer was constructed in this manner is not stated, but the work appears inferentially to have been scamped, which had there been a proper supervision, could hardly have been done with a modern public sewer down a thoroughfare of some length. The Veronsov Road. But the conflicting and disjointed system of sewerage was not the sole evil of the various commissions. The mismanagement and jobbery, not to say peculation, of the public monies, appears to have been enormous. For instance, in the Accountants Report, February 1848, prepared by Mr. W. H. Gray, 48 Lincolns in Fields, I find the following statements relative to the bookkeeping of the several commissions. Quote, The Westminster Plan is full of unnecessary repetition. It is deficient in those real general accounts which concentrate the information most needed by the commissioners, and it contains fictions, which are very inconsistent with any sound system of bookkeeping. The ledger of the Westminster Commission does not give a true account of the actual receipt and expenditure of each district. The Hainsbury books are still more defective than those of the Westminster Commission. There are the same kind of fictions, but the extraordinary defect in these books consists in the utter want of system throughout them by keeping one-sided accounts only in the ledger with respect to the different sewers in each district, showing only the amount expended on each. The Tower Hamlets books have been kept on a regular system, though by no means one conveying much general information. With respect to the Surrey and Kent accounts, says Mr Gray, the books produced are the most incomplete and unsatisfactory that ever came under my observation. The ledger is always thought to be a sine qua non in bookkeeping, but here it has been dispensed with altogether, for that which is so marked is no ledger at all. Under these circumstances, the report continues, it cannot be wondered at that debts should have been incurred and it should have swollen to the amount of 54,000 pounds, carrying a yearly interest of 2,360 pounds, besides annuities granted to the amount of 1,125 pounds a year. The Poplar and Greenwich accounts, I quote the official report, confined as they are to mere cash books, offer no subjects for remark. No books of account have been produced with respect to the St Catherine's commission. On the 16th December 1847, the new commissioners ordered all the books to be sent to the office in Greek Street, but it was not until the 21st of February 1848 that all the minute books were produced. There were no indexes for many years, even to the proceedings of the courts, and the account books of one of the local courts, if they might be so called, were in such a state that the book called Ledger had for several years been cast up in pencil only. This refers to what may be characterised with more or less propriety, as mismanagement or neglect, though in such mismanagement it is hardly possible to escape one influence. I now come to what are direct imputations of jobbery, and where that is flourishing or easy, no system can be other than vicious. In a paper printed for use of commissioners, September 7th, 1848, entitled Draft Report on the Surrey Accounts, emanating from a General Purposes Committee, I find the following concerning the parliamentary expenses of obtaining an act which it was found necessary to repeal. The cost was altogether upwards of £1,800, which of course had to be defrayed out of the taxes. This act, says the report, authorised an almost unlimited borrowing of money, and immediately upon its passing, in July 1847, notices were issued for works estimated to amount to £100,000, and others we understand were projected for early execution to the amount of £300,000. Considering the general character of the works executed, and from them judging of those projected, it may confidently be avert that the whole sum of £300,000, the progressive expenditure of which was stayed by the supersidious of the old commission, would have been expended in waste. The report continues, it is to be observed that each of the district surveyors would have participated in the sum of £15,000 percentage on the expenditure for the extension of the Surrey Works. Thus the surveyors, with their percentages on the works executed, and the clerk by the fees on contracts and so on, had a direct interest in a large expenditure. Instances of the same dishonest kind might be multiplied to almost any extent. After the above evidences of the incompetency and dishonesty of the several district commissions, and the reports from which they are copied contain many more examples of a similar and even worse description. It is not to be wondered at that in the year 1847, the district courts were, with the exception of the city, superseded by the authority of the Crown, and formed into one body, the present Metropolitan Commission of Sewers, of the constitution and powers of which I shall now proceed to speak. Of the powers and authority of the present commissions of Sewers. In 1847 the eight separate commissions of Sewers were abolished and the whole condensed by the government into one commission, with the exception of the city, which seems to supply an exception in most public matters. The act does not fix the number of the commissioners. To the Metropolitan Commissioners five city commissioners are added, the Lord Mayor for the year being one ex-officio. These have a right to act as members of the Metropolitan Board, but their powers in this capacity are loosely defined by the act and they rarely attend, or perhaps never attend, unless the business in some way or other affects their distinct jurisdiction. The commissioners of whom twelve form a quorum are unpaid, with the exception of the chairman, Mr. E. Laws, a barrister, who has one thousand pounds a year. They are appointed for the term of two years revocable at pleasure. The authority of the City Commission, as distinct from the Metropolitan, for there are two separate acts, seems to be more strongly defined than that of the others, but the principle is the same throughout. The Metropolitan Act bears date September 4th, 1848, and the City Act September 5th, 1848. The Metropolitan Commissioners have the control over the Sewers, Drain's, Watercourses, Wears, Dams, Banks, Defenses, Gratings, Pipes, Conduits, Culverts, Sinks, Vaults, Sesspools, Rivers, Reservoirs, Engines, Sluices, Penstocks, and other works and apparatus for the collection and discharge of rainwater, surplus land or spring water, wastewater, or filth, or fluid or semi-fluid refuse of all descriptions, and for the protection of land from floods or inundation within the limits of the commission. As ample as these powers seem to be, the Commissioners' authority does not extend over the Thames, which is in the jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor and Corporation of the City of London, and it appears childish to give men control over rivers and to empower them to take measures for the protection of land from floods or inundation, while over the Great Metropolitan stream itself, the Antlet Creek below Graves End to Oxford, they have no power whatever. The Commissioners, City as well as Metropolitan, are empowered to enforce proper house drainage wherever needed, to regulate the building of new houses in respect of water closets, sesspools, and so on, to order any street, staircase, or passage not effectually cleansed to be effectually cleansed, to remedy all nuisances having insanitary tendencies, to erect public water closets and urinals, free from any charge to the public, to order houses and rooms to be whitewashed, to erect places for depositing the bodies of poor persons deceased until interment, and to regulate the cleanliness, ventilation, and even accommodation of low lodging houses. The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers extends over all such places or parts in the counties of Middlesex, Surrey, Essex and Kent, or any of them not more than 12 miles distant in a straight line from St Paul's Cathedral in the City of London, but not being within the City of London or the liberties thereof. This, it must be confessed, is an exceedingly broad definition of the extent of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commission, giving the Commissioners an extraordinary amount of latitude. In our days there are many London's. There is the London, or the Metropolitan, apportionment of the capital, as defined by the Registrar General. This, as we have seen, has an area of 115 square miles, and therefore may be said to comprise as nearly as possible all those places which are rather more than 5 miles distant from the Post Office. There is the Metropolis, as defined by the Post Office functionaries, or the limits assigned to what is termed the London District Post. This London District Post seems, however, to have three different metropolises. First, there is the Central Metropolis, throughout which there is an hourly delivery of letters after midday, and which deliveries are said to be confined to London. Then there is the Six-Delivery Metropolis, or that throughout which the letters are dispatched and received six times per day. This is said to extend to such a flit environs, as are included within a circle of three miles from the General Post Office. Then there is the Six-Mile Metropolis, with special privileges. And lastly the Twelve-Mile Metropolis, which being the extreme range of the London District Post, may be said to constitute the Metropolis of the General Post Office. There is again the Metropolis of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Police, before the region of rural police and country and parish constables is attained, a jurisdiction which covers 96 square miles, as I have shown at pages 163 to 166 of the present volume, and reaches, generally speaking, to such places as are included within a circle of five miles and a half from the General Post Office. There is, moreover, the Metropolis as defined by the Hackney-Carriage Act, which comprises all such places as are within five miles of the General Post Office. And further, there is the Metropolis of the London City Mission, which extends to eight miles from the Post Office, and the Metropolis again of the London Ragged Schools, which reaches to about three miles from the Post Office. This however is not all, for there are diverse districts for the registration and exercise of votes, parliamentary or municipal. There are ecclesiastical and educational districts. There is a thorough complication of parochial, extra-parochial and chartered districts. There is a world of subdivisions and of sub-subdivisions, so ramified here and so closely blended there, and often with such preposterous and arbitrary distinctions, that to describe them would occupy more than a whole number. My present business, however, is the extent of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers, or rather, to ascertain the boundaries of that Metropolis, over which the Metropolitan Commissioners are allowed to have sway. The many discrepancies and differences I have explained make it difficult to define any district for the London Sewerage, and in the reports and so on which are presented to Parliament, or prepared by public bodies. Little or no care seems to be taken to observe any distinctiveness in this respect. For instance, the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers, which is said to extend to all such places as are not more than 12 miles distant