Report 
 
 ON THE 
 
 DUBLIN IMPROVEMENT BILL, 
 
 BY 
 
 A. HAYWARD, Esq., Q. C. 
 
 AND 
 
 C. P. BRASSINGTON, Esq., Land Surveyor. 
 
 * 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED BY LUKE JAMES HANSARD, 
 NEAR LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS. 
 
 1847. 
 
1 YrW'M 
 
 W’b'b'T 
 
 REPORT 
 
 ON THE 
 
 DUBLIN IMPROVEMENT BILL. 
 
 The direct and immediate object of the proposed Bill for 
 the improvement of the borough of Dublin (as explained by 
 the promoters) is not to carry out any definite or specific 
 scheme or schemes for the better draining, paving, cleansing, 
 lighting, or otherwise improving the localities, but to extend 
 and transfer to the town-council of the borough all the 
 powers now in force for such purposes or any other pur¬ 
 poses of local administration. 
 
 Many of the proposed enactments relate to matters with 
 which the Commissioners of Woods and Forests have 
 nothing to do; and we have, as far as possible, restricted 
 our inquiries to matters strictly and properly within their 
 jurisdiction as affecting the streets and buildings, sewerage, 
 supply of* water, or (generally speaking) material and phy¬ 
 sical wants and comforts of the inhabitants. 
 
 The proposed bill recites forty-two acts of Parliament 
 creating, altering or affecting powers to be transferred to 
 the town-council. More than three-fourths of these acts 
 relate to matters within the jurisdiction of the Commission¬ 
 ers of Woods and Forests, and many of them are so compli¬ 
 cated and ambiguous as to render it very difficult to 
 determine what the existing powers under them are. 
 
 In the course of the inquiry, it became necessary to 
 examine a great many other acts of Parliament, as well as 
 numerous deeds and documents of a technical character. 
 
 When, therefore, the promoters of the bill, as w r ell as the 
 boards or authorities whose constitution or system of man- 
 
 a 2 
 
 ' ]) 5Q2‘29 
 
4 
 
 agement was impugned, applied to be allowed to appear by 
 counsel, we thought it best to accede to the application. 
 
 In the case also of large and respectable bodies of citi¬ 
 zens, we thought time would be saved, and order best pre¬ 
 served in our proceedings, by permitting them to commu¬ 
 nicate such objections or information as they wished to lay 
 before us through professional organs, instead of requiring 
 the persons constituting such bodies to appear individually, 
 except with respect to statements requiring confirmation 
 upon oath. 
 
 The following counsel appeared : 
 
 Mr. O’Hea and Sir Colman O’Loghlen, for the promoters of 
 the bill. 
 
 Mr. Murphy, Q,. C., and Mr. Henderson, for the Paving 
 Board. 
 
 Mr. George, Q. C., for the Wide Street Commissioners. 
 
 Mr. Perrin, for the secretary and treasurer of the Term Grand 
 Juries. 
 
 Mr. Tomb, Q,. C., and Mr. Dobbs, for four or five hundred of 
 the most respectable inhabitants and rate-payers of Dublin. 
 
 Mr. Murphy, Q,. C., and Mr. Armstrong, for the Chamber of 
 Commerce. 
 
 Mr. Rolleston, for a large body of the rate-payers of St. 
 Andrew’s Parish. 
 
 Mr. Armstrong, for the Trustees of the Royal Exchange. 
 
 The promoters of the bill opened their case at length, 
 and laid before us such evidence as they thought fit. The 
 boards above mentioned, and several other objecting parties, 
 were fully heard. The counsel for the promoters were 
 frequently heard on incidental points, and had the general 
 reply. 
 
 Besides examining all the witnesses called, and inspecting 
 all the documents produced, by the promoters as a part of 
 their original case, we availed ourselves of the authority 
 reposed in us to examine other witnesses and resort publicly 
 to independent sources of information; giving in each 
 instance full notice of our intentions, and stating from time 
 to time in what manner, in our opinion, the various facts 
 and documents bore upon the points. 
 
 We also announced at the commencement that we were 
 willing and anxious to receive communications from all 
 
parties interested, so far as this could be done without an 
 undue loss of time or an inconvenient interruption of the 
 prescribed order of proceeding; and many valuable commu¬ 
 nications were consequently made to us by persons volun¬ 
 teering to give information or suggesting incidental doubts 
 and inquiries. No person presenting himself for the pur¬ 
 pose of giving material information, was refused an oppor¬ 
 tunity of communicating it during the whole progress of 
 the investigation. 
 
 By these means, we believe we have succeeded in ascer¬ 
 taining all the principal local facts and circumstances which 
 ought to be taken into consideration in legislating for the 
 city of Dublin on the subjects submitted to us; but it was 
 found impossible to take all the evidence on each subject 
 consecutively, or in what might be thought its proper place 
 or natural order. One great advantage of a local inquiry is 
 the facility of sending for additional or explanatory evidence 
 as it may be required. When such necessity arose, we were 
 often compelled to postpone the specific topic of inquiry, 
 and occupy the interval with some other topic. The con¬ 
 venience of counsel and other persons also led to fre¬ 
 quent postponements of particular heads, and to apparent 
 digressions. 
 
 The plan w T e propose to adopt in this Report is to de¬ 
 scribe, first, the existing boards and- authorities; secondly, 
 the present condition of the city, as regards paving, light¬ 
 ing, supply of water, drainage, and width of streets, as well 
 as its sanatory condition generally, as affected by these and 
 other matters of the same class; thirdly, the constitution 
 of the town-council, and its comparative fitness to frame 
 and administer an improved and comprehensive system of 
 local administration. 
 
 The origin and constitution of the existing boards within 
 the scope of our inquiry are fully stated in the Appendix 
 to the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire 
 into the Municipal Corporations of Ireland, printed in 
 1835; down to which year the history of these boards is 
 clearly traced. They are: 
 
 1st. The Commissioners for paving, cleansing, and light- 
 
6 
 
 ing the streets of Dublin, commonly called “ The Paving 
 Board.” 
 
 2nd. The Commissioners for making wide and conve¬ 
 nient streets, commonly called “ The Wide Street Commis¬ 
 sioners.” 
 
 3rd. The “Term Grand Juries.” 
 
 1st. The Paving Board .—The history of this board is 
 curious, as shewing the variety of plans of local adminis¬ 
 tration which have been tried and failed successively. The 
 duty of paving and cleansing the city was originally imposed 
 upon the corporation. The earliest Act of Parliament on 
 the subject was passed in 1717 (4 Geo. 1, cap. 11), and 
 after reciting the insufficient repair and defective paving of 
 the streets, throws the chief responsibility as regards the 
 city on the Lord Mayor, who (with one of the sheriffs and 
 two of the aldermen chosen by him) is to direct the level¬ 
 ling and paving, raising and mending of the pavements, and 
 empowered to charge the chief tenants inhabiting houses, 
 and the owners of waste ground, with the expense of 
 paving, altering, and amending the pavements before their 
 houses and grounds, so as it should not exceed 20s. at a 
 time. The “ scavenger of the city ” was to carry away the 
 dirt two days in each week, and the inhabitants were com¬ 
 pelled to sweep before their houses on those two days before 
 nine in the morning, so that the dirt might be ready for the 
 scavenger. 
 
 In 1719 (6 Geo. 1, c. 15), it being found, as recited, 
 that it was almost impossible for the Lord Mayor to see 
 the former act put into execution on account of the great 
 extent of the city, the aldermen and deputy-aldermen were 
 joined with him, and empowered to regulate the pavements 
 in their respective districts. 
 
