Of the Contractors for Scavengery.
The scavenging of the streets of the metropolis is performed directly or indirectly by the authorities of the several parishes “without the City,” who have the power to levy rates for the cleansing of the various districts; within the City, however, the office is executed under the direction of the Court of Sewers.
When the cleansing of the streets is performed indirectly by either the parochial or civic authorities, it is effected by contractors, that is to say, by traders who undertake for a certain sum to remove the street-refuse at stated intervals and under express conditions, and who employ paid servants to execute the work for them. When it is performed directly, the authorities employ labourers, generally from the workhouse, and usually enter into an agreement with some contractor for the use of his carts and appliances, together with the right to deposit in his wharf or yard the refuse removed from the streets.
I shall treat first of the indirect mode of scavenging—that is to say, of cleansing the streets by contract—beginning with the contractors, setting forth, as near as possible, the receipts and expenditure in connection with the trade, and then proceeding in due order to treat of the labourers employed by them in the performance of the task.
Some of the contractors agree with the parochial or district authorities to remove the dust from the house-bins as well as the dirt from the streets under one and the same contract; some undertake to execute these two offices under separate contracts; and some to perform only one of them. It is most customary, however, for the same contractor to serve the parish, especially the larger parishes, in both capacities.
There is no established or legally required form of agreement between a contractor and his principals; it is a bargain in which each side strives to get the best of it, but in which the parish representatives have often to contend against something looking like a monopoly; a very common occurrence in our day when capitalists choose to combine, which is legal, or unnoticed, but very heinous on the part of the working men, whose capital is only in their strength or skill. One contractor, on being questioned by a gentleman officially connected with a large district, as to the existence of combination, laughed at such a notion, but said there might be “a sort of understanding one among another,” as among people who “must look to their own interests, and see which way the cat jumped;” concluding with the undeniable assertion that “no man ought reasonably to be expected to ruin himself for a parish.”
There does not appear, however, to have been any countervailing qualities on the part of the parishes to this understanding among the contractors; for some of the authorities have found themselves, when a new or a renewed contract was in question, suddenly “on the other side of the hedge.” Thus, in the south-west district of St. Pancras, the contractor, five or six years ago, paid 100l. per annum for the removal and possession of the street-dirt, &c.; but the following year the district authorities had to pay him 500l. for the same labour and with the same privileges! Other changes took place, and in 1848-9 a contractor again paid the district 95l. I have shown, too, that in Shadwell the dust-contractor now receives 450l. per annum, whereas he formerly paid 240l. To prove, however, that a spirit of combination does occasionally exist among these contractors, I may cite the following minute from one of the parish books.
Extract from Minute-book, Nov. 7, 1839. Letter C, Folio 437.
“Commissioner’s Office,
“30, Howland-street,
“Nov. 7, 1839.
“Report of the Paving Committee to the General Board, relating to the watering the district for the past year.
“Your Committee beg leave to report that for the past three years the sums paid by contract for watering were respectively:—
| “For 1836 | £230 |
| „ 1837 | 220 |
| „ 1838 | 200 |
“That in the month of February in the present year the Board advertised in the usual manner for tenders to water the district, when the following were received, viz.:—
| “Mr. Darke | £315 |
| „ Gore | 318 |
| „ Nicholls | 312 |
| „ Starkey | 285 |
which was the lowest.
“Your Committee, anxious to prevent any increase in the watering-rate from being levied, and considering the amount required by the contractors for this service as excessive and exorbitant, and even evincing a spirit of combination, resolved to make an inroad upon this system, and after much trouble and attention adopted other measures for watering the district, the results of which they have great pleasure in presenting to the Board, by which it will be seen that a saving over the very lowest of the above tenders of 102l. 3s. has been effected; the sum of 18l. 18s. has been paid for pauper labour at the same time. Your Committee regret that, notwithstanding the efforts of themselves and their officers, the state of insubordination and insult of most of the paupers (in spite of all encouragement to industry) was such, that the Committee, on the 12th of July last, were reluctantly compelled to discontinue their services. The Committee cannot but congratulate the Board upon the result of their experiment, which will have the effect of breaking up a spirit of combination highly dangerous to the community at large, at the same time that their labours have caused a very considerable saving to the ratepayers; and they trust the work, considering all the numerous disadvantages under which they have laboured, has been performed in a satisfactory manner.
“P. Cunningham,
“Surveyor,
“30, Howland-street, Fitzroy-square.”