in a straight line from St Paul's Cathedral in the City of London, comprises an area of 452 square miles. The Metropolis that of the Registrar General presenting a radius of six miles with a fractional addition contains 115 square miles, yet an official document 58 square miles or a circle of about four and a half miles radius are given as the extent of the Metropolis sewered by the Metropolitan Commission. By what calculations this 58 miles are arrived at, whether it has been the arbitrium of the authorities to consider the sewers and so on as occupying the half of the area of the Registrar General's Metropolis, or what other reason has induced the computation, I am unable to say. The boundaries of the several metropolises may be indicated as follows. The three mile circle includes Camberwell, Skirts Pickham seems to divide Detford irregularly, touches the West India dock, includes portions of Limehouse, Stepney, Bromley, Stratfordly Bowl, and about the half of Victoria Park, Hackney. It likewise comprises a part of Lower Clapton, Dalston, and a portion of Stoke Newington, and closely touching upon or containing small portions of Lower Holloway and Kentish Town, sweeps through the Regents and Hyde Parks, includes a moiety of Chelsea, and crossing the river at the Red House Battersea, completes the circle. This is the sixth delivery district of the General Post Office. In this three mile district are chiefly condensed the population, commerce and wealth of the greatest and richest city in the world. The six mile circuit runs from Streatham on the south, just excludes Sydenham, contains within its exterior line Lewisham, Greenwich, and a part of Woolwich, also wholly or partially East Ham, Leightonstone, Walthamstow, Tottenham, Hornsey, Highgate, Hampstead, Kennzel Green, Hammersmith, Fulham, Wandsworth, and Upper Tooting. The portion without the three mile circle and within the six is the suburban portion or the immediate environs of the metropolis and still presents rural and woodland beauties in different localities. This may be termed the metropolis of the Registrar General and commissioners of Metropolitan Police. The 12 mile circle or the extent of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers as well as the London District Post includes Croydon, Wickham, Pulse Cray, Foots Cray, North Cray, and Bexley, crosses the river at the Aerith Reach, proceeds across the Rainham Marshes, comprises Dagenham, Skirts Romford, includes Henholt Forest and the greater portion of Epping Forest, touches Waltham Abbey and Cheshunt, comprehends Enfield and Chipping Barnet, runs through Elstra and Stanmore, comprehends Harrow on the Hill, Norwood and Hounslow, embraces Twickenham and Teddington, seems to divide somewhat equally the domains of Bushey Park and of Hampton Court Palace then crossing the river about midway between Thames Ditten and Kingston, the boundary line passes between Chim and Ewell and completes the circuit. Over this large district then the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers is said to extend and one of the outlets of the London Sewers has already been spoken of as being situate at Hampton. The district yielding the amount of sewage which is assumed as being the gross wet house refuse of the Metropolis is, as we have seen, taken at 58 square miles and is comprised within a circle of about four and a half miles radius. This reaches only to Brickston, Dullich, Greenwich, East India Docks, Layton, Highgate, Hamsted, Bayswater, Kensington, Brompton and Battersea. The actual jurisdiction of the Commissioners is then nearly eight times larger than the portion to which the estimated amount of the sewage of the Metropolis refers. The Metropolitan District is still distinguished by the old divisions of the Tower Hamlets, Poplar and Blackwell, Hoburn and Finsbury, Westminster and so on. But many of these divisions are now incorporated into one district, of which there would appear to be but four at present, or five inclusive of the city. These are as follows. One, Fulham and Hammersmith, Counters Creek and Ranala Districts. Two, Westminster, Eastern and Western, Regent Street and Hoburn. Three, Finsbury, Tower Hamlets, Poplar and Blackwell. Four, Districts South of the Thames, Eastern and Western. Five, City. The practical part or working of the Commissioners is much less complicated at present than it was in the times of the Independent Districts and Independent Commissions. The orders for all work to be done emanate from the Court in Greek Street, but the several surveyors and so on, whose salaries, numbers and so on are given below, can and do order on their responsibility any repair of a temporary character which is evidently pressing, and report it at the next Court Day. The Court meets weekly and monthly, and what may be styled the heavier portion of the business as regards expenditure on great works is more usually transacted at the monthly meetings when the attendance is generally fuller. But the Court can and sometimes does meet much more frequently and sometimes has adjourned from day to day. Any private individual or any public body may make a communication or suggestion to the Court of Sewers which, if it be in accordance with their functions, is taken into consideration at the next accruing Court Day or as soon after as convenient. The Court in these cases either comes to a decision of adoption or rejection of any proposition or refers it to one of their engineers or surveyors for a report or to a committee of the commissioners appointed by the Court. If the proposition be professional as to defects or alleged and recommended improvements in the local sewers and so on, it is referred to a professional gentleman for his opinion. If it be more general as to the extension of sewerage to some new undertaking or meditated undertaking in the way of building new markets, streets or any places large and public or in applications for the use and appropriation by enterprising men of sewage manure, it is referred to a committee. On receiving such reports the Court makes an order according to its discretion. If the work to be done be extensive, it is entrusted to the chief engineer and perhaps to a principal surveyor acting in accordance with him. If the work be more local, it is consigned to a surveyor. One or other of these officers provides or causes to be prepared a plan and a description of the work to be done and instructs the clerk of the works to procure estimates of the cost at which a contractor will undertake to execute this work or as it is often called by the labouring class to complete the job. A word at one time singularly applicable. The estimates are sent by the competing builders, architects, general speculators or by anyone wishing to contract to the courthouse without the intervention of any person, officially or otherwise and they are submitted to the board by their clerk. The lowest contract as the sum total of the work is most generally adopted and when a contract has been accepted the matter seems settled and done with as regards the management of the commissioners. For the contractor at once becomes responsible for the fulfilment of his contract and may and does employ whom he pleases and at what rates he pleases without fear of any control or interference from the court. The work however is super intended by the surveyors to ensure its execution according to the provisions of the agreement. The contractor is paid by direct order of the court. The surveyors and clerks of works are mostly limited as to their labourers to the several districts but the superior officers are employed in all parts and so if necessary are the subordinate officers when the work requires an extra staff. According to the returns the following functionaries appear to be connected with the under mentioned districts. Fulham, Hammersmith, Counters Creek and Ranala. Once or there, three clerks of the works, one inspector of flushing. Eastern and western divisions of Westminster and Regent Street. Once or there, who has also the Hoburn district to attend to, two clerks of the works, Six Flap and Sluice Keepers. Hoburn, two clerks of the works, one inspector of flushing. Finsbury, one clerk of the works, one inspector of flushing. Tara Hamlets and Poplar and Blackwell. Once or there, who has also the Finsbury district included in his district, two clerks of the works, two inspectors of flushing. South of the Thames, western districts, once or there, two clerks of the works, two inspectors of flushing. Eastern districts, once or there, two clerks of the works, two inspectors of flushing. What may be called the working staff of the Metropolitan Commissioners consists of the following functionaries receiving the following salaries. Chairman, with a yearly salary of 1,000 pounds. Secretary, with a yearly salary of 800 pounds, besides an allowance of 100 pounds in lieu of apartments. Clerk of Minutes, 350 pounds. Two clerks of Minutes, each with a salary of 150 pounds, 300 pounds. One clerk of Minutes, with a salary of 120 pounds. One clerk of Minutes, with a salary of 105 pounds. One clerk of Minutes, with a salary of 95 pounds. One clerk of Minutes, with a salary of 90 pounds. Accountant, with a salary of 350 pounds. Accountant's clerk, with a salary of 150 pounds. Accountant's clerk, with a salary of 80 pounds. Clarke of Surveyers and Contractors accounts £200, Ditto with a salary of £125, Ditto with a salary of £110, Clarke of Rates £250, another Clarke of Rates £180, another Clarke of Rates £110, another Clarke of Rates £90. Engineer £1000 for Travelling Expenses £200 Surveyor for Fulham and Hammersmith, Counters Clark and Ranilla District £350 Clarke of Works Hammersmith £150 Clarke of Works Counters Creek £150 Clarke of Works Ranilla £150 Inspector of Flushing £80 Surveyor of Eastern and Western Divisions of Westminster and of Regent Street and Hoburn Divisions £300 Two Clarke of Works Eastern and Western and Regent Street with a salary of £300 each £600 Two Clarke of Works Hoburn with a salary of £150 each £300 Inspector of Flushing £80 Surveyor of Finsbury Tower Hamlets and Poplar and Blackwell £300 Clarke of Works Finsbury £150 Inspector of Flushing £80 Two Clarke of Works Tower Hamlets and Poplar and Blackwell with a salary of £150 each £300 Two Inspector of Flushing with a salary of £80 each £160 One Marsh Bailiff £65 Surveyor of the Western Districts south of the Thames £300 Ditto Eastern Ditto £250 Clarke of Works Eastern Portion £164 Two Inspector of Flushing £80 each £160 One Wall Reave £22 each Shillings Clarke of Works Western Portion £164 Ditto Ditto £150 Two Inspector of Flushing with a salary of £80 each £160 Two Engineers Clarke's with a salary of £150 each £300 One Ditto £150 One Ditto £100 One Ditto £80 One Bylaw Clarke £150 22 Flap and Sleuth Keepers £892 12 Shillings Surveyor of the Surveying and Drawing Staff £250 Drawing Clarke £150 Two Ditto with a salary of £130 each £260 Five Ditto with a salary of £105 each £525 One Ditto £50 Six Surveyers with a salary of £100 each £600 Six Chairman £18 Shillings a Week each £280 Office Keeper and Crier General Service £120 Bailiff and so on £100 Strong Room Keeper £80 One Messenger £70 Two Ditto £40 each £80 Three Errand Boys £32 each £96 Housekeeper £150 Yearly Total £13,874 This is called a reduced staff and the reduction of salaries is certainly very considerable. If we consider the yearly emoluments of tradesmen and businesses requiring no great extent of education or general intelligence, the salaries