View report page

3
recommendation of that Report in its entirety your Vestry
did not adopt. But by the appointment of a clerk, whose
duty it would be to relieve the Inspectors of their clerical
work, the principle advanced by the Committee received a
recognition. This concession on the part of the Vestry,
although not fulfilling the purpose held in view by the
Committee, has been followed by excellent results; results
which may be observed in the greater efficiency of the
Department.
Whether or no the question should receive the further
attention of your Vestry, may be decided by a consideration
of the bearing of the facts which I find it consistent with my
duty to lay before you.
As far as it may be ascertained byan examination ofthecondition
of the Sanitary departments of the Metropolitan Vestries,
the provision made for the needs of the several parishes
is not based upon the observation of any uniform principle.
A district comprising a population of 9,000 inhabitants,
in some quarters is regarded as affording a field sufficiently
extensive to engage the attention and energy of the Inspector;
whilst in another parish, a district comprising 105,000 is
not considered too large. Between these extreme ranges,
inspectorial areas containing a population numbering 20,000,
40,000, and 80,000 are found.
If the size of a parish may be gauged by the number of
houses contained within the limits of its boundary, Lambeth
is the largest parish of the Metropolitan group. But if
population be regarded as the test, the parish of Islington
takes precedence. No remarkable inequality exists, however,
between the two great parishes either in the size of population
or the number of rateable householders.* The one on the
*Population Census returns 1881, Lambeth 253,699, Islington 282,865.
Rated Householders 1888, Lambeth 34,910, Islington 34,327.
E 2