The following regulations sufficiently show the nature of the agreements made between the contractors and the authorities as to the cleansing of the more important thoroughfares especially. It will be seen that in the regulations I quote every street, court, or alley, must now be swept daily, a practice which has only been adopted within these few years in the City.
“Sewers’ Office, Guildhall, London, Rakers’ Duties,[15] Midsummer, 1851, to Midsummer, 1852.
“Cleansing.
“The whole surface of every Carriage-way, Court, and Alley shall be swept every day (Sundays excepted), and all mud, dust, filth, and rubbish, all frozen or partially frozen matter, and snow, animal and vegetable matter, and everything offensive or injurious, shall be properly pecked, scraped, swept up, and carted away therefrom; and the iron gutters laid across or along the footways, the air-grates over the sewers, the gulley-grates in the carriage-way of the streets respectively; and all public urinals are to be daily raked out, swept, and made clean and clear from all obstructions; and the Contractor or Contractors shall, in time of frost, continually keep the channels in the Streets and Places clear for water to run off: and cleanse and cart away refuse hogan or gravel (when called upon by the Inspector to do so) from all streets newly paved.
“The Mud and Dirt, &c., is to be carted away immediately that it is swept up.
“N.B. The Inspector of the District may, at any time he may think it necessary, order any Street or Place to be cleansed and swept a second time in any one day, and the Contractor or Contractors are thereupon bound to do the same.
“The Markets and their approaches are also to be thus cleansed DAILY, and the approaches thereto respectively are also to be thus cleansed at such an hour in the night of Saturday in each week as the Inspector of the District may direct.
“Every Street, Lane, Square, Yard, Court, Alley, Passage, and Place (except certain main Streets hereinafter enumerated), are to be thus cleansed within the following hours Daily: namely—
“In the months of April, May, June, July, August, and September. To be begun not earlier than 4 o’Clock in the morning, and finished not later than 1 o’Clock in the afternoon.
“In the months of October, November, December, January, February, and March. To be begun not earlier than 5 o’Clock in the morning, and finished not later than 2 o’Clock in the afternoon.
“The following main Streets are to be cleansed DAILY throughout the year (except Sundays), to be begun not earlier than 4 o’Clock in the morning, and finished not later than 9 o’Clock in the morning.
- Fleet Street
- Ludgate Hill and Street
- St. Paul’s Church Yard
- Cheapside
- Newgate Street
- Poultry
- Watling Street, Budge Row, and Cannon St.
- Mansion House Street
- Cornhill
- Leadenhall Street
- Aldgate Street and Aldgate
- King William Street and London Bridge
- Fenchurch Street
- Holborn
- Holborn Bridge
- Skinner Street
- Old Bailey
- Lombard Street
- New Bridge Street
- Farringdon Street
- Aldersgate Street
- St. Martin-le-grand
- Prince’s Street
- Moorgate Street
- The Street called ‘The Pavement’
- Finsbury Place, South
- Gracechurch Street
- Bishopsgate St., within and without
- The Minories
- Wood Street
- Gresham Street
- Coleman Street.
“N.B. In times of frost and snow these hours of executing the work may be extended at the discretion of the Local Commissioners.”
The other conditions relate to the removal of the dust from the houses (a subject I have already treated), and specify the fines, varying from 1l. to 5l., to be paid by the contractors, for the violation or neglect of any of the provisions of the contract. It is further required that “Each Foreman, Sweeper, and Dustman, in the employ of either of the Contractors,” (of whom there are four, Messrs. Sinnott, Rooke, Reddin, and Gould), “will be required to wear a Badge on the arm with these words thereon,—
“‘London Sewers,
No. —
Guildhall,’
by which means any one having cause of complaint against any of the men in the performance of their several duties, may, by taking down the number of the man and applying at the Sewers’ Office, Guildhall, have reference to his name and employer.
“Any man working without his Badge, for each day he offends, the Contractor is liable to the penalty of Five Shillings.
“All the sweepings of the Streets, and all the dust and ashes from the Houses, are to be entirely carted away from the City of London, on a Penalty of Ten Pounds for each cart-load.”
These terms sufficiently show the general nature of the contracts in question; the principal difference being that in some parts, the contractor is not required to sweep the streets more than once, twice, or thrice a week in ordinary weather.