of the surveyors, Clarke of the Works and so on, must appear very far from extravagant and when we consider their responsibility and what may be called their removable, some of the salaries may be pronounced mean for I think it must be generally admitted by all, except the narrow-minded, who look merely at the immediate outlay as the be-all and the end-all of every expenditure that if the surveyors, Clarke of Works, inspectors of flushing and so on, be the best men who could be procured as they ought to be or at any rate be thorough masters of their craft, they are rather underpaid than overpaid. The above statement may be analysed in the following manner Chairman £1,000 Subtotal of £3,505 from Secretary and Seven Clerks £1,860 Accountant and Five Clerks £1,015 Clarke of Rates and Three Clerks £630 Subtotal of £9,533 from Engineer and Five Clerks £1,830 Seven Surveyers of Surveying and Drawing Staff with Six Chairman and Nine Drawing Clerks £2,125 Five District Surveyers £1,500 Twelve Clerks of Works £2,278 Nine Inspectors of Flushing £720 22 Flap and Sleuth Keepers £892,12 Shillings Bailiff, Marsh Bailiff and Walreef £187,8 Shillings Subtotal of £596 from Office Keeper, Strong Room Keeper and House Keeper £350 Three Messengers and Three Earned Boys £246 Grant Total £14,634 The cost of rent, taxis, stationery and office incidentals is now £4,440 which makes the total yearly outlay amount to upwards of £19,000 The annual cost of the staff in the Secretary's Department is said to have been reduced from £3,962 for shillings to £3,605 In the Engineers Department from £16,437 three shillings to £8,973 sixteen shillings In the General Service there has been an increase from £606,16 shillings to £696 A deputation who waited lately upon Lord John Russell is said to have declared the expenses of the Commissioner's Office to be at the rate of from 25 to 30% on the amount of rate collected The sum collected in the year 1850 averaged £89,341 The cost of management in that year was £23,465 This it will be seen is 26% of the gross income The annual statement of the receipts and expenditure under the Commission for the year 1851 has just been published but not officially From this it appears that in February 1851 the balance of cash in hand was £5,750 9 shillings 11 pence The total receipts during the year have amounted to £129,009 Making together £134,750 10 shillings 8 pence The expenditure as returned under the General Head is for work £95,539 19 shillings 3 pence This item includes the cost of supervision and compensation for damages The cost of surveys has been £6,332 19 shillings 9 pence Management £16,430 9 shillings and tuppence Loans £10,442 10 shillings and tuppence Contingencies £2,749 1 shilling and a penny Total payments £131,494 19 shillings and 5 pence Balance in hand £3,355 11 shillings 8 pence As an instance of the mismanagement of the sewers work of the metropolis it is but right that the subjoined document should be published I need not offer any comment on the following return to an address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 28th July 1851 Except that I was told early in January on good authority that the matter was now worse than it was when reported as follows Quote With reference to the two orders of the commissioners of Her Majesty's Woods and so on I have the honour to state that since the 15th of November when I last sent in a memorandum I have frequently visited the several crown buildings affected by the building of the main public sewer for draining Westminster Namely the Earl of Momsbury, the Exchequer Bill Office, the United Service Museum, Lord Liverpool's, Mr Virtue's, Mr Ultraman Thompson's and Mrs Dalglish's All these buildings have been more or less damaged by the construction of the sewer The Exchequer Bill Office, the United Service Museum and Mr Virtue's in a manner that, in my opinion, can never be effectively repaired At Lord Momsbury's the party wall next to the Exchequer Bill Office has moved as shown by some cracks in the staircase But for this house it may not be necessary to require more to be done than stopping and painting At the Exchequer Bill Office the old gothic groins have been cracked in several places And several settlements have taken place in the walls over and near to where the sewer passes under the building The shores are still standing against this building but it would now be better to remove them The cracks in the groins and walls can never be repaired to render the building so substantial as it was before The cracks in the basement still from month to month show a very slight movement Those in the staircase and roof also appear to increase As respects this building I would submit to the commissioners of woods That it would not be advisable to permit the surveyors of the commissioners of sewers to enter and make only a surface repair of plaster and paint But I would suggest that a careful survey be made by surveyors appointed respectively by the board of woods and the commissioners of sewers And that a thorough repair of the building be made so far as it is susceptible of repair under the board of woods The commissioners of sewers paying such proportion of the cost thereof as may fairly be deemed to have been occasioned by their proceedings At the United Service Museum the settlements on the side next to the sewer appear to be very serious The house occupied by Lord Liverpool as also Mr Virtue's house of which his lordship is Crownless E Were both affected the former to some extent but not seriously of the latter the west front sunk and pulled over the whole house with it But as respects these two houses the interference of the board is I believe unnecessary Mr Hardwick one of the sewer commissioners having as architect for Lord Liverpool caused both to be repaired A like repair has also been made in the kitchen offices of Mr Alderman Thompson's house where alone any cracks appeared At Mrs Dalglish and Taylor's very serious injury has been done to both their buildings and their trade The commissioners of sewers have a steam engine still at work on those premises and have not yet concluded their operations there Some of the sheds which entirely fell down they have rebuilt and others which appear in a very defective if not dangerous state It is understood they propose to repair or rebuild But as eventually Mrs Dalglish and Taylor will have a very heavy claim against them for interference with business And as the extent of damage to the buildings which has been done or may hereafter arise cannot at present be fully ascertained It would probably be advisable to postpone this part of the subject giving notice however to the commissioners of sewers that it must hereafter come under consideration Signed James Penethorn 10th of May 1851 Sewer Whitehall Yard and so on Under the order of the commissioners of Her Majesty's Woods and so on of yesterday's date endorsed on a letter from Mr Tons I have inspected the United Service Institution in Whitehall Yard and find most of the cracks have moved The movement though slight and not showing immediate danger is more than I had anticipated would occur within so short a period when I reported on the 10th instant It tends to confirm the opinion they're in given and shows the necessity for immediate precaution and for a thorough repair Signed James Penethorn 16th May 1851 Seymour Charles Gore commissioners of Her Majesty's Woods, Forests, Land Revenues, Works and Buildings Office of Woods and so on 5th August 1851 End of section 76 Section 77 of London Labour and the London Poor Volume 2 by Henry Mayhew This LibriVox recording is in the public domain Recording by Gillian Henry Of the sewers rate Having shown the expenditure of the commission of sewers we now come to consider its income The funds available for the sewerage and drainage of the several towns throughout the kingdom Are raised by means of a particular property tax termed the sewers rate This forms part of what are designated the local taxes of England and Wales Local taxes are of two classes One, rates raised upon property in defined districts as parishes, jurisdictions, counties and so on Two, tolls, dues and fees charged for particular services on particular occasions As turnpike tolls, harbour dues and so on and so on The rates or sums raised upon the property lying within a certain circumscribed locality Admit of being subdivided into two orders One, the rates of independent districts or those which being required for a particular district As the parish or some equivalent territorial limit Are not only levied within the bounds of that district But expended for the purposes of it alone As is the case with the poor rate Two, the rates of aggregate districts Or those which though required to be expended for the purposes of a given district Such as the county Are raised in detail in the several inferior districts Such as the various parishes Which compose the larger one And which contribute the sums thus levied to one common fund Such is the case with the county rate But the rates of independent districts may be further distinguished into two orders Namely, one, those which are levied on the same classes of persons The same kinds of property And the same principles of valuation as the poor rate Such are the highway rate, the lighting and watching And the militia rate among the independent rates And the police, borough and county rates among the aggregate rates Two, those which are not levied on the same basis as the poor rate The church and sewers rates are familiar instances of this peculiarity The sewers rate then is a local tax required for an independent rather than an aggregate district And is not levied upon the basis of the poor law The assessment of the poor rate for instance includes tithes of every kind That of the sewers rate extends to such tithes only as are in the hands of laymen Again, the sewers rate embraces some incorporeal hereditments To which the poor rate does not extend But stock in trade, which of late years has been specially exempted from the poor rate Was never subject to the sewers rate A sewers rate however was known as early as the sixth year of Henry VI, 1427 Though commissions were not instituted till the time of Henry VIII The act which now regulates the collection of the funds required for the cleansing, building, repairs and improvements of the sewers Is 4 and 5 Victoria, 1841 This statute gives the courts or commissions of sewers Power to tax in the gross, in each parish and so on All lands and so on within the jurisdiction of such courts For the requirements of the public sewerage This impost is not periodically levied Nor at any stated or even regularly recurring term But as occasion requires, perhaps once in two or three years It is with some exceptions, which require no notice What is commonly called a landlord's tax in the metropolis That is, the sewers rate collector must be paid by the occupier of the premises Who on the production of the collector's receipt can deduct the amount from his rent If this arrangement were meant to convey a notion to the public That the sewers tax was a tax on property On the capitalist who owns and not on the tenant who merely occupies It is a shallow device, for everyone must know That the more sewers rate a tenant pays for his landlord The more rent he must pay to him The sewers rate is levied according to the rateable value Put upon property by the surveyors and assessors appointed by the commissioners Who may make the rate by such ways and means