 In 1729 (3 Geo. 2, c. 13), the whole of the powers created 
 by the preceding acts were vested in the Lord Mayor; 
 the churchwardens and directors of the police being re¬ 
 quired to examine and return all defects in paving and 
 cleansing. 
 
 Forty-five years then elapsed without legislative inter- 
 
7 
 
 position, but in 1774 (13 & 14 Geo. 3, c. 22), a corporate 
 body, called “ The Commissioners for Paving the Streets 
 of Dublin,” was created, consisting of the Lord Chancellor, 
 the Chief Justices, the Lord Mayor, Recorder, sheriffs, 
 fifteen aldermen, and fifteen common councilmen, (to be 
 elected in common council by ballot), the Archbishop of 
 Dublin and the Seneschal of the Manor of St. Sepulchre, 
 the Lord of the Manor and the Seneschal of the Manor of 
 Thomas Court and Donore, the Deans of Christchurch and 
 St. Patrick’s, and thirty-seven persons named in the act. 
 
 In 1776 (15 & 16 Geo. 3, c. 20), a certain qualification 
 was required in the Commissioners and committee-men, 
 and new Commissioners were added. 
 
 In 1782 the last-mentioned board was dissolved, and a 
 new board formed, consisting of the Lord Mayor, Recorder, 
 sheriffs, and two senior aldermen (no common councilmen), 
 two senior sheriffs’ peers, the members of both Houses of 
 Parliament, and sixty-seven persons named in the act. 
 
 In 1784 new provisions were imperatively demanded, 
 but lighting, as well as paving and cleansing, was included 
 in the act then passed, and it therefore becomes necessary 
 to see how the lighting of the city had hitherto been pro¬ 
 vided for. 
 
 The first legislative measure regarding lighting was an 
 Act of 1697 (9 Will. 3, c. 17), by which the corporation 
 were empowered to cause public lights to be erected and 
 maintained. They deputed their authority to merchants of 
 the city, (first one and then two,) by whom the duty was 
 performed, under contract, until 1759, when an act was 
 passed (23 Geo. 2, c. 18) providing that the parishioners 
 of the several parishes should light the lamps of their 
 parishes and liberties; the lamps to be of such sort and 
 fashion as the corporation should deem proper; and the 
 corporation were further annually to name the extreme 
 amount to be paid to the respective contractors by the 
 parishes. 
 
 The lighting was provided for in this manner until 1784, 
 when it was considered expedient that the cleansing, light¬ 
 ing, paving, and sewerage should be placed under the care 
 
8 
 
 of one and the same body, and accordingly (by 23 & 24 
 Geo. 3, c. 57) seven persons were named to be “ Directors” 
 of the paving, cleansing, and lighting, without salary, fee, 
 or reward; and they were empowered, with the approbation 
 of the Lord Lieutenant, to appoint five Commissioners to 
 be paid 1/. each for each day’s attendance, and the several 
 powers of the several Acts were vested in the Directors 
 and Commissioners; the Directors being empo a o 
 remove the Commissioners, with the assent of the said 
 Lord Lieutenant, and also to appoint to vacancies in their 
 own body. 
 
 These Directors and Commissioners were incorporated, 
 and, among other duties, were to erect public fountains, 
 the number not to exceed 20. Additional rates were 
 authorized, and a composition was to be paid by the cor¬ 
 poration for the cleansing of the streets and paving parts of 
 the city, certain tolls and customs being held by them in 
 trust for the purpose. 
 
 In 1786 (26 Geo. 3, c. 61), a discretionary power of 
 erecting fountains without restriction as to number, as well 
 as of watering the streets, was conferred; all pre-existing 
 powers were consolidated, and new provisions were made 
 regarding the debt, thereby raised to 55,000/. and upwards, 
 and charged on the rates. 
 
 The water for the fountains and watering the streets 
 was to be supplied by the corporation; and by an act of 
 1788 (28 Geo. 3, c. 50, s. 101), the Commissioners were 
 empowered to pay 150/. per annum for the accommodation. 
 
 In 1790, 1797, and 1800, additional Acts were passed; 
 but in 1805 a sweeping reform was again found necessary. 
 Two Commissioners of Inquiry were appointed, and, on 
 their Report, the powers of the board were suspended, and 
 new administrators temporarily appointed. 
 
 In 1807 [47 Geo. 3 (loc. and pers.), sess. 2, c. 109], all 
 former enactments were repealed ; the Commissioners and 
 other officers were pensioned off, and the present Paving 
 Board was created. 
 
 This board consists of three paid Commissioners (Mem¬ 
 bers of the House of Commons being declared ineligible). 
 
9 
 
 appointed by the Lord Lieutenant, and removable by him at 
 pleasure. The salary of the Chief Commissioner is not to 
 exceed 600/. a year; nor the salaries of the other Commis¬ 
 sioners 500/. a year each. They are constituted a corpo¬ 
 ration, by the name of “ The Commissioners for Paving, 
 Cleansing, and Lighting the Streets of Dublin,” and two 
 form a quorum. The following officers are also appointed 
 by the Lord Lieutenant, during pleasure; namely, two 
 supervisors, one for each side of the Liffey, at 400/. a year 
 each ; a secretary, at 200/. a year; and a treasurer, at 
 500/. a year. The Commissioners are to appoint collectors, 
 not less than four nor more than eight, removable at plea¬ 
 sure, and to be paid at a rate not exceeding 2J per cent, 
 on the sums collected; and they are empowered to employ 
 other officers and servants, and to pay them by salaries or 
 allowances, so long as these do not exceed 2,500/. a year. 
 Parliamentary provision was made for paying off a debt of 
 97,000/. incurred by the old boards, and for defraying the 
 charges of paving, repairing, and lighting the streets and 
 other public passages within the limits of the Circular 
 Poad. The Commissioners were empowered to levy one 
 or more rates annually, on houses and other buildings, so as 
 the same shall not, in any one year, exceed 4s. 6d. in the 
 pound on houses, &c. of or above 10/. yearly value, nor 
 3s. 6^7. in the pound on those below. 
 
 The corporation were to pay 350/. a year for the paving 
 &c. of certain places, 20/. a year for certain lamps, and 
 2,000/. a year towards the cleansing of the streets; 20,000/. 
 was granted by Parliament for paving the principal streets 
 with granite, and 20,000/. for making sewers. The Com¬ 
 missioners are empowered from time to time to order streets, 
 &c. to be paved, repaired, or altered; and in case of new 
 streets, they may order the builders or other owners or 
 occupiers to attend and compound for the charges of paving 
 or making footways and sewers, and in case of default to 
 order the same to be done, and sue the defaulter for the cost. 
 
 The board are empowered to make any number of foun¬ 
 tains, and to cause the streets to be watered. They are 
 also empowered to make sewers or cesspools, and levy the 
 
10 
 
 charge on the owners or occupiers whose drip or drop shall 
 run into the same; and to make sewers, drains, and cess¬ 
 pools in streets inhabited by poor persons, and charge the 
 whole or a portion of the expense on the rates. They have 
 powers to compel the cleansing of private drains and sewers 
 at the expense of the occupier or owner; powers to enlarge 
 public passages, so long as they do not interfere with the 
 Wide Street Commissioners; and powers to contract for 
 the lighting; of the streets. Provisions are introduced to 
 regulate the works of the board and those of the Pipe 
 Water Committee (by whom water required for the foun¬ 
 tains and watering of the streets is or ought to be supplied), 
 as well as provisions for preventing various lands of obstruc¬ 
 tions and nuisances in the streets. 
 
