View report page

66
Dr. Tripe, at the Health Exhibition Conference, also agrees
with me when he points out the differences observable in the two
classes of the poor. "Persons of the class he would call the
residuum, many of whom were disgustingly filthy and destructive
in their habits, and who could scarcely be said to have any
sanitary domestic arrangements whatever." Again, "due care
must be taken by the inspector, that while too much zeal was
not displayed, yet nuisances injurious to health were not allowed
to remain." Again, "the position of the landlord or middleman
(the house-farmer and publican?) was often by no means
an enviable one, as it was most disheartening to him to find
dustbins broken, the water-supply apparatus damaged, the
walls defaced, and his property injured almost immediately after
it had been put in good order."
In my opinion, if the habits of a poorer class could be altered,
so that they should respect property, especially that of their
dwellings, and should keep themselves, their apartments and
their clothes, in a proper cleanly state, we should hear no
irrational complaints about "Regulations" and "house-farmers
and publicans."
Clerkenwell is a retrograde Parish! If so, how is it that the
Rateable value has increased from £195,000 in 1856, to
£350,000 in 1883; this does not seem to show that the public
consider it so, and are afraid to invest and deposit property in
the Parish.
Again, when we find that thousands of dirty children have been
collected from playing and idling in the streets and gutters, and
are brought to our Board Schools, where they must present a
somewhat cleanly and decent appearance; does this indicate a
retrograde condition?
Does the building of the large number of Model Dwellings,
which has been effected during the last few years, show that
the public are afraid to invest in a deteriorating Parish, where
it is alleged that 40 per cent. of the people are out of work, and
where therefore there must be no chance of getting their rents?