Whether this mass of filth be, zymotically, the cause of cholera,
or whether it be (as cannot be questioned) a means of agricultural
fertility, and therefore of national wealth, it _must_ be removed. I
need not dilate, in explaining a necessity which is obvious to every
man with uncorrupted physical senses, and with the common moral sense
of decency.
“Dr. Paley,” it is said, in a recent Report to the Metropolitan
Commission of Sewers, “gave to Burckhardt and other travellers a set of
instructions as to points of observation of the manners and conditions
of the populations amongst whom they travelled. One of the leading
instructions was to observe how they disposed of their excreta, for
what they did with that showed him what men were; he also inquired what
structure they had to answer the purpose of a privy, and what were
their habits in respect to it. This information Dr. Paley desired,
not for popular use, but for himself, for he was accustomed to say,
that the facts connected with that topic gave him more information
as to the real condition and civilisation of a population than most
persons would be aware of. It would inform him of their real habits of
cleanliness, of real decency, self-respect, and connected moral habits
of high social importance. It would inform him of the real state of
police, and of local administration, and much of the general government.
“The human ordure which defiles the churches, the bases of public
edifices and works of art in Rome and Naples, and the Italian cities,
gives more sure indications of the real moral and social position of
the Italian population than any impressions derived from the edifices
and works of art themselves.
“The subject, in relation to which the Jewish lawgiver gave most
particular directions, is one on which the serious attention and labour
of public administrators may be claimed.”
The next question, is--_How_ is the wet house-refuse to be removed?