 Detailed information regarding the conduct and pro¬ 
 ceedings of the board thus constituted, for a period of 
 nearly 30 years after its creation, is contained in the 
 Deport on Municipal Corporations (Ireland) already men¬ 
 tioned ; but it is right to state, that persons whose conduct 
 was censured in that Deport, complained to us of its having 
 been made (as regards the boards not strictly within the 
 scope of the inquiry) on ex parte evidence, and requested 
 permission to explain any personal matter that might be 
 deemed material. There can be no doubt, however, that 
 (as stated in that Deport) great abuses were discovered in 
 1825, through the instrumentality, in a great measure, of 
 one of the present Commissioners, Mr. Smyth; and a 
 Commission of Inquiry was consequently issued to two 
 barristers, who made a Deport in 1826, pointedly comment¬ 
 ing on the maladministration of the funds. 
 
 In 1827, Mr. Smyth was promoted to be Chief Commis¬ 
 sioner, and Mr. Kearney and Colonel (now Sir George) 
 Morris were appointed Commissioners with him. These 
 three have remained in office ever since, and now constitute 
 the board. It is admitted that great improvements have 
 been effected by them in the system of management, but 
 the Municipal Corporation Commissioners expressed a 
 strong opinion, in 1835, that economical reforms might be 
 carried further with advantage to the public; and although 
 
11 
 
 some reductions have been made during the intervening 
 period in the expenditure on the establishment, it is still on 
 too expensive a scale. 
 
 A table was supplied to us by the Secretary, inti tied:— 
 No. 1 .—Expenditure on Establishment {under the Heads 
 specified at page 96 in the Appendix to the Report on Muni¬ 
 cipal Corporations in Ireland. 
 
 The annuities are those payable to the superannuated or 
 discharged members and officers of the board abolished in 
 1807. These, in 1835, amounted to 8307. 15s, 6d., but 
 the gross amount of expenditure in 1835, under the head 
 of Expenditure on establishment, amounted to 9,179/. 
 12s. 5d. 
 
 A table showing precisely how the establishment is com¬ 
 posed was given to us, intitled, List of Commissioners and 
 Officers in the Paving Board Establishment at Annual 
 Salaries. 
 
 The minutes and accounts appeared on inspection to be 
 well kept; but it is difficult to understand how so many 
 persons can be constantly employed upon them. We 
 called for an account of the receipts and expenditure of 
 the last year, which was delivered to us, intitled:— 
 Abstract of the Cash Ledger of the Commissioners for 
 Paving, Sfc., within the Year ended the 5th January , 1847. 
 
 The increase in expenditure which this table (when com¬ 
 pared with tables for former years produced before us) shews 
 to have taken place within the last ten or twelve years (from 
 10 to 15 per cent.) was accounted for by the system of mac¬ 
 adamizing, by which the expenses of making, repairing, and 
 cleansing the streets are increased, and the profits from sca¬ 
 venging reduced; the scrapings of a macadamized street 
 being of little value as manure. 
 
 The 28th section of the Act of 1807, constituting the 
 Paving Board, requires them to present annually to the Lord 
 Lieutenant, on or before the 5th of January, a Report con¬ 
 taining a general statement of their proceedings, a particular 
 detail of any difficulty experienced in the execution of the 
 Act, or of any deficiency or inconvenience in the existing 
 law, and suggesting such remedies as shall appear to them 
 
12 
 
 most likely to promote the purposes of their institution. 
 Their Reports for the last two years were laid before us, 
 and the last will be presently mentioned more particularly. 
 
 They have omitted to report on one inconvenience in 
 the existing law, on which they relied as their excuse for 
 retaining in their service an officer, charged with onerous 
 and important duties, which he is confessedly incapable of 
 discharoino; from old ao;e. We allude to Mr. Tassic, the 
 supervisor of the south side of the river, who has held that 
 office for forty years, and is now considerably past seventy. 
 The appointment is in the Lord Lieutenant; and although 
 a discretionary power of removal is vested in the board, they 
 have no power of pensioning off or giving a retired allowance, 
 and have been naturally unwilling to discharge an old and 
 (so long as his strength lasted) valuable officer under such 
 circumstances. The evil consequences will be made apparent 
 when we come to the topic of sewerage. 
 
 The most material charge brought against the Paving 
 Board (in addition to the general charge of irresponsibility 
 brought against all the boards) was, that, from its constitu¬ 
 tion, it was peculiarly liable to Castle influence, and (in a less 
 direct manner) to the influence of persons of rank and station. 
 
 The liability to Castle influence in the case of Com¬ 
 missioners appointed during pleasure by the Lord Lieu¬ 
 tenant, is undeniable; but the only instance given to illus¬ 
 trate the effects of such influence was one elicited during the 
 cross-examination of Mr. Reilly, the secretary. The Paving 
 Board having occasion to provide anew from 1845, (when 
 the prior contract ended), for the lighting of the city by gas, 
 were unable to come to terms with the contractors. They 
 conceived that competition was virtually excluded by private 
 agreements between the gas companies; and in this state of 
 things they suggested to the Government the expediency of 
 constructing public gas-works. The Government disap¬ 
 proved of this suggestion, interfered to reconcile the differ¬ 
 ence, and, having succeeded in bringing about the required 
 concession, recommended the Paving Board to contract 
 anew with the Hibernian Gas Company, and a contract 
 was accordingly entered into with that company for a period 
 
13 
 
 of fifteen or twenty years, at the option of the contracting 
 parties respectively. It struck us that the Castle influence 
 was here most beneficially exercised; and the secretary of 
 the board stated that, assuming the necessity of a new con¬ 
 tract with a company, the terms were as good as could be 
 expected, and a decided improvement on the last. He 
 added, that the only difference of opinion between the Go¬ 
 vernment and the Paving Board related to the expediency 
 of constructing public gas-works. 
 
 Two supposed examples of indirect influence were ad¬ 
 duced. One was the covering of part of the footway round 
 St. Patrick’s Cathedral with asphalte, and leaving the ap¬ 
 proach to the Catholic chapel in Westland Bow without 
 either asphalte or flagging; the dean and chapter having 
 made an application to the board, and no application what¬ 
 ever having been made on behalf of the frequenters of the 
 chapel, or the inhabitants of the vicinity. 
 
 Another was the paving of a lane leading to several sets 
 of stables, including stables belonging to the Dean of St. 
 Patrick’s. The Dean formally memorialised the board to 
 order the paving in question, and his memorial was duly 
 entered on their minutes. They inspected the place, ordered 
 it to be paved, and charged the expense on the occupiers of 
 the adjoining premises receiving benefit from the work, 
 in supposed accordance with the act. All the occupiers 
 but one paid their shares of the charge : one, Mr. Wrixon, 
 a barrister, refused, and they distrained for his share. He 
 brought an action, to which the board pleaded the general 
 issue, their law advisers not being aware of a (then) recent act, 
 limiting the legal effect of that plea. In consequence of this 
 oversight, the action was virtually undefended, and the plain¬ 
 tiff obtained a verdict for the value of the property seized. 
 
 This was adduced to show not only the liability of the 
 board to undue influence, but their tendency to engage in 
 unnecessary litigation ; and another lawsuit with the same 
 gentleman was mentioned in proof of the last branch of 
 the charge. It appeared that, considering a public right 
 of way to exist through a lane, alleged by Mr. Wrixon to 
 be his private property, and subject to no such right, they 
 
14 
 
 ordered an obstruction set up by him to be removed; an 
 action was brought, but, on the eve of the trial, and after 
 briefs had been delivered to counsel, the board were ad¬ 
 vised that their evidence was not sufficient to prove a dedi¬ 
 cation to the public, and they suffered judgment by default. 
 We have no means of judging of the degree of discretion 
 exercised in the course of these proceedings except from 
 the result, and from the appearance of the lanes, which 
 seemed to us to favour the conclusions of the board. 
 
 Another class of accusations related to their mode of 
 contracting for the scavenging of the city, which forms a 
 very large item in their expenses. 
 