And in such manner and form as to them may seem most convenient It seems a question yet to be determined Whether or not there is a right of appeal against the sewers rate But the general opinion is that there is no appeal The rate can be mortgaged by the commissioners If an advance of money is considered desirable The maximum of one shilling in the pound On the net annual value of the property was fixed by the act The commissioners have also the power to levy a special rate On any district not connected with the general system of sewerage But which it has been resolved should be so connected Also an improvement rate at a maximum of 10% on the rack rent In respect of works they may judge to be of private benefit A provision which has called forth some comments The metropolitan sewers rate is now collected in nine districts Without present 42 commissions or courts of sewers Throughout England and Wales The only return which has yet been prepared Of the annual amount assessed and collected Under the authority of the Metropolitan Commission of Sewers Is one presented to the House of Commons in 1843 It includes the sum assessed in four of the eight districts Within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Commissioners From 1831 to 1840 inclusive Westminster Total in the ten years 235,397 pounds Annual average 23,539 pounds and seven tenths Hoburn and Finsbury Total in the ten years 123,317 pounds Annual average 12,331 pounds and seven tenths Tower Hamlets Total in the ten years 82,468 pounds Annual average 8,246 pounds and eight tenths From East Mulsey in Surrey to Ravensburn in Kent Total in the ten years 175,137 pounds Annual average 17,513 pounds and seven tenths Grand total in the ten years 616,319 pounds Total annual average 61,631 pounds and nine tenths The following amounts were returned to Parliament As that expended in two other of the Metropolitan Districts In the year 1833 In the city 17,718 pounds and two tenths Poplar District 2,746 pounds and nine tenths Total 20,465 pounds and one tenth Annual average of the four above mentioned districts 61,631 pounds and nine tenths Yearly total 82,097 pounds The two districts excluded from the above total Are the minor ones of St Catherine and Greenwich So that altogether the gross sum levied within the jurisdiction Of the Metropolitan Commissioners Must have been between 85,000 pounds and 90,000 pounds The annual amount of the local rates in England and Wales Is, according to a work on the subject The local taxes of the United Kingdom Published under the direction of the Poor Law Commissioners In 1846 8,801,838 pounds Note the following statement may, according to the work above Alluded to, be presented as an approximate return Of the present annual amount of the local rates In England and Wales 1. Rates A. Rates of independent districts 1. On the basis of the poor rate The poor rate including the purposes of The workhouse building rate The survey and valuation rate Relief of the poor 4,976,093 pounds Other objects 567,567 pounds Contributions to county and borough rates See below Surage rate, unknown Constables rate, unknown Highway rates, 1,312,812 pounds Lighting and watching rate, unknown Militia rate, not needed 2. Not on the basis of the poor rate Church rates, 506,812 pounds Surage rate, general surage tax in the Metropolis 82,097 pounds In the rest of the country, unknown Drainage and enclosure rates Enclosure rate and regulated pasture rate, unknown B. Rates of aggregate districts County rates, 100 rate, borough rates All contributed from the poor rate 1,356,457 pounds Total rates of England and Wales 8,801,838 pounds The amount of the taxation in the shape of Tolls, Jews and Fees is as follows 2. Tolls, Jews and Fees Turnpike Tolls 1,348,085 pounds Borough Tolls and Jews 172,911 pounds City of London, 205,100 pounds Making 378,000 and 11 pounds Light Jews, 257,776 pounds Port Jews, 554,645 pounds Church Jews and Fees Marriage Fees Registration Fees, unknown Justituary Fees Clerks of the Peace, 11,057 pounds Justices Clerks, 57,668 pounds Making 68,725 pounds Total Tolls, Jews and Fees Of England and Wales 2,607,241 pounds The sub-joined, then adds the same work Founded on the preceding details May be regarded as exhibiting an approximate estimate Of the present amount of the local taxis in England and Wales Being, however, obviously below the actual total Rates, 8,801,838 pounds Tolls, Jews and Fees 2,607,241 pounds Total, 11,409,079 pounds The annual amount of the local taxation of England and Wales May at the present time be stated in round numbers At not less than 12 million pounds Or, we may say that the local taxation of the country Is one fourth of the amount of the general taxation End note In this large sum Only the average annual outlay on the six districts Of the sewers of the Metropolis is included 82,097 pounds And it is stated that not even an approximate average Could be arrived at as regards the expenditure on sewers In the country districts Such absence of statistical knowledge And it is a want continually observable Is little creditable to the legislative, executive And administrative powers of the state I shall now proceed to show from the best data At my command, the present outlay On the metropolitan sewers According to the present law The commissioners are required to submit to parliament Yearly returns of the money collected on a count off And expended in the sewerage of the Metropolis I need only state that in the latest And indeed the sole returns upon the subject The rates in 1845, 1846 and 1847 Under the former separate commissions Were one-pence and tuppence in the pound on land And from thruppence Ranla and Westminster To one-shelling ten-pence Greenwich on houses The rates made under the combined and consolidated commissions From the 30th of November 1847 To the 8th of October 1849 Were all six-pence Accepting the western division of Westminster sewers Which were thruppence And a part of the Surrey and Kent District eight-pence The rates under the present Metropolitan Commission From the 8th of October 1849 To the 31st of July 1851 Are all six-pence With a similar exception in Surrey and Kent The following are the only further returns bearing Immediately on the subject Return of the percentage on the total rateable Annual value of the property assessed To which the rates collected under the separate commissions Between January 1845 And November 1847 amounted Similar return as to the combined and consolidated commissions From November 1847 to October 1849 And as to the present commission From October 1849 To July 31st 1851 Under the old separate commissions of sewers Between January 1845 and November 30th 1847 Total rateable annual value on the districts On November 30th 1847 And October 8th 1849 And July 31st 1851 respectively Six million six hundred and eighty-three thousand Eight hundred and ninety-six pounds Average amount collected for one year Eighty one thousand seven hundred and thirty-eight pounds Eleven shillings Amount of the percentage of the rates collected On the rateable annual value One pound four shillings and five pence Or tuppence and three farthings Point seven two in the pound per annum Under the combined and consolidated commissions From November 30th 1847 To October the 8th 1849 Total rateable annual value Seven million one hundred and twenty-eight thousand One hundred and eleven pounds Average amount collected for one year Sixty seven thousand seven hundred and seven pounds Sixteen shillings and thruppence Amount of the percentage of the rates collected On the rateable annual value Eighteen shillings eleven pence and three farthings Or tuppence and a farthing Point one one in the pound per annum Under the present Metropolitan Commission of Sewers From October 8th 1849 To July 21st 1851 Total rateable annual value Rental of the districts now rated Eight million one hundred and thirty-five thousand And ninety pounds Rental of the districts within the active jurisdiction In which expenses have been incurred And which are about to be rated Eight million eight hundred and twenty thousand Three hundred and twenty-five pounds Average amount collected for one year Eighty nine thousand three hundred and forty one pounds Sixteen shillings Amount of the percentage of the rates collected On the rateable annual value Rental of the districts now rated One pound one shilling and eleven pence Or tuppence and a point five two In the pound per annum Rental of the districts within the active jurisdiction In which expenses have been incurred And which are about to be rated One pound and thruppence Or tuppence and a farthing Point seven two in the pound per annum August 1851 Thomas Coggin, clerk of rates and collections Return of the cost of management per annum On the total rateable annual value Of the districts Eighteen forty-five Total rateable annual value of the districts Six million three hundred and twenty thousand Three hundred and thirty one pounds Cost of management per annum Eighteen thousand five hundred and ninety one pounds Four shillings and thruppence Rate percent per annum Of cost of management on the rateable Annual value of the districts Five shillings ten pence apne Eighteen forty-six Total rateable annual value of the districts Six million four hundred and twenty three thousand Nine hundred and nine pounds Cost of management per annum Eighteen thousand ninety seven pounds Five shillings and a penny Rate percent per annum Of cost of management Five shillings seven pence apne Eighteen forty-seven Total rateable annual value of the districts Six million six hundred and eighty three thousand Eight hundred and ninety six pounds Cost of management per annum Twenty four thousand three hundred and seventy one pounds Sixteen shillings and nine pence Rate percent per annum of cost of management Seven shillings eight pence apne Eighteen forty-eight Total rateable annual value of the districts Six million seven hundred and eighty three thousand One hundred and eleven pounds Cost of management per annum Twenty thousand and eight pounds Seven shillings and ten pence Rate percent per annum of cost of management Five shillings ten pence and three farthings Eighteen forty-nine Total rateable annual value of the districts Eight million seventy seven thousand five hundred and ninety one pounds Cost of management per annum Twenty thousand and five pounds Seven shillings and six pence Rate percent per annum of cost of management Four shillings eleven pence and a farthing Eighteen fifty Total rateable annual value of the districts Eight million seven hundred and ninety one thousand nine hundred and sixty seven pounds Cost of management per annum Twenty three thousand four hundred and sixty five pounds Eighteen shillings and seven pence Rate percent per annum of cost of management Five shillings and four pence August seventh eighteen fifty one G. S. Hatton, accountant End of section seventy seven Section seventy eight of London Labour and the London Poor Volume two by Henry Mayhew This LibriVox recording is in the public domain Recording by Gillian Henry Off the cleansing of the sewers Ventilation There are two modes of purifying the sewers The one consists in removing the foul air The other in removing the solid deposits I shall deal first with that mode of purification Which consists in the mechanical removal Or chemical decomposition of the noxious gases Engendered within the sewers This is what is termed the ventilation of the sewers And forms a very important branch of the inquiry