The number of individuals in London styling themselves Master Scavengers is 34. Of these, 10 are at present without a contract either for dust or scavenging, and 5 have a contract for removing the dust only; so that, deducting these two numbers, the gross number 34 is reduced to 19 scavenging contractors. Of the latter number 16 are in a large way of business, having large yards, possessing several carts and some waggons, and employing a vast number of men daily in sweeping the streets, carting rubbish, &c. The other 3 masters, however, are only in a small way of business, being persons of more limited means. A large master scavenger employs from 3 to 18 carts, and from 18 to upwards of 40 men at scavengery alone, while a small master employs only from 1 to 3 carts and from 3 to 6 men. By the table I have given, p. [186], vol. ii., it is shown that there are 52 contracts between the several district authorities and master scavengers, and nineteen contractors, without counting members of the same family, as distinct individuals; this gives an average of nearly three distinct contracts per individual. The contracts are usually for a twelvemonth.
Although the table above referred to shows but 19 contractors for public scavenging, there are, as I have said, more, or about 24, in London, most of them in a “large way,” and next year some of those who have no contracts at present may enter into agreements with the parishes. The smallness of this number, when we consider the vast extent of the metropolis, confirms the notion of the sort of monopoly and combination to which I have alluded. In the Post-Office Directory for 1851 there are no names under the heads of Scavengers or Dustmen, but under the head of “Rubbish Carters,” 28 are given, 9 names being marked as “Dust Contractors” and 10 as “Nightmen.”
Of large contractors, however, there are, as I have said, about 24, but they may not all obtain contracts every year, and in this number are included different members of the same family or firm, who may undertake specific contracts, although in the trade it is looked upon as “one concern.” The smaller contractors were represented to me as rather more numerous than the others, and perhaps numbered 40, but it is not easy to define what is to be accounted a contractor. In the table given in pp. [213, 214], I cite only 7 as being the better known. The others may be considered as small rubbish-carters and flying-dustmen.
There are yet other transactions in which the contractors are engaged with the parishes, independently of their undertaking the whole labour of street and house cleansing. In the parishes where pauper, or “poor” labour is resorted to—for it is not always that the men employed by the parishes are positive “paupers,” but rather the unemployed poor of the parish—in such parishes, I say, an agreement is entered into with a contractor for the deposit of the collected street dirt at his yard or wharf. For such deposit the contractor must of course be paid, as it is really an occupation and renting of a portion of his premises for a specific purpose. The street dirt, however, is usually left to the disposal of the contractor, for his own profit, and where he once paid 50l. for the possession of the street-collected dirt of a parish, collected by labour which was no cost to him, he may now receive half of such 50l., or whatever the terms of the agreement may be. I heard of one contractor who lately received 25l. where he once paid 50l.
In another way, too, contractors are employed by parishes. Where pauper or poor labour in street cleansing is the practice, a contractor’s horses, carts, and cart-drivers are hired for the conveyance of the dirt from the streets. This of course is for a specific payment, and is in reality the work of the tradesmen who in the Post Office Directory are described as “Rubbish Carters,” and of whom I shall have to speak afterwards. Some parishes or paving boards have, however, their own horses and vehicles, but in the other respects they have dealings with the contractors.
To come to as correct a conclusion as possible in this complicated and involved matter, I have obtained the aid of some gentlemen long familiar with such procedures. One of them said that to procure the accounts of such transactions for a series of years, with all their chops and changes, or to obtain a perfectly precise return, for any three years, affecting the whole metropolis, would be the work of a parliamentary commission with full powers “to send for papers,” &c., &c., and that even then the result might not be satisfactory as a clear exposition. However, with the aid of the gentlemen alluded to, I venture upon the following approximation.
As my present inquiry relates only to the Scavenging Contractors in the metropolis, I will take the number of districts, markets, &c., which are specified in the table, p. [186], vol. ii. These are 83 in number, of which 29 are shown to be scavenged by the “parish.” I will not involve in this computation any of the more rural places which may happen to be in the outskirts of the metropolitan area, but I will take the contracts as 54, where the contractors do the entire work, and as 29 where they are but the rubbish-carters and dirt receivers of the parishes.