 The contracts (hitherto separate) for carts and horses are 
 from three years to three years. A contract for horses was 
 to end on 12th November, 1845. The advertisement for 
 fresh tenders appeared 25th October, 1845 ; the tenders were 
 to be sent in by the 12th November, and the work was to 
 commence on the 12th December in that year, down to 
 which period provision had been made. Five tenders (in¬ 
 cluding one from the former contractor) were sent in; but 
 instead of accepting the lowest, or taking steps to procure 
 fresh offers, the board entered into a private contract with 
 . the former contractor, without communicating with the 
 other competing parties. There was no reason to suppose 
 that the bargain was disadvantageous to the public interests, 
 or that a better could have been made under the circum¬ 
 stances ; but competition was virtually excluded, and such 
 a system must always give rise to suspicion and distrust. 
 The tender of the former contractor was not the lowest, but 
 the contract actually made was under any of the tenders. 
 
 As regards the contract for carts also, the notice by 
 k advertisement was much too short; and the persons whose 
 duty it was to see that the preceding contract was properly 
 executed, as regards the quality and state of repair of carts 
 supplied, appear to have been somewhat inattentive in that 
 particular.—(See the evidence of Messrs. Mooney, O’Hara, 
 and Hay don.) 
 
 Evidence was given that the scavenging of the city had 
 been insufficiently performed during the last year, and per- 
 
15 
 
 formed very badly Indeed during the last two or three months. 
 As to the last two or three months (November and De¬ 
 cember, 1846, and January, 1847), the charge was not 
 denied; but, by way of excuse or palliation, it was alleged 
 that the frost had occasioned much of the evil by its effects 
 on the macadamized streets, and that the board had been 
 greatly embarrassed by the difficulty of getting depots for 
 the scrapings, and by a breach of contract as to carts. The 
 recent difficulties of the scavenging department are stated 
 in the last Report to the Lord Lieutenant; but we are by 
 no means satisfied that the resulting inconvenience to the 
 public might not have been prevented, or greatly lessened, 
 by due attention and activity. 
 
 The accounts of the board are audited in England, and 
 have not been printed for the public since 1842. The dis¬ 
 continuance of the former practice of printing them was 
 attempted to be justified on the plea of expense ; but the 
 annual publication of such accounts as that printed ante, 
 p. viii, would cost very little. At the same time, every 
 facility has been uniformly afforded for inspecting the ac¬ 
 counts ; in evidence of which it was stated by the secretary 
 that when Mr. Reynolds, an active promoter of the present 
 bill, applied to be furnished with information regarding 
 them, he was offered the inspection of any of the books he 
 chose to call for. In fact, the substantial charge against 
 this board, as regards money matters, evidently is, not that 
 they do not account for what they spend, but that they 
 spend too much; and our impression is that their establish¬ 
 ment is on too expensive a scale, and that the various works 
 and services belonging to the department might be more 
 cheaply performed if the principle of competition were fairly 
 carried out, and more time allowed for preliminary inquiries 
 into the character and resources of persons making tenders 
 before contracting with them. 
 
 The minute books were produced, shewing the proceed¬ 
 ings of the board day by day. The secretary stated that 
 they sit daily during three or four hours, and that there is 
 business enough on an average to occupy them to that extent. 
 
 A doubt (which ought to be set at rest by the Legisla- 
 
1G 
 
 lure) has arisen with regard to the amount of money which 
 the board may raise in any one year by rates. By the 
 6 & 7 Yict. c. 102, intitled, “ An Act for the more equal 
 Applotment of certain Bates in the County of the City of 
 Dublin and County of Dublin respectively,” it is provided, 
 that “ rates shall henceforward be assessed according to the 
 valuation of the poor-rate instead of the valuation for mini¬ 
 sters’ money, &c., provided that the gross amount to be levied 
 by the Paving Board should not exceed in any one year 
 the amount which they would have been empowered to levy 
 under any preceding acts, if this act had not been passed.” 
 They have hitherto taken the largest amount levied in any 
 preceding year as their maximum; but, according to this 
 construction, the amount must remain stationary, though the 
 number and value of houses may be indefinitely increased. 
 
 The Wide Street Commissioners .— The powers and consti¬ 
 tution of this board are to be collected from twenty acts of 
 Parliament, beginning with the 31 Geo. 2, c. 19, and end¬ 
 ing with 9 & 10 Viet. c. 400. An abstract of the whole 
 will be inserted in the Appendix to this Beport. The rea¬ 
 son why so many acts have been found necessary is, be¬ 
 cause general powers of improvement by widening have 
 never been conferred; but in each instance the particular 
 improvement, the funds lor effecting it, and the time within 
 which it was to be effected, have been specified by the 
 Legislature. Each act, however, is in some sort a re-en¬ 
 actment of the preceding one, with an occasional variation 
 as to the constitution or powers of the board; and it is re¬ 
 markable that in the act of 9 & 10 Viet. c. 400, all the pre¬ 
 ceding acts are recited and re-enacted, except as modified 
 by that act,—a style of legislation which might lead to 
 serious difficulties. 
 
 The present board consists of twenty-five Commission¬ 
 ers ; namely, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, with the city and 
 county Members for the time being, and twenty persons 
 appointed for life by the Lord Lieutenant. No qualifica¬ 
 tion of any sort is required, but the twenty non-official 
 members vacate their seats by not attending for six months, 
 
17 
 
 ami, in point of fact, are all resident in Dublin or the neigh¬ 
 bourhood. A list of the members in 1846, with the 
 number of their respective attendances during that year, 
 was delivered to us, intitled, “ Names and Number of 
 Attendances of the Commissioners of Wide Streets for the Year 
 ended 1846.” 
 
 The appointments are admitted on all hands to have been 
 uniformly made on liberal and comprehensive principles. 
 The only attempt made to impugn the composition or cha¬ 
 racter of the board was by shewing that five or six of the 
 members were also directors of an insurance company with 
 which a loan had been negotiated by the board. But it 
 was not shewn that the terms had varied in consequence; 
 the rate of interest was the ordinary rate at the period; 
 applications for the loan were first made in other quarters; 
 the meeting which sanctioned the application was attended 
 by Sir John Burgoyne (then a member) and five other 
 members not directors of the company, of whom only two 
 were present; and in the shape which the objection ulti¬ 
 mately took (being at length based exclusively on the fact 
 of members of the board being also directors of the com¬ 
 pany), it would probably lie against any numerous body 
 partly composed of commercial men (not excepting the 
 town-council), in every case of dealing with a company 
 or commercial body of importance. 
 
 The board generally meet every Wednesday; three form 
 a quorum. The members have no salary or emolument. 
 It being obvious that the attendance at periods when no 
 particular measure was in agitation, was no criterion of the 
 general efficiency of a board of this sort, we requested 
 tables of attendances in relation to specific improvements, 
 which were supplied under the following heads: “ Nassau- 
 street Improvement“ Grafton-street Improvements 
 
 Besides Parliamentary grants from time to time, they 
 have standing sources of revenue. Their principal revenue 
 is derived from a tax of 4 d. in the pound, levied for them by 
 the collectors of the Grand Jury cess. 
 
 A table, showing its amount and application, intitled, 
 
 B 
 
18 
 
 “ Wide-street Tax. — Income and Statement of Incumbrances 
 chargeable upon same,” was supplied to us. 
 
