View report page

14
markets could profitably utilize limited quantities of
animal refuse directly; but possibly a scheme might
be arranged for this purpose through the agency
of establishments where "offensive trades" are
carried on under the provisions of the Slaughterhouses
Metropolis Act, 1874.
In any case the refuse should be collected daily in the
early morning hours, and conveyed in properly
constructed covered receptacles, or in vehicles
expressly adapted for the prevention of effluvium
nuisance. Failing an arrangement for utilization,
each district should provide the means of destroying
animal refuse. It appears doubtful whether vegetable
refuse could be profitably utilized in London by the
process of "carbonisation." The mere destruction
of such refuse by fire could be effected without
difficulty or nuisance.
2. With respect to the collection and disposal of house refuse.—
It is almost superfluous to observe that the Committee
cannot approve of the refuse being deposited
in large heaps or "tips"in or near towns or
inhabited dwellings: its use for levelling land for
building purposes is now very properly forbidden
by the bye-laws regulating the foundations of
buildings,* and its destruction in the open air,
creating an intolerable nuisance, is impracticable.
The refuse, moreover, is not without value—the "breeze,
for instance, being almost indispensable to the brick
maker. The value, however, has decreased of late
years, for the growth of London has led to the production
of the refuse in larger amount, while the
increased distance to the brickfields has greatly increased
the cost of carriage.
Formerly contractors were willing to pay large sums for
the privilege of removing the contents of dust-bins.
Now they invariably receive payment. The expense
to the Nuisance Authority, however, is not so great
as it would be were not the refuse capable of
* Vide Bye-laws made on Oct. 3rd, 1879, by the Metropolitan Board of
Works, under the provisions of the Metropolis Management and Buildings
Act, 1878, sec. 16.