I am assured that it is a fair calculation that the scavengery of the streets, apart from the removal of the dust from the houses, costs in payments to the contractors, 150l. as an average, to each of the several 54 districts; and that in the 29 localities in which the streets are cleansed by parish labour, the sum paid is at the rate of 50l. per locality, some of them, as the five districts of Marylebone for instance, being very large. This is calculated regardless of the cases where parishes may have their own horses and vehicles, for the cost to the rate-payers may not be very materially different, between paying for the hire of carts and horses, and investing capital in their purchase and incurring the expense of wear and tear. The account then stands thus:—
| Parish payment on 54 contracts, 150l. each | £8100 |
| Parish payment on 29 contracts, 50l. each | 1450 |
| Yearly total sum paid for Scavenging of the Metropolis | £9550 |
or, apportioned among 19 contractors, upwards of 500l. each; and among 83 contracts, about 115l. per contract. Even if other contractors are employed where parish labour is pursued, the cost to the rate-payers is the same. This calculation is made, as far as possible, as regards scavengery alone; and is independent of the value of the refuse collected. It is about the scavengery that the grand fight takes place between the parishes and contractors; the house dust, being uninjured by rain or street surface-water, is more available for trade purposes.
From this it would appear that the cost of cleansing the streets of London may be estimated in round numbers at 10,000l. per annum.
The next point in the inquiry is, What is the value of the street dirt annually collected?
The price I have adduced for the dirt gained from the streets is 3s. per load, which is a very reasonable average. If the load be dung, or even chiefly dung, it is worth 5s. or 6s. With the proportion of dung and street refuse to be found in such a thoroughfare as the Haymarket, in dry, or comparatively dry weather, a load, weighing about a ton, is worth about 3s. in the purchaser’s own cart. On the other hand, as I have shown that quantities of mixed or slop “mac” have to be wasted, that some is sold at a nominal price, and a good deal at 1s. the load, 3s. is certainly a fair average.
A TABLE SHOWING THE NUMBER OF MEN AND CARTS EMPLOYED IN COLLECTING DUST, IN SCAVENGERY, AND AT RUBBISH CARTING, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF MEN, WOMEN, AND BOYS WORKING IN THE DUST-YARDS OF THE SEVERAL METROPOLITAN CONTRACTORS.
| Contractors (Large). | Dust. | Scavengery. | Rubbish Carting. | Working in the Yard. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts used. | Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts, Waggons, or Machines used. | Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts used. | Number of Men employed. | Number of Women employed. | Number of Boys working. | |
| Mr. Dodd | 20 | 10 | 26 | 13 | 20 | 20 | 9 | 12 | 4 |
| „ Gould | 20 | 10 | 28 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 5 | 15 | 4 |
| „ Redding | 32 | 16 | 41 | 18 | 22 | 22 | 5 | 12 | 4 |
| „ Gore | 32 | 16 | 18 | 7 | none. | none. | 4 | 20 | 6 |
| „ Rooke | 16 | 8 | 16 | 6 | 16 | 16 | 2 | 6 | 3 |
| „ Stapleton & Holdsworth | 10 | 5 | 11 | 8 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 8 | 2 |
| „ Tame | 20 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 12 | 12 | 4 | 8 | 2 |
| „ Starkey | 10 | 5 | 22 | 8 | none. | none. | 4 | 12 | 3 |
| „ Newman | 8 | 4 | 23 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 2 |
| „ Pratt and Sewell | 10 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 20 | 20 | 2 | 6 | 2 |
| „ W. Sinnott, Sen. | 28 | 14 | 5 | 2 | none. | none. | 5 | 15 | 5 |
| „ J. Sinnott | 8 | 4 | 16 | 6 | ditto. | ditto. | none. | none. | none. |
| „ Westley | 10 | 5 | 18 | 9 | ditto. | ditto. | 3 | 9 | 2 |
| „ Parsons | 10 | 5 | 18 | 3 | ditto. | ditto. | 2 | 6 | 1 |
| „ Hearne | 18 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 20 | 20 | 3 | 9 | 3 |
| „ Humphries | 20 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 3 |
| „ Calvert | 6 | 3 | none. | none. | 7 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 2 |