 By the 21 & 22 Geo. 3, c. 17, a duty on coals was granted 
 to them; and by 39 Geo. 3, c. 53, a tax on licenses to play 
 cards. These have ceased, but they still possess a fund, 
 derived from the former produce of the coal duty, which 
 on 5th January, 1847, stood thus:— 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Invested 3J per cent, stock - - 4,979 30 3 
 
 Cash in hank - - - 964 1 5 
 
 In the hands of the secretary - - 4 19 4 
 
 £5,958 11 0 
 
 A return inserted in the Appendix to this Report shows 
 the produce and application of the Wide-street tax, from 
 1833 to 1845, both inclusive. The law charges are regu- 
 larly taxed, and their large amount was attributed to the 
 peculiar business of the board, much of which consists in 
 settling titles and conveyances, going before juries, &c. 
 No attempt was made to impugn the correctness of the 
 accounts, and evidence was given that the board had paid 
 due attention to the pecuniary interests of the public as 
 regards the amount of compensation claimed. 
 
 A return of the regular expenses of what may be called 
 establishment Avas delivered to us : intitled, “ A Return of 
 the Number and Description of the Persons employed by or 
 under the Wide-street Commissioners , together with the Amount 
 of Salary or other Alloicances paid to every Person or Officer, 
 when exceeding 50/. a year,” was handed to us. 
 
 A board for the occasional improvement of a city by 
 widening or forming new streets, obviously stands on a dif¬ 
 ferent footing from boards requiring, in all their members, 
 the constant attendance which is only to be expected from 
 paid officers, and the skill and aptitude which can only be 
 acquired from habit and practice. Such a board should be 
 composed, at least in part, of men of enlarged minds and 
 cultivated taste, as well as of station, property, and charac¬ 
 ter ; and the attendance of such men may be secured often 
 enough to prevent malversation and insure the exercise of 
 a sound enlightened discretion on all the more important 
 
19 
 
 questions that may come before the body. The late acts 
 require the assent of the Lord Lieutenant to all plans of 
 projected improvement. 
 
 By the bill of 9 & 10 Viet. c. 400, as originally intro¬ 
 duced, powers were to be given to the Commissioners to 
 make a new approach to St. Patrick’s Cathedral, and widen 
 St. James’s Gate, as well as to remove certain houses which 
 obstruct the streets, and to effect some other alleged im¬ 
 provements particularised in the bill and schedule. The 
 granting of such powers was opposed by the corporation of 
 Dublin, who disputed the necessity of the two principal 
 improvements, alleged that the rates would be increased 
 3000/. a year, and objected to vesting any new powers in a 
 body so constituted. Among their printed objections we 
 find:— 
 
 “ That a more comprehensive, sanatory, and municipal improve¬ 
 ment measure is in preparation, and will be submitted to Parliament 
 in the next Session by the citizens and corporation of Dublin, whose 
 object is to consolidate all the different Boards having the power of 
 levying rates, and thus simplify the machinery and economise the 
 amount of municipal taxation, now vexatiously and excessively raised 
 from them by this and other bodies, to the extent of 200,000/. per 
 annum, and upwards. (This includes poor-rates and other charges 
 not affected by the proposed bill to the amount of nearly 100,000/. 
 per annum.) 
 
 “That the measure is unsound in principle, inasmuch as it de¬ 
 putes to Commissioners, who are nominated altogether irrespective of 
 the corporation or the rate-payers, by the Government for life, the 
 power of levying rates to a considerable amount, without being bound 
 to account to the rate-payers for their receipts or expenditures, and 
 without there being any limit put to the period for which the power 
 to tax is given. 
 
 “ That no Commissioners, such as this bill continues in power, are 
 known to exist in any other corporate town, and that the city of 
 Dublin is more oppressed by local taxation than any other munici¬ 
 pality in the United Kingdom.” 
 
 They further objected before us that the necessity of ob¬ 
 taining an act of Parliament for each successive improve-^ 
 ment had caused a great expense, which would be saved by 
 the passing of their bill; but this argument in no respect 
 
 b 2 
 
20 
 
 affects the comparative fitness of the board to be intrusted 
 with such powers as the Legislature may think right to dele¬ 
 gate. If the obvious objections to granting powers of pull- 
 in «• down and rebuilding any part of the city at pleasure, 
 could be got rid of in the case of the town-council by 
 making the approbation of the privy council a condition 
 precedent ( see sections 91, 92, of the proposed bill), these 
 objections might be got rid of by the same means in the case 
 of the existing board. There are still, undoubtedly, many 
 parts of the city requiring the exercise of such powers as 
 have hitherto been vested in it. 
 
 The Term Grand Juries .—It was contended that this in¬ 
 stitution came within the scope of our inquiry, on the ground 
 that the Term Grand Juries of Dublin exercise a power of 
 voting money for roads, bridges, and other purposes of local 
 improvement; but we declined entering into so wide a field 
 of inquiry on finding that a very able and comprehensive 
 report was made in 1842 by “ The Commissioners appointed 
 to revise the several laws under and by virtue of which 
 monies are now raised by grand jury presentment in Ire¬ 
 land.” We shall merely add, that the particular objections 
 made to the system, in addition to the general and sweeping 
 one of irresponsibility, were two; 1, that the Grand Jury 
 were in the habit of voting money to members of their own 
 body; and 2, that the mode of collecting led to considerable 
 abuses. The first of these objections was answered by 
 shewing that the sums in question were voted 'pro forma to 
 the juryman, and that no part of them really went into his 
 pocket. The last struck us as well founded, and the prac¬ 
 tice which gave rise to it (of returning solvent and insolvent 
 arrears,) was condemned so long ago as 1835, in the before- 
 mentioned report of the Municipal Commissioners. 
 
 The Pipe-Water Committee of the Town Council. —A dis¬ 
 tinct section of this Report will be devoted to the constitu¬ 
 tion and general character of the town-council; but the 
 Pipe Water Committee may be more properly considered 
 in this place as completing the list of the existing boards; 
 
21 
 
 and it is to be observed that the management of this de¬ 
 partment was put forward by the promoters of the bill as 
 evidencing the zeal of the corporation to promote the com¬ 
 forts of the inhabitants, and their own superior qualifications 
 for local government; so that what they have done or con¬ 
 templated therein may be fairly taken as a test of what they 
 think is incumbent on local administrators in other depart¬ 
 ments, and what the inhabitants may expect from them. 
 
 A complete monopoly of the right of supplying water to 
 the city of Dublin (except as regards wells and springs) is 
 vested in the town-council. The entire management is 
 left with a committee of twenty members, called the Pipe- 
 Water Committee, three of whom form a quorum. 
 
 The maximum rate of charge is fixed by 6 & 7 Viet, 
 c. 102, s. 6; namely, for every house of 51. and under 10Z. 
 yearly value, 5s .; of 10Z. and under 20Z., 10s. 6d .; of 20Z. 
 and under 50Z., 15s.; of 50Z. and under 80Z., 27s. 6d .; of 
 80Z. or upwards, 30s. This scale was stated to be more 
 favourable to the poorer classes than the former scale of 
 charges. 
 
 A summary of the total receipts and total expenditure of 
 this department from 1st November, 1841 (when the new 
 corporation came into office), to 1st January, 1847, is in¬ 
 serted in the Appendix, as delivered to us by the town 
 clerk; and the particulars may be seen in the annual printed 
 accounts of the Borough Fund. The average income per 
 annum for the above period is 12,934Z. 9s. 9d .; the average 
 expenditure, 11,778Z. 11s. 6d.; but under the items of ex¬ 
 penditure are the costs of passing an unnecessary act of 
 Parliament, the expenses of putting down new fire-plugs, 
 and salaries to retired officers, which cannot be considered 
 as permanent charges. The pecuniary resources of this de¬ 
 partment, which might be increased by good management, 
 would have justified the doing of far more than has been 
 done or even contemplated by the Pipe-Water Committee; 
 and the result of certain legal decisions on their liabilities 
 is, that they are legally as well as morally bound to apply all 
 surplus revenue in extending the supply, lessening their 
 
charges, or improving the establishment. (See the Attorney 
 General v. The Corporation of Dublin , 1 Bligh, N. It. 312, 
 and 9 Bligh, N. R. 395.) The maximum rate has been 
 uniformly imposed, besides an annual payment of between 
 9.9. and 10.9. each for water-closets. 
 
