View report page

14
of supervision was then required on the part of the Vestry, or their
officers.
In the two following years the Vestry still received money payments;
but only small sums, as, although dust continued to be in demand, it fetched
a much lower price; but in the third year, 1869 to 1870, and those succeeding,
the Vestry had to pay heavily for the removal, dust gradually becoming so
entirely valueless to the Contractors, that they are compelled to make arrangements
with other parties who undertake to receive the dust when collected at
a price per load, now varying from 8d upwards. The former conditions are,
therefore, now entirely reversed, for while the Contractors receive large sums
from the Vestry, the loss to the parish, in 1871 to 1872, being £6257, as
contrasted with the year 1866-7, the work has been done more or less irregularly
and inefficiently. It is well understood that, owing to the dustmen being
so much worse paid than they used to be, boys or lads are often engaged in
the work instead of men, all being allowed to engage in the practice
technically known as "totting," i.e., picking out from the dust any saleable
refuse, such as rags, bones, glass, &c,, to receive which bags are usually
hanging upon their carts. This waste of time did not occur when dust was
of value, as the price per load, received by the men, paid them better, and
they were even fined for totting. The dustmen are, perhaps, still tolerably attentive
to the wealthier localities, and to particular houses where they receive
gratuities to call once a week or fortnight, as arranged; but they would, if
allowed, entirely ignore the poorer districts, which they term " dead
pieces." The Contractors themselves also having to pay others for receiving
the refuse, as previously mentioned, instead of being themselves the
receivers of a price for it, and being paid a lump sum by the Vestry for
the work undertaken, very naturally endeavour to pay away as
little of it as possible, as the amount of their profit is, unfortunately,
no longer contingent upon their men's diligence, and
the largest number of loads of dust which they can get out of the parish,
but is altogether dependent upon their being able to get off with the
smallest amount of work. This led in the beginning of the year 1871 to
such neglect on the part of the Contractors, and such confusion arising out
of repeated complaints from the inhabitants, that the entire supervision
of the dusting contracts was given by the Vestry to the Sanitary Committee,
and the Committee recognizing the changed circumstances, and the Dust
Inspector (who held other offices) having resigned, they recommended the