| 278 | 139 | 262 | 107 | 152 | 152 | 61 | 161 | 48 | |
| Contractors (Small). | |||||||||
| Mr. North | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| „ Milton | 6 | 3 | none. | none. | none. | none. | 3 | 6 | 2 |
| „ Jenkins | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | ditto. | ditto. | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| „ Stroud | 10 | 5 | none. | none. | ditto. | ditto. | 4 | 9 | 3 |
| „ Martin | 2 | 1 | 6 | 3 | ditto. | ditto. | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| „ Clutterbuck | 4 | 2 | none. | none. | 5 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| „ W. Sinnott, Jun. | 4 | 2 | ditto. | ditto. | 6 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 32 | 16 | 13 | 5 | 15 | 15 | 12 | 26 | 10 | |
| Contractors, but not having any contract at present, only carting rubbish, &c. | |||||||||
| Mr. Darke | ... | ... | ... | ... | 36 | 36 | |||
| „ Tomkins | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | |||
| „ J. Cooper | ... | ... | ... | ... | 8 | 8 | |||
| „ T. Cooper, Sen. | ... | ... | ... | ... | 12 | 12 | |||
| „ Athill | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | |||
| „ Barnett (lately sold off) | |||||||||
| „ Brown | ... | ... | ... | ... | 4 | 4 | |||
| „ Ellis | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | |||
| „ Limpus | ... | ... | ... | ... | 10 | 10 | |||
| „ Emmerson | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | |||
| 94 | 94 | ||||||||
| Contractors (Large). | Dust. | Scavengery. | Rubbish Carting. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts used. | Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts, Waggons, or Machines used. | Number of Men employed. | Number of Carts used. | |
| Mr. Dodd | 20 | 10 | 26 | 13 | 20 | 20 |
| „ Gould | 20 | 10 | 28 | 11 | 11 | 11 |
| „ Redding | 32 | 16 | 41 | 18 | 22 | 22 |
| „ Gore | 32 | 16 | 18 | 7 | none. | none. |
| „ Rooke | 16 | 8 | 16 | 6 | 16 | 16 |
| „ Stapleton & Holdsworth | 10 | 5 | 11 | 8 | 10 | 10 |
| „ Tame | 20 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 12 | 12 |
| „ Starkey | 10 | 5 | 22 | 8 | none. | none. |
| „ Newman | 8 | 4 | 23 | 10 | 8 | 8 |
| „ Pratt and Sewell | 10 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 20 | 20 |
| „ W. Sinnott, Sen. | 28 | 14 | 5 | 2 | none. | none. |
| „ J. Sinnott | 8 | 4 | 16 | 6 | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Westley | 10 | 5 | 18 | 9 | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Parsons | 10 | 5 | 18 | 3 | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Hearne | 18 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 20 | 20 |
| „ Humphries | 20 | 10 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 6 |
| „ Calvert | 6 | 3 | none. | none. | 7 | 7 |
| 278 | 139 | 262 | 107 | 152 | 152 | |
| Contractors (Small). | ||||||
| Mr. North | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 |
| „ Milton | 6 | 3 | none. | none. | none. | none. |
| „ Jenkins | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Stroud | 10 | 5 | none. | none. | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Martin | 2 | 1 | 6 | 3 | ditto. | ditto. |
| „ Clutterbuck | 4 | 2 | none. | none. | 5 | 5 |
| „ W. Sinnott, Jun. | 4 | 2 | ditto. | ditto. | 6 | 6 |
| 32 | 16 | 13 | 5 | 15 | 15 | |
| Contractors (Large). | Working in the Yard. | |||||
| Number of Men employed. | Number of Women employed. | Number of Boys working. | ||||
| Mr. Dodd | 9 | 12 | 4 | |||
| „ Gould | 5 | 15 | 4 | |||
| „ Redding | 5 | 12 | 4 | |||
| „ Gore | 4 | 20 | 6 | |||
| „ Rooke | 2 | 6 | 3 | |||
| „ Stapleton & Holdsworth | 4 | 8 | 2 | |||
| „ Tame | 4 | 8 | 2 | |||
| „ Starkey | 4 | 12 | 3 | |||
| „ Newman | 4 | 8 | 2 | |||
| „ Pratt and Sewell | 2 | 6 | 2 | |||
| „ W. Sinnott, Sen. | 5 | 15 | 5 | |||
| „ J. Sinnott | none. | none. | none. | |||
| „ Westley | 3 | 9 | 2 | |||
| „ Parsons | 2 | 6 | 1 | |||
| „ Hearne | 3 | 9 | 3 | |||
| „ Humphries | 3 | 9 | 3 | |||
| „ Calvert | 2 | 6 | 2 | |||
| 61 | 161 | 48 | ||||
| Contractors (Small). | ||||||
| Mr. North | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| „ Milton | 3 | 6 | 2 | |||
| „ Jenkins | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| „ Stroud | 4 | 9 | 3 | |||