Into the character and working of the underground refuse channels For it relates to the risk of explosions And the consequent risk of destruction to men's lives While if the sewer be ill ventilated The surrounding atmosphere is often prejudicially affected By the escape of impure air from the subterranean channels A survey as to the ventilation and so on of the sewers Was made by Mr. Hawkins, assistant surveyor And Mr. Jenkins, clerk of the works Four examinations took place of sewers Of those in Bloomsbury Those from Tottenham Court Road to Norfolk Street, Strand From the guard room in Buckingham Palace To the Horse Ferry Road, Millbank And in Grovener Square and the street's adjacent There were difficulties attending the experiment From Castle Street to Museum Street There was a drop of four feet in the levels So that the examiners had to advance on their hands and knees And it was difficult to make observations In some places in Westminster also the water and silt Were knee deep and the lamps, three were used Splashed all over In Bloomsbury the sewers gave no token of the presence of any gas But in the other places its presence was very perceptible Especially in a sewer on the west side of Grovener Square A very low one in which the gas was ignited Within the wire shade of one of the lamps But without producing any effect Beyond that of immediately extinguishing the light There was also during the route In the neighbourhood of Sir Henry Mewes Brewery And of an adjoining distillery in Vine Street A considerable quantity of steam in the sewer But it had no material effect upon the light The examiners came to the conclusion That where there was any liability to an explosion From the presence of carbureted hydrogen Or other causes The improved Davy lamp afforded an almost certain protection The attention of the commissioners Seems to have been chiefly given of late As regards ventilation and indeed general improvement To the sewers on the Surrey side of the metropolis Among these a new sewer along Friar Street Running from the Black Friars to the Southark Bridge Road Is one of the most noticeable Friar Street is one of the smaller of thoroughfares The character of which is perhaps little suspected By those who pass along the open Black Friars Road As you turn out of that road to the left hand Advancing from the bridge Almost opposite the Magdalene Hospital Is Friar Street On its left hand as you proceed along it Are gas works and the factories Or workplaces of tradesmen in the soap boiling Tallow melting, cat and other gut manufacturing Bone boiling and other noisome callings On the right hand are a series of short And often neatly built streets But the majority of them have the look Of unmistakable squalor or poverty Though not of the poverty of the industrious Across Flint Street, Green Street and other ways Few of them horse thoroughfares Hang on a fair day lines of washed clothes to dry Yellow looking chemises and petticoats Are affixed alongside men's trousers and waist coats Course featured and brazen looking women With necks and faces reddened as if with brick dust From exposure to the weather Stand at their doors and beckon to the passersby Perhaps in no part of the metropolis Is there a more marked manifestation Of moral obsceneness on the one hand And physical obsceneness on the other With the low prostitution of this locality Is mixed the low and the bold crime of the metropolis Some of the offshoots from Friar Street Communicate with places of as nefarious a character Hackett, whom his newspaper admirers seem to wish To elevate into the fame of a second Jack Shepherd Resided in this quarter The gang who were last winter repulsed In their burglarious attack on Mr. Halford's villa In the Regents Park favoured the same locality And were arrested in their old haunts Public houses may be seen here and there Houses perhaps not generally discouraged by the police Which are at once the rendezvous and the trap of offenders For to and from such resorts they can be readily traced And all over this place of moral degradation Extends the stench of offensive manufacturers And ill-ventilated sewers Certainly there is now an improvement But it is still bad enough A report of the 21st of September, 1848 Shows that a new sewer, 1500 feet in length Had been, quote, put in along Friar Street With a fall of 15 inches from the level of the sewer In Blackfriars Road to Suffolk Street The sewer, states the report With which it communicates at its upper end In the Blackfriars Road contains nearly two feet In depth of soil It in consequence has silted up to that level With semi-fluid black filth, principally from the factories Of the most poisonous and sickening description Forming an elongated cesspool 1500 feet in length The filth at its lower end being upwards Of three feet in depth Since the building of this sewer The foul matter so discharged into it Has been in a state of decomposition Constantly giving off pestilential and poisonous gases Which have spread into and filled the adjoining sewers Thence they are being drawn into the houses By the house drains And into the streets by the street drains To such a fearful extent As to infect the whole atmosphere of the neighbourhood And so to cause the very offensive order Generally complained of there Sulphurated hydrogen is present In these sewers in large quantities As metals, silver and copper are attacked And blackened by it And the smell from it is so sickening As to be almost unbearable End quote On the question of how best to deal with sewers Such as the Friar Street Missors John Rowe and John Phillips Surveyors and Mr Henry Austin Consulting engineer have agreed In the following opinion The most simple and convenient method Would be by placing large strong fires In shafts directly over the crown of the sewers The expense of each furnace With the enclosure around it Will be about twenty pounds The fires would be fed almost constantly By which little smoke would be generated The heat to be produced from these fires Would rarify the air so much As to create rapidly ascending currents In the shafts And strong drafts through the sewers The foul air in which Would then be drawn to the fires And there consumed And as it was being destroyed Fresh air would be drawn in At all the existing inlets Of house and street drains Pushing forward and supplying The place of the foul air End quote Of these three were regular sewer men And the others were a policeman And Mr Wells, a surgeon Who went into the sewer in the hopes Of giving assistance Mr Phillips, the then chief Surveyor of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Of the sewers Mr Phillips, the then chief Surveyor of the commission of sewers Stated that the cause of these deaths In the sewers was entirely An exceptional case And the gas which had caused the accident Inquired into was not a sewer gas There is often, he said A great escape of gas from the mains Which found its way into the sewers The gas however Which has done the mischief In the present instance Would not explode Your opinion was That the deceased men died from asphyxia Caused by inhaling Sulfurated hydrogen and carbonic Acid gas in mixture with Prusik vapour And that these noxious emanations Were derived from the refuse lime Of gas works thrown in with other rubbish To make up the road above the sewer Other scientific gentlemen Attributed the five deaths To the action of sulphurated hydrogen gas Or according to Dr. Lyon Playfair To be chemically correct Hydrosulfate of ammonia The coroner, Mr. Bedford In summing up said that Mr. Phillips Wished it to be supposed That gas lime was the cause Of the foul gas And Dr. Ewer said that gas lime Had to do with the calamity But Dr. Miller, Mr. Richard Phillips Mr. Campbell and Dr. Playfair Were especially the latter Were perfectly sure that Lime had nothing to do with it The verdict was the following We find that Daniel Pert Thomas G. and John Atwood Died from the inhalation Of noxious gas generated In a neglected and Unventilated sewer in Kenilworth Street And we find that Henry Wells And John Walsh met their deaths From the same cause in their Laudable endeavours to save the lives Of the first three sufferers Or unanimously consider the commissioners And officers of the metropolitan Sewers are much to blame For having neglected to avail themselves Of the unusual advantages offered From the local situation Of the Grovner Canal For the purpose of flushing The sewers in this district End quote Of flushing and Plunging and other modes Of washing the sewers The next step in our inquiry And that which at present Concerns us more than any other Is the mode of removing The solid deposits from the sewers As well as the condition of the Workmen connected with that Particular branch of labour The sewers are the means by which A larger proportion of the wet Refuse of the metropolis is Removed from our houses And we have now to consider the Means by which the more solid Part of this refuse is removed From the sewers themselves The latter operation is quite as Essential to health and cleanliness As the former for to allow the Filth to collect in the channels Which are intended to remove it And there to remain decomposing And vitiating the atmosphere Of the metropolis is manifestly As bad as not to remove it At all and since the more solid Portions of the sewage Will collect and form hard Deposits at the bottom of each Object it becomes necessary That some means should be devised For the periodical purgation Of the sewers themselves There have been two modes Of effecting this object The one has been the carting away Of the more solid refuse And the other the washing of it away Or as it is termed Flushing in the case Of the covered sewers and Plunging in the case of The open ones under both Systems whether the refuse be Carted or flushed away The hard deposit has to be first Loosened by manual labourers The difference consisting principally In the means of after removal The first of these systems Namely the cartage method Was that which prevailed In the metropolis till the year 1847 I shall therefore Give a brief description of this Mode of cleansing the sewers Before proceeding to treat of the Model mode of flushing Under the old system The clearing away of the deposit Was a nightmare's work Differing little except in being More toilsome, offensive to the Public and difficult A hole was made from the street Down into the sewer where the Deposit was thickest and the Deposit was raised by means Of a tub filled below Drawn up to the street and emptied Into a cart or spread in mounds To be shoveled into some vehicle A nightman told me that this Mode of work was sometimes A great injury to his trade Because when it was begun on a Night many of the householders Sleeping in the neighbourhood used To say to themselves or to their Missuses as they turned in their beds It's them here cussed cesspools Again I wish they was done away With and all the time sir The cesspools was as innocent and As sweet as a angel This clumsy and filthy process Is now but occasionally resorted To. A man who had super Intended a labour of this kind In a narrow but busy thoroughfare In Southark told me that these Sewer labourers were the worst Abused men in London, no one Had a good word for them But there have been other modes Of removing the injurated sewage Besides that of cartage And which though not exactly Flushing certainly consisted Of allowing the deposit to be washed away Some of these contrivances were Curious