View report page

58
case, and should have had it buried at once. The "scandal," so
called by one of the Guardians who originated the application of
the term, ended with them, for they had to bury the corpse after
all, as they should have done at first.
Artizans' Dwellings Acts.—When the Artizans'
Dwellings Act (Torrens') came into force in 1868, I made
representations of certain bad courts, which appeared to me to
come within the scope of the law. These were considered by
the Vestry, and the legal notices served, and a few houses were
demolished and re-built. But it was found that the newly
constructed houses were so closely placed, that little or no real
benefit was derived, and no further proceedings were taken.
When the Artizans' Dwellings Act (Cross) came into force in
1875, which was all that was desired, being of a much more
sweeping character, I again made representations in regard to
several Courts and Places, in some of which the mortality was
very great, while in others it was not so, yet the buildings were
too closely crowded, veritable slums, causing much social evil and
misery. The then Sanitary Committee agreed with my representation,
which was duly submitted to the Metropolitan Board of
Works, by whom, in my opinion, the whole should have been
demolished and re-arranged.
The Metropolitan Board took up two courts and made a
scheme—the Pear Tree Court Scheme, and the houses have
been pulled down, and new blocks of Peabody Buildings erected.
The number of persons displaced was 450, for whom the Act
required new provision; the new buildings however, accommodate
1150. Seven of the courts I condemned were pulled down
for new street improvements. I also decided that some other
courts should follow the preceding, and these were inspected by
the Sanitary Committee. But as the Metropolitan Board did
not proceed with the first instalment I did not make a representation
to them. The Metropolitan Board, finding an outcry
against the enormous expense which the schemes they made
caused, declined to proceed further, and a new Act limited their