| „ Martin | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| „ Clutterbuck | 1 | 3 | 1 | |||
| „ W. Sinnott, Jun. | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| 12 | 26 | 10 | ||||
| Contractors, but not having any contract at present, only carting rubbish, &c. | ||||||
| Mr. Darke | ... | ... | ... | ... | 36 | 36 |
| „ Tomkins | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 |
| „ J. Cooper | ... | ... | ... | ... | 8 | 8 |
| „ T. Cooper, Sen. | ... | ... | ... | ... | 12 | 12 |
| „ Athill | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 |
| „ Barnett (lately sold off) | ||||||
| „ Brown | ... | ... | ... | ... | 4 | 4 |
| „ Ellis | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 |
| „ Limpus | ... | ... | ... | ... | 10 | 10 |
| „ Emmerson | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 |
| 94 | 94 | |||||
| Machines. | Dust. | Scavengers. | Rubbish. | Employed in Yard. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Men. | Carts. | Men. | Carts. | Men. | Carts. | Men. | Women. | Children. | ||
| Woods and Forests | none. | none. | 4 | 2 | machines. | none. | none. | none. | none. | none. |
| Regent-street and Pall-mall | ditto. | ditto. | 12 | 2 | „ | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. |
| St. Martin’s | ditto. | ditto. | 9 | 4 | „ | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. | ditto. |
| 25 | 8 | „ | ||||||||
| Parishes. | ||||||||||
| Kensington[16] | ... | ... | 5 | 2 | ||||||
| Chelsea[16] | ... | ... | 5 | 2 | ||||||
| St. George’s, Hanover-sq.[16] | ... | ... | 5 | 1 | ||||||
| St. Margaret’s, Westminster[16] | ... | ... | 7 | 3 | ||||||
| Piccadilly[16] | ... | ... | 28 | 2 | ||||||
| St. Ann’s, Soho[16] | ... | ... | 4 | 2 | ||||||
| Paddington[16] | ... | ... | 6 | 2 | ||||||
| St. Marylebone[16] (5 Districts) | ... | ... | 35 | 4 | ||||||
| St. James’s, Westminster | ... | ... | 2 | 1 | ||||||
| Hampstead | No parochial removal of dust. | 4 | 1 | |||||||
| Highgate | ditto. | 4 | 1 | |||||||
| Islington[16] | ... | ... | 8 | 1 | ||||||
| Hackney | 8 | 4 | 7 | 1 | ... | ... | 2 | 6 | 2 | |
| St. Clement Danes[16] | ... | ... | 7 | 3 | waggons. | |||||
| Commercial-road, East[16] | ... | ... | 6 | 3 | carts. | |||||
| Poplar | 4 | 2 | 4 | 1 | ... | ... | 2 | 4 | 1 | |
| Bermondsey | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | ... | ... | 3 | 6 | 2 | |
| Newington | 8 | 4 | 6 | 2 | ... | ... | 2 | 6 | 2 | |
| Lambeth[16] | ... | ... | 16 | 3 | ||||||
| Ditto (Christchurch) | 4 | 2 | 20 | 3 | ... | ... | 1 | 4 | 1 | |
| Wandsworth | 4 | 2 | 4 | 1 | ... | ... | 1 | 4 | 1 | |
| Camberwell and Walworth | 8 | 4 | 6 | 2 | ... | ... | 2 | 5 | 3 | |
| Rotherhithe | 6 | 3 | 5 | 2 | ... | ... | 1 | 5 | 2 | |
| Greenwich | 4 | 2 | 5 | 2 | ... | ... | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| Deptford | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | ... | ... | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| Woolwich | none. | none. | 5 | 2 | ||||||
| Lewisham | ditto. | ditto. | 4 | 1 | ||||||
| Total for Parishes | 56 | 28 | 218 | 50 | carts. | 16 | 46 | 16 | ||
| 3 | waggons. | |||||||||
| Total for large contractors | 278 | 139 | 262 | 107 | 152 | 152 | 61 | 161 | 48 | |
| Total for small contractors | 32 | 16 | 13 | 5 | 15 | 15 | 12 | 26 | 10 | |
| Total for machines | ... | ... | 25 | 8 | machines. | |||||
| Total for street orderlies | ... | ... | 60 | 9 | ||||||
| Gross total | 366 | 183 | 578 | 179 | carts. | 167 | 167 | 89 | 233 | 74 |
| 3 | waggons. | |||||||||
| Men. | Carts. | |||||||||
| Total employed at dust | 366 | 183 | ||||||||
| „ „ scavenging | 578 | 179 | ||||||||
| „ „ rubbish carting | 167 | 167 | ||||||||
| „ (men, women, and children), in yard | 396 | |||||||||
| Total employed in the removal of house and street refuse | 1507 | 529 | ||||||||
Thus the annual sum of the street-dirt, as regards the quantity collected by the contracting scavengers (as shown in the table given at page [186]), is, in round numbers, 89,000 cart-loads; that collected by parish labour, with or without the aid of the street-sweeping machines, at 52,000 cart-loads, or a total (I do not include what is collected by the orderlies) of 141,000 loads.
