London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Clerkenwell 1884

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Clerkenwell, St. James and St. John]

This page requires JavaScript

11
Mr. E. J. Thompson (late Clerkenwell member of the
Metropolitan Board of Works) seconded.
After a lengthy discussion,
Mr. Robson having replied to remarks made by
several members, proceeded: A great deal had been said
about house-farmers. What were they? He did not
know, and thought that if the whole of the members
who spoke so much about them were to give written
definitions no two of them "would agree. If a man held a
house and let out a part it was unjust to level such a name
as house-farmer at his head. He himself had none of
his money invested in house property, but he had
been told that such statements as had gone forth had
been most damaging to persons who had money invested
in house property. Mr. Robson, in conclusion, said:—
The great mistake this Vestry has made was the rejection
of Mr. Jennings from the Sanitary Committee. It is quite
true as Mr. Kelly has said, that I had hoped it would not
be so, that I had said it would be a scandal if he were
rejected. But I say Sir Charles Dilke himself is responsible
for the rejection of Mr. Jennings. What happened?
At the Kensington Town Hall on the Saturday night
prior to the election, Sir Charles Dilke had said that he had
been told that the Chairman of the Sanitary Committee of
the Clerkenwell Vestry had been thwarted in every way.
Therefore, is it to be wondered at that members (who
knew this was not the case,) should resent it, and allow
their feeling to get the better of their judgment? I
know that this feeling actuated many members in
their action at the election. What has caused the
Vestry of Clerkenwell to be brought into such disrepute?
I believe it has arisen from the fact that
members of this Board, instead of discussing matters
that come before them fairly and quietly, allow themselves
to degenerate into personalities. This is a practice
which should be condemned on every public Board.
We have been told to-night that the London Government
Bill has been withdrawn. I could almost have
wished, for many reasons, that this had not been the