 It was stated that a great extent of new pipe had been 
 laid down since the new corporation came into office; but 
 this was explained to be for the accommodation of those who 
 could afford to pay for it, and has proportionally added to 
 the revenue. The comforts of the class who are too poor to 
 pay for water, do not appear to have been considered, and 
 the following statements in the last annual report of the 
 Paving Board to the Lord Lieutenant, were substantially 
 confirmed by the evidence of the secretary (Mr. Reilly) and 
 other witnesses. 
 
 “The subject relating to the extension of main sewers within the 
 limit of our jurisdiction, having been so fully and circumstantially 
 discussed in our last Annual Report, we limit our observations upon 
 this occasion to a brief allusion to the suggestions therein submitted, 
 imparting our view of the means whereby the advantage of adequate 
 drainage might be accomplished, and all the beneficial results in re¬ 
 lation to the public health, domestic comfort, the abatement of nui¬ 
 sances, and the more effectual cleansing of the public ways, fully 
 attained. 
 
 “ The paramount importance of these objects and the means of 
 their attainment, are specially exemplified in the reports upon the 
 condition of large towns and populous districts in England, of which 
 copious extracts are given in our Report; and as the views entertained 
 by her Majesty’s Commissioners, deduced from the evidence collected 
 in the prosecution of their minute and comprehensive inquiries, are 
 exhibited in a more compendious form in the report of the committee 
 to the members of the association on Lord Lincoln’s Sewerage, 
 Drainage, &c., of Towns Bill, printed by Messrs. Charles Knight & 
 Company, 22, Ludgate-street, London, in the last year, we venture 
 to refer your Excellency to that publication as affording incontestible 
 evidence of the prevailing impediments to the maintenance of the 
 public health in great towns in England, and suggesting means 
 whereby they may be overcome ; comprehending, amongst other ex¬ 
 pedients, the combined agency of an extensive and improved system 
 of sewerage, and an abundant supply of pure and wholesome water. 
 The combination of these two, with the paving and the cleansing of 
 towns, including their suburbs, and placed under the same authority, 
 
is strongly urged by the committee, who recommended that the execu¬ 
 tive operations be controlled and supervised by paid officers appointed 
 by the Government. 
 
 “ By an act passed in the 8th & 9th year of her Majesty’s reign, 
 c. 198, it is provided that an improved supply of water should be 
 given by the waterworks in Dublin to the public fountains in our 
 charge. The provision is, that from and after the 1st of the present 
 month (February) each fountain should have a service of water 
 during at least six hours daily, of which hours three should be in the 
 forenoon and three in the afternoon. This injunction, if conformed to 
 (which it is not), would be an improvement on the supply previously 
 given, which in many cases was only occasional, with intervals of one 
 or more days between. The evils of an intermitted supply of water 
 are forcibly described in the publication we have referred to (from 
 page 84 to page 66), to which we would solicit special attention. In 
 the first-mentioned page (at sect. 57) it is stated that her Majesty’s 
 Commissioners had collected a body of evidence which shows, by 
 every variety of proof of which the question admits, that an inter¬ 
 mittent supply vitiates the water, is inadequate, and puts the consumer 
 to unnecessary trouble, inconvenience, and expense ; whereas a con¬ 
 stant supply was practicable, and was alone capable of satisfying the 
 wants of the people, and especially of the poorer classes, and is cheaper 
 than any other mode of supply. Amongst the advantages enumerated 
 of a constant supply at high pressure, is the removal of all the evils 
 arising from want of proper receptacles for water, from neglect in 
 cleansing tanks and water-butts, and from the accumulation of soot 
 and other impurities, all which would be prevented by keeping the 
 pipes constantly full, whereby also there could be no impregnation of 
 water with gas, which often took place when the water is supplied on 
 the intermittent system.” 
 
 “ At page 59 it is stated that, a constant supply in the mains is the 
 certain and only efficient means of arresting the devastation of fire; 
 and it is observed, that wherever there is a constant supply of water 
 at high pressure, it is easy, in the space of two minutes after the first 
 alarm of fire, to bring water at the rate of thirty gallons a minute, to 
 bear upon any house in which a fire occurs. And further, that under 
 that system of constant supply at high pressure, even the smallest 
 street might be supplied with a three-inch main, affording at least 
 one 40-feet jet, which is equivalent to keeping the power of one 
 engine, and twenty men at every door to act at one minute’s notice 
 after the first alarm of fire ; and the use of fire-engines may be thus 
 discontinued, as in the case of the town of Preston, where, on the first 
 alarm of fire, the practice is instantly to screw a hose to a plug, by 
 means of which water can be thrown to the top of the highest build¬ 
 ing. That each of those plugs can be fitted up for the sum of 21 ., 
 
24 
 
 so as to admit two hoses to he screwed to it, and thus to furnish two 
 jets ; that is to say, for the sum of 5d. per annum every house in 
 that town can be supplied with arrangements for the extinction of 
 lire, equivalent to four engines kept constantly at its door for its own 
 exclusive use. 
 
 “We are induced to offer these observations to the notice of your 
 Excellency, with the view more especially to direct the attention of 
 her Majesty’s Government to statements heretofore submitted by us 
 in former annual reports upon the insufficient supply of water af¬ 
 forded to the public fountains, the injurious effects of such inade¬ 
 quacy upon the condition of the poor, and the impediment thereby 
 occasioned to the effectual sprinkling of certain of the carriage-ways 
 in dry weather by our watering-carts.” 
 
 “ These services legally appertain to us, but there is another in 
 which our instrumentality is always sought as indispensable. We 
 allude to the constant requisitions of the police for the aid of our 
 watering-carts, in every case where fires occur within the limit of our 
 jurisdiction, in which water is conveyed in some cases from distant 
 fountains for the use of the fire-engines in attendance ; and we do not 
 hesitate to affirm, that were it not for such aid, conflagrations would 
 extend, and greatly augment the evils resulting from them to life and 
 property.” 
 
 After alluding to the defects in the water supply of 
 London, they proceed: 
 
 “ In Dublin we believe the evils of an insufficient supply of pure 
 water far surpass those described in the publication adverted to ; for 
 here, where the impediments peculiar to the instrumentality of trad¬ 
 ing companies do not prevail, and a special fund is provided and 
 levied exclusively applicable to the maintenance, extension, and im¬ 
 provement of the waterworks, many of the streets and passages within 
 the limits of the borough are wholly destitute of water, whither the 
 water mains have never yet extended. There is no provision for 
 conducting the water from the mains into the premises in front; and 
 in the case of such of the latter as are wholly occupied by poor 
 roomkeepers, the inmates must look for supplies of water at the 
 nearest fountain, if it happens to have water at the time, or go to a 
 more distant one capable of affording a supply. Fire-plugs have been 
 latety affixed to the water mains in Dublin, but we apprehend they 
 do not act in cases of conflagration as the fire-plugs in Preston do, 
 without the instrumentality of fire-engines; and their inadequacy 
 for the extinction of fires is still further demonstrated by the fact, 
 that there is no abatement whatever in the requisitions for the aid of 
 our watering-carts to convey the requisite supplies of water. But if 
 we err in our conception of the efficacy of the fire-plugs, and that 
 
25 
 
 they are (as is affirmed on the part of the Pipe Water Committee) 
 adequate for the service of water for the extinction of fires, we would 
 in that case respectfully solicit the sanction of your Excellency to 
 withhold the aid of our horses and carts upon the occasion of all future 
 requisitions, their employment in that service (not enjoined by any 
 legal obligation) having been hitherto attended with considerable 
 expense and inconvenience in the prosecution of onr works.” 
 
