View report page

28
(a) Evidence derived by comparison of the Hackney staff,
with certain other London districts.
(b) Evidence derived from a consideration of the increased
duties imposed by the various Acts and Orders upon the
Local Authorities since the last increase in the number of
permanent Inspectors.
(A) In order to present this evidence in a fair and intelligible
form, 1 have constructed a table showing the population, number
of houses, inhabitants, and of permanent Sanitary Inspectors,
together with the average number of houses and inhabitants per
Inspector—
(1st) For the whole of London, excluding Hackney.
(2nd) For various other large London Districts, which I have
selected as fair, representative types from the great
divisions of North, South, East, West, and Central,
respectively.
I think it will be admitted, in the first place, that no one of
the local bodies tabulated has erred on the side of extravagance in
the number of permanent Sanitary Inspectors appointed for the
District. The necessity for an increase in the permanent officials
of local bodies is always closely scrutinized, and is never conceded
until that necessity has been clearly established.
Such being the case, how does Hackney compare with other
districts of London?
The best answer to this will be a careful examination of the
annexed table.
In this table the contrast between Hackney and the other
London districts is very marked. Taking the whole of London,
exclusive of Hackney, the number of Inspectors appointed is,
roughly, in the proportion of one Inspector to about 3,000 houses, or
to 23,000 inhabitants, but in Hackney the proportion is one Inspector