enough I learned from a report printed In 1849 that the King's Scholar's Pond Sewer In the city of Westminster running Near the Abbey contained a Continuous bed of deposit Of soil, sand and filth From ten to thirty inches in depth And this for a mile and a Half next the river The first mile yielding more than Loads of matter. This sewer Was to be cleansed. We first used a machine Says Mr J Lysander Hale In the form of a plough And harrow combined. A horse Dragged it through the deposit in the sewer One man attended the horse And another guided the plough The work done by this machine In cutting a channel through the soil And causing the water to move through It quickly was effectual To remove the deposit But as the sewer is a tidal sewer And its sole entrance for a horse Being its outlet The machine could only be used For a small part of any day Sometimes with a strong breeze up the river The tide would not recede sufficiently To permit the horse to get in at all And it did not appear advisable To incur the expense of fifty pounds To build a sideway entrance For the animal So that under these circumstances We were obliged to discontinue The use of the horse and plough Which under other circumstances Would have been very effective From this time I understand the sewers of London Have remained unploughed By means of horse labour But the plough was not altogether abandoned And as horse power was not found Very easily applicable Water power was resorted to The plough and harrow Were attached to a barge Which was introduced into the sewer The sluice gates were kept shut Until the ebb of the tide made the difference Of level between the contents of the sewer And the surface of the Thames Equal to some eight feet The gates were then suddenly opened And the rapid and deep current Of water following was then Sufficient to bring the barge and plough Down the sewer with a force equal To five or six horse power This last mentioned method Was also soon abandoned We now come to the more approved Plan of flushing The term flushing Sewers implies Says Mr Haywood in his report Cleansing by the application Of bodies of water in the sewers This is periodically affected Varying in intervals According to the necessities of the sewerage Or other circumstances The flushing system has a two fold Object namely to remove All deposits and Prevent the accumulation of new When the deposit is not allowed To accumulate and harden Flushing consists Says Mr Haywood simply In heading back and letting off Flush at once Note hence the origin of the term End note That which has been delivered into the sewers In a certain number of hours By the various houses draining into them Diluted with large quantities Of water specially employed For the purpose Though the operation of flushing Is one of modern introduction As regards the metropolis One indeed which may be said To have originated in the modern demand For improved sanitary regulations It has been practised In some country parts Since the days of Henry VIII Flushing was practised Also by those able engineers The ancient Romans One of the grand architectural Remains of that people The best showing their system of flushing Is in the amphitheater At Nîmes in France The site of the ruined amphitheater Presents a large elliptical area 114251 Superficial feet Comprising its extent Around the arena ran A large sewer 3 feet 6 inches in width And 4 feet 9 inches in height With this sewer Elliptical in shape 348 pipes Communicated Carrying into it the rainfall And the refuse caused by the resort Of 23,000 persons For the seats alone contained That number The system of flushing practised here Says Mr Creasy With such advantage Deserves to be noticed There being means of driving through this Elliptical sewer That pleasure With such force that no solid matter Could by any possibility remain Within any of the drains or sewers An aqueduct 2 feet 8 inches in width And 6 feet in height Brought this water from the reservoirs Of Nîmes, not only to fill But to purge the whole of these sewers After traversing the arena It deviated a little to the south west Where it was carried out At the sixth arcade East of the southern entrance Manholes and steps to descend Into this capacious vaulted aqueduct Were introduced in several places And there can be no doubt That by directing for some hours Such a stream of water through it The greatest cleanliness was preserved Throughout all the sewers Of the building The flushing of the sewers Appears to have been introduced into the metropolis By Mr John Rowe In the year 1847 But did not come into general use Till some years later There used to be a partial flushing Of the London sewers 12 years ago The mode of flushing As it present practised Is as follows In the first instance The inspector examines and reports The condition of the sewer And receives and issues his orders Accordingly When the sewer is ordered to be flushed And there is no periodical Of time in the operation The men enter the sewers And rake up the deposit Listening it everywhere So as to render the whole Easy to be swept along By the power of the volume of water The sewers generally are in their widest parts Provided with grooves Or as the men style them Framings Into these framings are fitted Or permanently attached What I heard described as penstocks But which are spoken of in some of the reports As traps Gates They are made both of wood And iron By a series of bolts and adjustments The penstocks can be fixed Ready for use when the tide is highest In the sewer And the volume of water the greatest They then of course Are in the nature of dams The water having accumulated In consequence of the stoppage Because it having been loosened The bolts are withdrawn When the gates suddenly fly back And the accumulated water And stirred up sewage Sweeps along impetuously While the men retreat into some side Recesses adapted for the purpose The same is done with each Penstock until the matter Is swept through the outlet The men always follow the course Of this sewage current When the sewer is of sufficient capacity So throwing or pushing forward Any more solid matter With their shovels To flush we generally Go and draw a slide up And let a flush of water down Said one man to me And then we have iron rakers To loosen the stuff We have got another way that we do it as well One man stands here When the flush of water is coming down With a large board Then he lets the water rise Three of us on ahead With shovels loosening the stuff Then he ups with this board And lets a good heavy flush of water come down Precious hard work it is I can assure you I've had many a wet shirt We stand up to our fork in the water Right to the top of our jack boots And sometimes over them I should think you often get over the top of yours For you come home With your stockings wet enough Goodness knows, exclaimed his wife Who was present When there's a good flush of water coming down He resumed We're obligated to put our heads Fast up against the crown of the sewer And bear upon our shovels So that we may not be carried away And taken bang into the Thames You see there's nothing for us to lay hold on Why there was one chap Went and lifted a slag right up When he ought to have had it Up only nine or ten inches at the furthest And he nearly swamped three of us When we lean off our legs, there's a heavy fall About three feet Just before he comes to the mouth of the sewer And if we was to get there The water is so rapid, nothing could save us When we goes to work We nails our lanterns up to the crown of the sewer When the slide is lifted up The rush is very great And takes all before it It roars away like a wild beast We're always obliged to work According to tide Both above and below ground We've got no water in the sewer We shovel the dirt up into a bank on both sides So that when the flush of water comes down The loosened dirt is all carried away by it After flushing The bottom of the sewer is as clean as this floor But in a couple of months The soil is a foot to 15 inches deep And middling hard Flushing gates An engineer has reported Are chiefly of use in sewers Badly constructed And without falls And they are of very little use Where the gate has to be shut 24 hours and longer Before a head of water has accumulated But where intermittent flushing is practised Strong smells are often caused solely By the stagnation of the water Or sewage While accumulating behind the gate The most general mode of flushing At present adopted Is not to keep in the water Which has flowed into the sewer From the streets and houses As well as the tide of the river But to convey the flushing water From the plugs of the water companies Into the kennels And so into the sewers I find in one of the reports Acknowledgements of the liberal supplies Granted for flushing by the several companies The water of the Surrey canal Has been placed for the same object At the disposal of the sewer commissioners It is impossible To flush at all Where a sewer has a dead end That is, where there is a block As in the case of the Kenilworth Street sewer, Pimlico In which five persons lost their lives In 1848 There is no difference in the system Of flushing in the metropolitan And city jurisdictions Except that for the greater facilities Of the process The city provides water tanks In Newgate Market Where the heads of three sewers meet And where the accumulation of animal garbage And the fierceness and numbers Of the rats attracted thereby Were at one time frightful At Ledenhall Market And elsewhere, such tanks were also provided To the number of ten The largest being the Newgate Market tank Which is a brick cistern Of 8,000 gallons capacity Of these tanks however Only four are now kept filled For this collection of water Is found unnecessary The regular system of flushing Is considering the purpose without them And I understand that in a little time There will be no tanks at all The tank is filled when Required by a water company And the penstocks being opened The water rushes into the sewers With great force There is also another point peculiar To the city In it, all the sewers are flushed regularly Twice a week In the metropolitan sewers Only when the inspector pronounces flushing The city plan appears the best To prevent the accumulation of deposit There still remains to be described The system of plunging Or mode of cleansing the open sewers As contradistinguished from flushing Or the cleansing of the covered sewers When we go plunging One man said We has long poles With a piece of wood at the end of them And we stirs up the mud At the bottom of the ditches While the tides are going down Slides at the end of the ditches And we pulls these up And lets out the water and mud and all Into the Thames Yes, for the people to drink Said a companion dryly We are in the water a great deal Continued the man We can't walk along the sides of all of them The difference of cost Between the old method of removal And the new, that is to say Between carting and flushing Is very extraordinary It was done chiefly by contract And according to a report Of the surveyors to the commissioners August 31st, 1848 The usual cost for such work Almost always done during the night Was seven shillings the cubic yard That is, seven shillings For the removal of a cubic yard of sewage By manual labour And horse and cart In February 1849 The date of another report on the subject The cost of removing a cubic yard By the operation of flushing Was what eight pints This gives the following result But in