OF THE CONTRACTORS FOR SCAVENGERY._London Labour and the London Poor, Vol. 2

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 100_l._ per annum for the

removal and possession of the street-dirt, &c.; but the following year

the district authorities had to pay him 500_l._ for the same labour

and with the same privileges! Other changes took place, and in 1848-9

a contractor again paid the district 95_l._ I have shown, too, that

in Shadwell the dust-contractor now _receives_ 450_l._ per annum,

whereas he formerly _paid_ 240_l._ 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 102_l._ 3_s._ has been

effected; the sum of 18_l._ 18_s._ 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 1_l._ to 5_l._, 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,

N^o. --

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

50_l._ 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 50_l._, or whatever the terms of the agreement may be. I heard

of one contractor who lately received 25_l._ where he once paid 50_l._

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, 150_l._ 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

50_l._ 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, 150_l._ each £8100

Parish payment on 29 contracts, 50_l._ each 1450

-----

Yearly total sum paid for Scavenging of

the Metropolis £9550

-----

or, apportioned among 19 _contractors_, upwards of 500_l._ each; and

among 83 _contracts_, about 115_l._ 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 10,000_l._ 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 3_s._

per load, which is a very reasonable average. If the load be dung,

or even chiefly dung, it is worth 5_s._ or 6_s._ 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 3_s._ 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 1_s._

the load, 3_s._ 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.

+---------+--------+---------+----------------------------+---------+---------+--------

------------------------------+---------+--------+---------+---------+---------+--------+---------+---------+--------

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

„ 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

| | | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | | |

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

| | | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | | |

Mr. Darke | ... | ... | ... | ... | 36 | 36 | | |

„ Tomkins | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | | |

„ J. Cooper | ... | ... | ... | ... | 8 | 8 | | |

„ T. Cooper, Sen. | ... | ... | ... | ... | 12 | 12 | | |

„ Athill | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | | |

„ Brown | ... | ... | ... | ... | 4 | 4 | | |

„ Ellis | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | | |

„ Limpus | ... | ... | ... | ... | 10 | 10 | | |

„ Emmerson | ... | ... | ... | ... | 6 | 6 | | |

| | | | +---------+--------+ | |

| | | | | 94 | 94 | | |

--------------------------------+-------------+-------------------+-------------+-----------------------

| Dust. | Scavengers. | Rubbish. | Employed in Yard.

Machines. +------+------+-----+-------------+------+------+------+------+---------

| Men. |Carts.| Men.| Carts. | Men. |Carts.| Men. |Women.|Children.

--------------------------------+------+------+-----+-------------+------+------+------+------+---------

+------+------+-----+---- | | | | |

| | | 25 | 8 „ | | | | |

| | | | | | | | |

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 | | | | |

{|No parochial |} | | | | | |

Hampstead {| removal of |} 4 | 1 | | | | |

{| dust. |} | | | | | |

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

+------+------+-----+---- | | | | |

Total for Parishes | 56 | 28 ||218 | 50 carts. | | | 16 | 46 | 16

| | | | | | | | |

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

--------------------------------+------+------+-----+-------------+------+------+------+------+--------

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 | Per |

| Street Dirt. | Load. | Total.

---------------+--------------+-------+---------

By Contractors | 89,000 | 3_s._ | £13,350

By Parishes | 52,000 | 3_s._ | 7,800

---------------+--------------+-------+---------

Total | 141,000 | | £21,150

---------------+--------------+-------+---------

or a value of rather more than 1113_l._ as the return to each

individual contractor in the table, or about 255_l._ 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 19,000_l._, a sum of 1000_l._ to each

contractor, or nearly 229_l._ on each contract.

It would appear, then, that the total receipts of the contractors for

the scavenging of London amount to very nearly 30,000_l._; that is to

say, 10,000_l._ as remuneration for the office, and 20,000_l._ 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) | 16_s._[17] |£8070 8_s._

66 (for 6 months) | 16_s._ | 1372 16_s._

--------------------+--------------+-------------

Total | | £9443 4_s._

--------------------+--------------+-------------

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:--