This result shows, then, that the contractors yearly collect by scavenging the streets with their own paid labourers, and receive as the produce of pauper labour, as follows:—
| Loads of Street Dirt. | Per Load. | Total. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| By Contractors | 89,000 | 3s. | £13,350 |
| By Parishes | 52,000 | 3s. | 7,800 |
| Total | 141,000 | £21,150 |
or a value of rather more than 1113l. as the return to each individual contractor in the table, or about 255l. as the average on each contract. As, however, the whole of the parish-collected manure does not come into the hands of the contractors, it will be fair, I am assured, to compute the total at 19,000l., a sum of 1000l. to each contractor, or nearly 229l. on each contract.
It would appear, then, that the total receipts of the contractors for the scavenging of London amount to very nearly 30,000l.; that is to say, 10,000l. as remuneration for the office, and 20,000l. as the value of the dirt collected. But against this sum as received, we have to set the gross expense of wages paid to men, wear and tear of carts and appliances, rent of wharfs, interest for money, &c.
Concerning the amount paid in wages, it appears by the table at pp. [186, 187], that the men employed by the scavenging contractors in wet weather, are 260 daily (being nearly half of the whole force of 531 men, the orderlies excepted). In dry weather, however, there are only 194 men employed. I will therefore calculate upon 194 men employed daily, and 66 employed half the year, making the total of 260. By the table here given, it will be seen that the total number of scavengers employed by the large and small contractors, is 275.
| Number of Men. | Weekly Wage. | Yearly. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 194 (for 12 months) | 16s.[17] | £8070 | 8s. |
| 66 (for 6 months) | 16s. | 1372 | 16s. |
| Total | £9443 | 4s. | |
There remains now to show the amount of capital which a large contractor must embark in his business: I include the amount of rent, and the expenditure on what must be provided for business purposes, and which is subject to wear and tear, to decay, and loss.
There are not now, I am told, more than twelve scavengers’ wharfs and 20 yards (the wharf being also a yard) in the possession of the contractors in regular work. These are the larger contractors, and their capital, I am assured, may be thus estimated:—
Capital of the Master Scavengers.
| £ | s. | d. | ||
| 179 | Carts, 21l. each | 3,759 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | Waggons, 32l. each | 96 | 0 | 0 |
| 230 | Horses, 25l. each | 5,750 | 0 | 0 |
| 230 | Sets of harness, 2l. each | 460 | 0 | 0 |
| 600 | Brooms, 9d. each | 22 | 10 | 0 |
| 300 | Shovels, 1s. each | 15 | 0 | 0 |
| 100 | Barges, 50l. each | 5,000 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 15,102 | 10 | 0 | |
I have estimated according to what may be the present value, not the original cost, of the implements, vehicles, &c. A broom, when new, costs 1s. 2d., and is worn out in two or three weeks. A shovel, when new, costs 2s.
The following appears to be the
Yearly Expenditure of the Master Scavengers.
| £ | s. | d. | |
| Wages to working scavengers (as before shown) | 9,443 | 0 | 0 |
| Wages to 48 bargemen, engaged in unloading the vessels with street-dirt, 4 men to each of 12 wharfs, at 16s. weekly wage | 1,996 | 0 | 0 |
| Keep of 300 horses (26l. each) | 7,800 | 0 | 0 |
| Wear and tear (say 15 per cent. on capital) | 2,250 | 0 | 0 |
| Rent of 20 wharfs and yards (average 100l. each) | 2,000 | 0 | 0 |
| Interest on 15,000l. capital, at 10 per cent. | 1,500 | 0 | 0 |
| £24,989 | 0 | 0 |
I have endeavoured in this estimate to confine myself, as much as possible, to the separate subject of scavengery, but it must be borne in mind that as the large contractors are dustmen as well as scavengers, the great charges for rent and barges cannot be considered as incurred solely on account of the street-dirt trade. Including, then, the payments from parishes, the account will stand thus:—
Yearly Receipts of Master Scavengers.
| From Parishes | £9,450 |
| From Manure, &c. | 19,000 |
| Total Income | £28,450 |
| Deduct yearly Expenditure | 25,000 |
| Profit | £3,450 |
This gives a profit of nearly 182l. to each contractor, if equally apportioned, or a little more than 41l. on each contract for street-scavenging alone, and a profit no doubt affected by circumstances which cannot very well be reduced to figures. The profit may appear small, but it should be remembered that it is independent of the profits on the dust.