what particular time Instance or locality Is not mentioned 79,483 Cubic yards of deposit Removed by the contract flushing system At eight pints per cubic yard £2,649 Same quantity by the old system Of casting and cartage Seven shillings per cubic yard £27,819 Difference £25,170 It appears therefore Says Mr Lovik That by the adoption of the contract flushing system A saving has been effected Within the comparatively short period Of its operation Over the filthy and clumsy system Formerly practised Of £25,170 Showing the cost of this system To be ten and a half times greater Than the cost of flushing by contract An official report states When the accumulations of years Had to be removed from the sewers The rate of cost per lineal mile Has varied from about £40 To £58 Or from six pints to eight pints Per lineal yard The works in these cases Accepting those in the city Have not exceeded nine lineal miles On an average of weeks Says Mr Lovik In his report on flushing operations A few months after the introduction Of the contract system In September 1848 Under present arrangements About 62 miles of sewers Are passed through each week And deposit prevented from accumulating In them by periodic, weekly flushing The average cost per lineal mile Per week is about £2 Ten shillings The nature of the agreements With the contractors or gangers Are now for the prevention Of accumulations of deposit in a district For this purpose The large districts are subdivided Each subdivision being let To one man In the Westminster district there are four In the Hoburn and Finsbury two In the Syrian Kent seven subdivisions The Tower Hamlets and Poplar Districts are each let To one man In the Tower Hamlets it will be Perceived that a reduction of £8 Has been effected for the performance Of precisely the same work As that here to four performed The rates of charge standing thus Under the day work system £23 per week Under the contract system £15 per week In these portions specially Contracted for The work has been let by the linear measure Of the sewer in preference to The amount of deposit removed In the Surrey and Kent districts The open ditches have been cleansed Thrice as often as formerly A large proportion of the deposit Removed is from the open ditches In these the accumulations Are rapid and continuous Caused chiefly by their being The receptacles for the ashes And refuse of the houses Of manufactures and the Sweepings of the roads In the covered sewers one of the chief Sources of accumulation is the Detritus and mud from the streets Sweeped into the sewers The accumulations from these sources Will not I think be overestimated At two thirds of the whole Amount of deposit removed The contracts in operation February 1849 With the districts which they embrace Are as follows Table number one Sewers let for prevention of accumulations Of deposit Westminster 485,795 Lineal feet Hoburn and Finsbury 355,085 Lineal feet Terror Hamlets 223,738 Lineal feet Surrey and Kent 440,640 642 Lineal feet Poplar 26,000 Lineal feet Total 1,531,260 Lineal feet Average rate of works performed In sewers passed through each week Westminster 150,615 Lineal feet Hoburn and Finsbury 118,000 Lineal feet Terror Hamlets 30,000 Lineal feet Surrey and Kent 40,000 Lineal feet Poplar 2000 Lineal feet Total 340,615 Lineal feet Contract charge per week Westminster £40 Hoburn and Finsbury £23 Total £159,16 Westminster Attendance on Flaps and so on Contract charge per week £4 Total £163,16 The weekly cost prior to the contract system was in the several districts as follows Table number 2 In the Westminster District £78,10 The Hoburn and Finsbury District £24,17 In the Terror Hamlets District £23 In the Surrey and Kent District £56,8 In the Poplar District £6,13 Total £189,8 And there would appear to have been a saving of £25,12 shillings affected But by what means was this brought about? It is the old story I regret to say a reduction of the wages of the labouring men But this indeed is the invariable effect of the contract system The wages of the flusher men previous to September 1848 were 24 shillings to 27 shillings a week Under the present system they are 21 shillings to 22 shillings Here is a reduction of 4 shillings per week per man at the least And as there were about 150 hands employed at this period it follows that the gross weekly saving must have been equal to £30 So that, according to the above account there would have been about £5 left for the contractors or middlemen It is unworthy of gentlemen to make a parade of economy obtained by such ignoble means The engineers however speak of flushing as what is popularly understood as a unique shift as a system imperfect in itself but advantageously resorted to because obviating the evils of a worse system still With respect to these operations says Mr Lovik in a report on the subject in February 1849 I may be permitted to state that although I do not approve of the flushing as an ultimate system or as a system to be adopted in the future permanent works of sewerage but its use should be contemplated with regulated sizes of sewers regulated supplies of water and proper falls It appears to be the most efficacious and economical for the purpose to which it is adapted of any yet introduced A gentleman who was at one time connected professionally with the management of the public sewerage said to me Quote But a clumsy expedient and quite incompatible with a perfect system of sewerage It has nevertheless been usefully applied as an auxiliary to the existing system though the cost is frightful End of section 78 Section 79 Of London Labour and the London Poor Volume 2 by Henry Mayhew This LibriVox recording is in the public domain Recording by Gillian Henry Of the working flishermen When the system of sewer cleansing first became general as I have detailed the number of flishermen employed I am assured on good authority was about 500 The sewers were when this process was first resorted to full of deposit often what might be called coagulated deposit which could not be affected except by constantly repeated efforts There are now only about 100 flishermen for the more regularly flushing is repeated the easier becomes the operation Until about 18 months ago the flishermen were employed directly by the court of sewers and were paid in Mr Rose time one man said with a sigh from 24 shillings to 27 shillings a week now the work is all done by contract There are some 6 or 7 contractors all builders who undertake or are responsible for the whole work of flushing in the metropolitan districts I do not speak of the city and they pay the working flishermen 21 shillings a week and the gangers 22 shillings this wage is always paid in money without drawbacks and without the intervention of any other middleman than the contractor middleman The flishermen have no perquisites except what they may chance to find in a sewer their time of labour is 6 and a half hours daily The state of the tide however sometimes as a matter of course compels the flishermen to work at every hour of the day and night at all times they carry lights common oil lamps with cotton wicks only the inspectors carry Davey's safety lamp I met no man who could assign any reason for this distinction except that the Davey gave such a bad light The flishermen were when at work strong blue overcoats waterproofed but not so much as used to be the case the men then complaining of the perspiration induced by them buttoned close over the chest and descending almost to the knees where it is met by huge leather boots covering a part of the thigh such as are worn by the fishermen on many of our coasts their hats are fan-tailed like the dustmen's The flishermen are well conducted men generally and for the most part find stalwart good-looking specimens of the English labourer where they not known or believed to be temperate they would not be employed they have as a body no benefit or sick clubs but a third of them I was told or perhaps nearly a third were members of general benefit societies I found several intelligent men among them they are engaged by the contractors upon whom they call to solicit work since Mr. Rowe's time and Mr. Rowe is evidently the popular man among the flishermen or somewhat less than four years ago the flishermen have had to provide their own dresses and even their own shovels to stir up the deposit to contractors the comforts or health of the labouring men must necessarily be a secondary consideration to the realisation of a profit new men can always be found safe investments cannot the wages of the flishermen therefore have been not only decreased but their expenses increased a pair of flushing boots covering a part of the thigh similar to those worn by seaside fishermen costs 30 shillings as a low price and a flishermen wears out three pairs in two years boot stockings cost two shilling sixpence the jacket worn by the men at their work in the sewers in the shape of a pilot jacket but fitting less loosely is seven shilling sixpence a blue smock of coarse common cloth generally worn over the dress costs two shilling sixpence a shovel is two shilling sixpence aye sir said one man who was greatly dissatisfied with this change they'll make soldiers find their own regimentals next and maybe their own guns because they can always get rucks of men for soldiers or labourers I know there's plenty would work for less than we get but what of that there always is there's hundreds would do the work for half what the surveyors and inspectors get but it's all right among the knobs nor is the labourer of the flishermen at all times so easy or of such circumscribed hours as I have stated it to be in the regular way of flushing when small branch sewers have to be flushed the deposit must first be loosened or the water instead of sweeping it away would flow over it and in many of these sewers most frequent in the tower hamlets the height is not more than three feet some of the flishermen are tall bulky strong fellows and cannot stand upright in less than from five feet eight inches to six feet and in loosening the deposit in low narrow sewers we go to work said one of them on our bellies like frogs with a rake between our legs I've been blinded by steam in such sewers near Whitechapel church from the brew houses I couldn't see for steam it was a regular London fog you must get out again into the main sewer on your belly that's what makes it harder about the togs they get warned so the division of labour among the flishermen appears to be as follows the inspector whose duty it is to go round the several sewers and see which require to be flushed the ganger or head of the working gang who receives his orders from the inspector and direct the men accordingly the lock keeper or man who goes round to the sewers which are about to be flushed and fixes the penstocks for retaining the water the gang which consists of from three to four men who listen the deposit from the bottom of the sewer among these there is generally a forward man whose duty it is to remove the penstocks the ganger gets one shilling a week over and above the wages of the men table showing the districts under the management of the commissioners of sewers also the number and salaries of the clerks of the works assistant clerks of the works and inspectors of flushing paid by the commissioners and the number and wages paid to the flishermen by the general contractors fulham and hammersmith counters creek and run on the districts paid by the commissioners of sewers clerks of works three