The defective supply had the disastrous effect of putting a constant premium upon dirt—dirt of person, of room, of houses, and their surroundings. And such drains and sewers as there were, were insufficiently flushed.
Time after time the consequential evils were pointed out, and Water Companies and house-owners were vigorously censured. But the censure had little practical effect.
The great inconveniences and evils, however, evoked the expression of opinion that the duty of supplying water to the community ought to be in the hands of the community.
Even in 1844 it had been pointed out that:—
“Water is as indispensable for many purposes as air is for life itself, and its supply ought not to be allowed to depend on the cupidity or caprice of landlords or Water Companies.”
And the Metropolitan Sanitary Association had enunciated the principle:—
“That inasmuch as water is a prime necessity of life, attainable in large cities by combined effort only, and not to be denied to any without injury to all, its supply should not be dependent on commercial enterprise, but be provided at the expense of the community for the common benefit.”
And the Medical Officer of Health for St. George-in-the East wrote in 1856:—
“The water supply of your Parish is in the hands of a Joint Stock Company, called the East London Water Company, and is managed by persons who represent solely the interest of the shareholders, whose only anxiety is of course the dividends—the consumers are not represented at all. This appears to me to be a strange anomaly, a false position, and a monstrous inconsistency—as great as if the sewerage of London were committed to a Joint Stock Company. But so it is, and however great the danger, the Vestry has no available remedy whatever in its hands.”