Of the Contractors’ (or Employers’) Premises, &c.
At page [171] of the present volume I have described one of the yards devoted to the trade in house-dust, and I have little to say in addition regarding the premises of the contracting or employing scavengers. They are the same places, and the industrious pursuits carried on there, and the division and subdivision of labour, relate far more to the dustmen’s department than to the scavengers’. When the produce of the sweeping of the streets has been thrown into the cart, it is so far ready for use that it has not to be sifted or prepared, as has the house-dust, for the formation of brieze, &c., the “mac” being sifted by the purchaser.
These yards or wharfs are far less numerous and better conducted now than they were ten years ago. They are at present fast disappearing from the banks of the Thames (there is, however, one still at Whitefriars and one at Milbank). They are chiefly to be found on the banks of the canals. Some of the principal wharfs near Maiden-lane, St. Pancras, are to be found among unpaven, or ill-paved, or imperfectly macadamized roads, along which run rows of what were once evidently pleasant suburban cottages, with their green porches and their trained woodbine, clematis, jasmine, or monthly roses; these tenements, however, are now occupied chiefly by the labourers at the adjacent stone, coal, lime, timber, dust, and general wharfs. Some of the cottages still presented, on my visits, a blooming display of dahlias and other autumnal flowers; and in one corner of a very large and very black-looking dust-yard, in which rose a huge mound of dirt, was the cottage residence of the man who remained in charge of the wharf all night, and whose comfortable-looking abode was embedded in flowers, blooming luxuriantly. The gay-tinted holly-hocks and dahlias are in striking contrast with the dinginess of the dust-yards, while the canal flows along, dark, sluggish, and muddy, as if to be in keeping with the wharf it washes.
The dust-yards must not be confounded with the “night-yards,” or the places where the contents of the cess-pools are deposited, places which, since the passing of the Sanatory Act, are rapidly disappearing.
Upon entering a dust-yard there is generally found a heavy oppressive sort of atmosphere, more especially in wet or damp weather. This is owing to the tendency of charcoal to absorb gases, and to part with them on being saturated with moisture. The cinder-heaps of the several dust-yards, with their million pores, are so many huge gasometers retaining all the offensive gases arising from the putrefying organic matters which usually accompany them, and parting with such gases immediately on a fall of rain. It would be a curious calculation to estimate the quantity of deleterious gas thus poured into the atmosphere after a slight shower.
The question has been raised as to the propriety of devoting some special locality to the purposes of dust-yards, and it is certainly a question deserving public attention.
The chief disposal of the street manure is from barges, sent by the Thames or along the canals, and sold to farmers and gardeners. In the larger wharfs, and in those considered removed from the imputation of “scurfdom,” six men, and often but four, are employed to load a barge which contains from 30 to 40 tons. In such cases the dust-yard and the wharf are one and the same place. The contents of these barges are mixed, about one-fourth being “mac,” the rest street-mud and dung. This admixture, on board the vessel, is called by the bargemen and the contractors’ servants at the wharfs Leicester (properly Læsta, a load). We have the same term at the end of our word bal-last.
I am assured by a wharfinger, who has every means of forming a correct judgment, it may be estimated that there are dispatched from the contractors’ wharfs twelve barges daily, freighted with street-manure. This is independent of the house-dust barged to the country brick-fields. The weight of the cargo of a barge of manure is about 40 tons; 36 tons being a low average. This gives 3744 barge-loads, or 132,784 tons, or loads, yearly; for it must be recollected that the dirt gathered by pauper labour is dispatched from the contractors’ yards or wharfs, as well as that collected by the immediate servants of the contractors. The price per barge-load at the canal, basin, or wharf, in the country parts where agriculture flourishes, is from 5l. to 6l., making a total of 20,594l. The difference of that sum, and the total given in the table (21,147l.) may be accounted for on the supposition that the remainder is sold in the yards and carted away thence. The slop and valueless dirt is not included in this calculation.