annual salary of the whole four hundred and fifty pounds assistant clerks of works note these officers are paid only during the period of service and are chiefly engaged on special works the corresponding officers for London are under the city commissioners and note assistant clerks of works four rate of annual salary four hundred pounds inspectors of flushing one annual salary of the whole one hundred and twenty pounds flap and sluice keepers none aggregate total nine hundred and seventy pounds paid by contractors gangers to weekly wage of each twenty two shillings flushers thirteen weekly wage of each twenty one shillings aggregate total eight hundred and twenty four pounds four shillings Westminster sewers western division eastern division region street district paid by the commissioners of sewers clerks of works four annual salary of the whole six hundred pounds assistant clerks of works three rate of annual salary three hundred pounds inspectors of flushing one annual salary of the whole eighty pounds flap and sluice keepers six yearly wages of the whole three hundred and ninety pounds aggregate total one thousand three hundred and seventy pounds paid by contractors gangers three weekly wage of each twenty two shillings flushers thirty wage of each twenty one shillings aggregate total one thousand eight hundred and nine pounds and twelve shillings finsbury division tower hamlets levels and popular and black wall districts paid by the commissioners of sewers clerks of works three annual salary of the whole four hundred and fifty pounds assistant clerks of works two rate of annual salary two hundred pounds inspectors of flushings three annual salary of the whole two hundred and eighty pounds flap and sluice keepers one yearly wages of the whole seventy pounds aggregate total one thousand pounds paid by contractors gangers three weekly wage of each twenty two shillings flushers twenty seven weekly wage of each twenty one shillings one thousand six hundred and forty five pounds sixteen shillings district south of the Thames paid by the commissioners of sewers clerks of works three annual salary of the whole four hundred and fifty pounds assistant clerks of works six rate of annual salary six hundred pounds inspectors of flushings four annual salary of the whole three hundred and twenty pounds flap and sluice keepers twenty twelve yearly wages of the whole three hundred and seventy four pounds aggregate total one thousand seven hundred and forty four pounds paid by contractors gangers two weekly wage of each twenty two shillings flushers twenty two weekly wage of each twenty one shillings aggregate total one thousand three hundred and fifteen pounds and twelve shillings clerks of works thirteen annual salary of the whole one thousand nine hundred and fifty pounds assistant clerks of works fifteen rate of annual salary fifteen hundred pounds inspectors of flushings nine annual salary of the whole eight hundred pounds flap and sluice keepers nineteen yearly wages of the whole eight hundred and thirty four pounds aggregate total five thousand five hundred and ninety five pounds paid by contractors gangers ten flushers twenty two aggregate total five thousand five hundred and ninety five pounds and four shillings city paid by the commissioners of sewers inspectors of flushings one annual salary of the whole eighty pounds flap and sluice keepers three yearly wages of the whole two hundred and twenty eight pounds paid by contractors gangers one weekly wage of each twenty two shillings flushers nine weekly wage of each twenty one shillings aggregate total five hundred and forty eight pounds twelve shillings the above division of districts is the one adopted by the commissioners of sewers but the districts of the flusherman are more numerous than those above given being as follows fulham and hammersmith employing one ganger and six flusherman counters creek and ranala districts employing one ganger and seven flusherman this is the first district of commissioners westminster western division employing one ganger and ten flusherman westminster eastern division employing one ganger and twelve flusherman and hober division employing one ganger and 8 Flusherman. This is the 2nd District of Commissioners. Finsbury Division employing 1 Ganger and 9 Flusherman, Tower Hamlets Levels employing 1 Ganger and 10 Flusherman, and Poplar and Blackwell employing 1 Ganger and 8 Flusherman. This is the 3rd District of Commissioners. District South of the Thames employing 2 Gangers and 22 Flusherman. This is the 4th District of Commissioners. City employing 1 Ganger and 9 Flusherman. Hoburn and Finsbury Districts are under one contractor, and so are the two divisions of Westminster. The same men who flush Hoburn flush the Finsbury District also, 17 being the average number employed, but the Finsbury District requires rather more men than the Hoburn, and the same men who work on the western division of Westminster flush also the eastern, the number of flushers in the western district being more on account of its being the larger division. The Inspector receives £80 per annum. The table just given shows the number of clerks of the works, inspectors of flushing, flap and sluice keepers, Gangers and Flusherman employed in the several districts throughout the Metropolis, as well as the salaries and wages of each and the whole. None of the Flusherman can be said to have been brought up to the business, for boys are never employed in the sewers. Neither had the labourers been confined in their youth to any branch of trade in particular, which would appear to be consonant to such employment. There are now, among the Flusherman, men who have been accustomed to all sorts of groundwork, tailors, pot boys, painters, one jeweler, some time ago there was also one gentleman, and shoemakers. You see, sir, said one informant, many of such, like mechanics, can't live above ground, so they try to get their bread underneath it. There used to be a great many pensioners, Flusherman, which weren't right, said one man, when so many honest working men haven't a penny, and don't know which way to turn themselves. But pensioners have often good friends and good interest. I don't hear any complaints that way now. Among the Flusherman are some 10 or 12 men who have been engaged in sewer work of one kind or another between 20 and 30 years. The cholera I heard from several quarters did not, in 1848, attack any of the Flusherman. The answer to an inquiry on the subject generally was, not one that I know of. It is a somewhat singular circumstance, says Mr Haywood, the city surveyor, in his report dated February 1850, that none of the men employed in the city sewers in flushing and cleansing have been attacked with, or have died off, cholera during the past year. This was also the case in 1832 to 1833. I do not state this to prove that the atmosphere of the sewers is not unhealthy. I by no means believe an impure atmosphere is healthy. But I state the naked fact, as it appears to me a somewhat singular circumstance, and leave it to pathologists to argue upon. I don't think flushing work disagrees with my husband, said a Flusherman's wife to me, for he eats about as much again at that work as he did at the other. The smell underground is sometimes very bad, said the man, but then we generally take a drop of rum first, and something to eat. It wouldn't do to go into it on an empty stomach, because it would get into our inside, but in some sewers there's scarcely any smell at all. Most of the men are healthy who are engaged in it, and when the cholera was about, many used to ask us how it was we escaped. The following statement contains the history of an individual Flusherman. I was brought up to the sea, he said, and served on board a man of war, the racer, a sixteen-gun brig, laying off Cuba in the West Indies, and there away, watching the slavers. I served seven years, we were paid off in forty-three at Portsmouth, and a friend got me into the shores. It was a great change from the open sea to a closed shore. Great, and I didn't like it at all at first. But it suits a married man, as I am now, with a family much better than being a seaman, for a man aboard a ship can hardly do his children justice in their schooling and such like. Well, I didn't much admire going down the manhole at first. The manhole is a sort of iron trap door that you unlock and pull up. It leads to a lot of steps, and so you get into the shore, but one soon gets accustomed to anything. I've been at flushing and shore work now since forty-three, all but eleven weeks, which was before I got engaged. We work in gangs from three to five men. Note, here I had an account of the process of flushing, such as I have given, and note. I've been carried off my feet sometimes in the flush of a shore. Why, today, note, a very rainy and windy day, February the fourth, and note. It came down Baker Street when we flushed it, four-foot plum. It would have done for a mildam. One couldn't smoke or do anything. Oh, yes, we can have a pipe and a chat now and then in the shore. The tobacco checks the smell. No, I can't say I felt the smell very bad when I first was in a shore. I've felt it worse since. I've been made innocent drunk like in a shore by a drain from a distillers. That happened to me first in Vine Street shore, St Giles, from Mr Ricketts Distillery. It came into the shore like steam. No, I can't say it tasted like gin when you breathed it, only intoxicating like. It was the same in Whitechapel from Smith's Distillery. One night I was forced to leave off there. The steam had such an effect. I was falling on my back when a mate caught me. The breweries have something of the same effect, but nothing like so strong as the distilleries. It comes into the shore from the breweries places in steam. I've known such a steam followed by bushels of grains. Icer, carp loads washed into the shore. Well, I never found anything in a shore worth picking up, but once a half crown. That was in the Buckingham Palace, sir. Another time I found 16 shilling sixpence, and thought that was a haul. But every bit of it, every coin, shillings and sixpences and joys was bad, all smashers. Yes, of course it was a disappointment naturally so. That happened in Brick Lane shore, Whitechapel. Oh, somebody or other had got frightened, I suppose, and had shied the coins down into the drains. I found them just by the chapel there. A second man gave me the following account of his experience in flushing. You remember, sir, that great storm on the first of August 1848. I was in three shores that fell in. Conjuit Street and Fobarts Passage, Regent Street. There was then a risk of being drowned in the shores, but no lives were lost. All the house drains were blocked about Carnaby Market, that's the Fobarts Passage shore, and the poor people was what you might call houseless. We got in up to the neck and water in some places because we had to stoop, and knocked about the rubbish as well as we could to give away to the water. The police put up barriers to prevent any carts or carriages going that way along the streets. No, there was no lives lost in the shores. One man was so overcome that he was falling off into a sort of sleep in Milford Lane shore, but was pulled out. I helped to pull him. He was as heavy as lead with one thing or another. Wet and all that. Another time, six or seven years ago, Whitechapel High Street shore was almost choked with butchers awful, and we had a great deal of trouble with it. End of section 79