 “ In submitting these general observations, we rest our justification 
 upon our legal claim to a continuous supply of water for the public 
 fountains, and upon the fact that the supply given is neither continu¬ 
 ous or adequate ; that this default is owing to the defective structure 
 of the waterworks, and their insufficiency to yield a simultaneous and 
 constant supply at all points for all purposes, the necessity for which 
 is so clearly exemplified by the committee whose report upon the 
 English waterworks we have quoted this communication ; and that 
 in no part of the United Kingdom is the necessity for the improve¬ 
 ment suggested in that publication so palpable and plain as in the 
 city of Dublin. We therefore humbly repeat the prayer conveyed in 
 our last annual report, to the effect, 4 That we may be enabled to ex¬ 
 ercise such a dominion over the waterworks in this city (heretofore 
 declared by judicial authority as the public property of the citizens), 
 as to apply it to the flushing and cleansing of the public sewers, and 
 the other objects suggested in the Report as conducive to the general 
 drainage of the town, watering of the streets, the cleansing of the 
 public ways, and a continuous supply to the public fountains.’ ” 
 
 We quote these passages not merely as containing im¬ 
 portant information, but as a criterion of the zeal and know¬ 
 ledge of the Paving Board, and as illustrating the inconve¬ 
 nience of separate systems of management for matters so 
 closely connected as the water supply, street cleansing, and 
 sewerage of a city. 
 
 Evidence regarding the fire-plugs (which are merely 
 contrivances for getting water from the pipes to feed the 
 engines), was given by Alderman Gavin, the inventor, who 
 stated that 600 would be required; that only 380 had been 
 fixed, and that only 200 of these were in a state of efficient 
 service. By section 210 of the proposed bill, power is given 
 to the town-council to include an establishment of water- 
 carts and horses, &c., among their provisions for extinguish¬ 
 ing fires. This justifies an inference that they place no 
 great reliance on their plugs, or that they are not properly 
 impressed with the importance of taking active and decisive 
 
26 
 
 steps to preserve the city from the risk to which the present 
 state of things exposes it. 
 
 The fullest information any officer of the corporation was 
 capable of affording as to the adequacy and quality of the 
 present supply of water, will be found in the evidence of 
 Mr. Crofton, the overseer of the Pipe Water Works, which 
 office he had held since 1837. He had been on the estab¬ 
 lishment since 1833. He stated that the south side of the 
 city was supplied from two basins or reservoirs, one fed 
 from the Grand Canal, the other from the Grand Canal and 
 the city watercourse. The city watercourse is a stream di¬ 
 verted from the River Dodder, which is the property of the 
 corporation. The water from the Grand Canal, which con¬ 
 stitutes much the greater part of the average supply, is sup¬ 
 plied under a contract for a period of which about 20 years 
 are yet to run. 
 
 The north side of the city is supplied from a reservoir 
 fed from the Royal Canal. The supply on both sides has 
 occasionally run short, and the only reason the overseer, 
 gave at first for not expecting a recurrence of the deficiency 
 on the south side, was an assurance from an officer of the 
 Grand Canal Company that steps had been taken to prevent 
 its recurrence. On the last day of our inquiry the secre¬ 
 tary of the Grand Canal Company was produced on the part 
 of the promoters, and swore positively that there had been, 
 to his knowledge, neither complaint nor ground for com¬ 
 plaint during the last four or five years, and that any quan¬ 
 tity of water could and would have been supplied without 
 difficulty from the Grand Canal. This evidence struck us as 
 quite irreconcilable, with much of that given by Mr. Crof¬ 
 ton, the overseer. Mr, Crofton, moreover, had no accurate 
 notion to what extent the city was supplied with springs. 
 His opinion was that the pipe water required filtering; but 
 he stated that only one of the basins, the smallest, was 
 supplied with a filter, and that this filter was too small for 
 the basin. 
 
 It appeared from the evidence of Sir Drury Dickenson, 
 the supervisor and secretary of the Pipe Water Committee, 
 
27 
 
 that plans of filters had been before the Pipe Water Com¬ 
 mittee in the year 1843, and that the small filter for the 
 small basin was the sole practical result. This gentleman 
 also stated that the newest plan or map of the city water¬ 
 works was made in 1834, and that great inconvenience was 
 felt in the department for want of a plan showing the pre¬ 
 sent extent of the mains. 
 
 The overseer had never considered whether water could 
 be supplied for the purposes of sewerage, and had never 
 been consulted on the point. The general tendency of his 
 evidence was to confirm in great part the complaints of the 
 Paving Board as to the deficient supply of the public foun¬ 
 tains. Only two fountains had been added since 1842. On 
 being further examined as to the cause of the occasional 
 scarcity, he stated that the main pipes leading from the 
 reservoirs were too small, and that it would cost 50,000/. to 
 make the present waterworks fully available. This officer, 
 however, had evidently given very little consideration to 
 matters beyond the line of his routine duty. His salary is 
 under 140/. a year; and it is to be regretted that an officer 
 of a higher class, with some scientific knowledge, had not 
 been at least occasionally employed in this department. 
 
 A report of the Pipe Water Committee, made soon after 
 the new corporation came into office (1841), was produced 
 by the promoters of the bill to show their zeal for improve¬ 
 ment. On the question of suppressing the office of engi¬ 
 neer, the committee remark: 
 
 “We could collect, both from engineer and overseer, that the water¬ 
 works are very imperfectly mapped, and that a search extending to 
 several feet is often to be made when a pipe is to be repaired or altered. 
 We learn from the overseer (Mr. Crofton) that he could from recol¬ 
 lection point to within one foot of the direction of many of the mains; 
 but his knowledge in this respect is confined to himself, and has never 
 been made the subject of any sort of record. He has nothing, he says, 
 on paper, even to assist his own memory. We need not point out the 
 expediency of an alteration of the practice in this respect, and the 
 adoption of all practicable means of rendering the maps complete.” 
 
 The engineer (it appears from this report) had a salary 
 of 50/. a year, and “ thought he earned it not so much for 
 
28 
 
 the duty he actually performed, as for what he was prepared 
 from observation and experience to perform.” The com¬ 
 mittee “ could not in reason attach much importance to his 
 advantages in this respect,” and the office was abolished: 
 but more than five years have elapsed, and nothing more 
 has been done. The map of 1834, rendered still less 
 effective by the lapse of time and the quantity of new 
 mains, is the only map; and the sole reliance of the Pipe- 
 Water Committee is still on the unassisted memory of the 
 same overseer. 
 
 The omission to complete the map and employ some 
 capable person to ascertain the precise cause of the occa¬ 
 sional failures of water, is the more remarkable, because in 
 August, 1845, the town-council obtained an act to enable 
 them to supply all the adjoining parishes, if required so to do 
 in the manner provided by the act (8 & 9 Viet.). Their sup¬ 
 posed position, as regards their legal rights to water and 
 their power of getting it, is thus stated in the recital of 
 the act: 
 
 “ And whereas, under and by virtue of the said several recited acts, 
 the supply of water to the city of Dublin has been vested in and put 
 under the sole control, management, and authority of the corporation, 
 of the borough of the city of Dublin, and the lord-mayor, aldermen, 
 and burgesses thereof, are seised and possessed, as of their domain in 
 fee, of the stream from which the said supply is to a considerable 
 degree derived; and whereas the corporation have increased the sup¬ 
 ply of water by obtaining a further supply from the Grand Canal, 
 under and by virtue of a certain contract or agreement with the com¬ 
 pany of undertakers of the said canal, made on or about the 7th day of 
 February, in the year of our Lord 1806, and also by obtaining a fur¬ 
 ther supply from the Royal Canal, under and by virtue of a certain con¬ 
 tractor agreementmadeonorabout the 24th day of June, 1808, between 
 the said corporation and the said Royal Canal Company; and whereas 
 the citizens of Dublin have had, by means of the said several acts, a suf¬ 
 ficient supply of wholesome water assured to them for domestic uses at a 
 moderate rate of charge, and also a supply of water for extinguishing 
 fire; and whereas it has been deemed advisable to amend the said 
 acts, and to extend the benefits so obtained by the inhabitants who 
 reside within the limits of the borough of Dublin to the inhabitants 
 of the several parishes outside the boundaries of the said borough, 
 but adjoining thereto, in order that a sufficient and wholesome supply 
 
29 
 
 of water for domestic uses may be insured to those localities where 
 the population has of late years considerably increased, and also a 
 supply of water for the purpose of extinguishing fire.” 
 
 The most important statements in this recital could 
 hardly have been based on satisfactory information, or such 
 information might have been afforded to ourselves. Ac¬ 
 cording to the evidence laid before us, it is far from clear 
 that the citizens of Dublin (if the poor are to be included 
 in that description) have had a sufficient supply of whole¬ 
 some water assured to them for domestic purposes, and also 
 a supply for extinguishing fire; nor till the appearance of 
 the secretary of the Grand Canal Company towards the 
 close of our inquiry, was there reason to believe that the 
 present supply could be safely extended to the adjoining 
 parishes, even after the required improvement of the water¬ 
 works. 
 
 The Pipe Water Act of 1846 has proved inoperative, 
 not a single parish having applied to benefit by it. The 
 act cost the town-council more than 800/., and the only 
 useful clause is one compelling the Pipe Water Committee 
 to increase their supply of water for the public fountains. 
 They took credit before us for having obeyed this clause, 
 which was forced upon them through the instrumentality 
 of Mr. Willis, w T ho petitioned the House of Lords that the 
 bill in question “ might not be allowed to pass into a law 
 without some inquiry as to the defective supply of* that 
 necessary article, water, to almost all the portions of the 
 borough in which the poor are located.” This petition 
 contains the following startling statement, extracted from a 
 book published by Mr. Willis, in 1845, on the social and 
 sanatory condition of the working classes of Dublin :—Jj 
 
 “ There is a great want of water, though not from any absolute 
 necessity, as it is supplied to the district for about four hours on 
 three days in each week; but of the houses let to weekly tenants, 
 not one in ten has the water conveyed into it by branch from the 
 street-main. In such cases the tenants are dependant for their sup¬ 
 ply on the public fountain, which is often at a considerable distance 
 from their residence; besides which the water is not constantly in 
 these fountains. The wretched people have no vessels to contain a 
 
30 
 
 supply; the kettle and broken jar are the only ones to he seen in 
 these abodes of misery; nothing marks their poverty more than 
 when, congregating round the public fountain, they are seen strug¬ 
 gling to have their little supply. There are many lanes and courts 
 in which a tumbler of water could not he had fit for drinking; even 
 for purposes of cleanliness, a scanty supply is with difficulty to he 
 had, and appears of such value that it is rarely thrown out until after 
 being put to several uses. I have frequently noticed this filthy stuff 
 remaining within the room, and have been invariably told that it 
 was yet wanted. It had first been used, perhaps, to wash the man’s 
 shirt, and some little white linen; it was then used to wash the coarser 
 things, and even again put in requisition to mop out the room, floor, 
 or stairs. These facts are not confined to the very poor. The most 
 offensive stench to be met with is that which emanates from these 
 filthy suds; and I find that whenever these rooms or stairs are 
 washed it is with this noisome semi-fluid poison*.’* 
 
 Mr. Willis is an apothecary and medical practitioner of 
 Dublin, laudably distinguished by long and enlightened at¬ 
 tention to the habits and wants of the poor. He had been 
 a guardian of the North Dublin Union, and an officer of 
 health for the parish of St. Michan. He came before us, 
 and stated on oath that the state of things described in his 
 book, from which we shall presently make another extract, 
 had become, if possible, worse in all respects. 
 
 “ I am at present, (he said,) going through the city in order to as¬ 
 certain the quantity of destitution, and that statement does not 
 approach to anything like the fact as to the state of the water and 
 the sewerage. I cannot convey in words to you the horrible state of 
 nastiness and destitution that prevail in that parish: except he 
 looked into the interior, a person cannot form an idea of the horrible 
 nasty filth that is in every house; the pipe-water is not in one house 
 in every ten.” 
 
 The answer of the promoters was, that mains were laid 
 down, and that all who chose to pay for pipe-water might 
 have it. But their lowest rate of charge is 5s., to be paid 
 
 * “Facts connected with the social and sanatory condition of the 
 working classes in the city r of Dublin, with tables of sickness, medical 
 attendance, deaths, expenditure of life, &c. &c. By Thomas Willis, 
 F.S.S. Dublin, 1345.” Page 42. 
 
31 
 
 in one sum; to expect the poorest class in any city, much 
 less the degraded class described by Mr. Willis, to save up 
 5s. to pay for water, is preposterous; and in our opinion 
 the Pipe Water Committee should long ago have taken 
 measures to place a plentiful supply within the reach of all, 
 without regard to revenue. 
 
 Mr. Willis states in his evidence that there are many 
 parts of the district of which he spoke without mains, and 
 that thousands of the inhabitants are supplied from a por¬ 
 tion of the Royal Canal, where the water is constantly 
 loaded with impurities. Opinions differed as to the whole¬ 
 someness of the Dublin water, and no satisfactory evidence 
 was given as to its quality. 
 
 The ■present State of the City as to Sewerage , Faring, 
 Sfc .—If the bare existence of evils or abuses were sufficient 
 to justify the granting of the powers demanded, the pro¬ 
 moters of this bill would have comparatively little difficulty 
 in establishing their case. The state of the city is undeni¬ 
 ably very bad as regards many of the more immediate 
 objects of the present inquiry, particularly sewerage, per¬ 
 haps the most important of any ; for large underground ac¬ 
 cumulations of foetid matter may be the cause of disease and 
 death for a long period before attention is attracted to them. 
 It was proved to us by the supervisors that some of the 
 leading streets and squares of Dublin were without any 
 public or effective sewerage whatever, and that the want 
 of sewers was still more felt and more fraught with danger 
 in the streets and lanes inhabited by the lower classes; who 
 more readily submit to the proximity of dirt heaps, foul 
 drains, and cesspools, very seldom take measures for pre¬ 
 venting or mitigating the injurious consequences, and 
 hardly ever adopt habits of strict cleanliness unless the 
 means are placed immediately within their reach. Mr. 
 Willis’s evidence proves that' the Dublin poor form no ex¬ 
 ception to the rule; indeed, his opinion was, that the tone 
 of feeling was so sunk among large classes of them, that they 
 had no longer any wish or taste for cleanliness, nor any 
 
32 
 
 capacity for appreciating the commonest decencies of civil¬ 
 ized life. 
 
 It was stated in evidence that efficient public sewers were 
 wanting in the following streets and squares, or in con¬ 
 siderable portions of them; namely, Westland-row, Bar¬ 
 rack-street, north side of Merrion-square, north and south 
 sides of Fitzwilliam-square, part of Sackville-street, Henry- 
 street, west side of St. Stephen's Green, &c. These were 
 named as examples. 
 
 Michan’s parish was named by many as a striking spe¬ 
 cimen of a poor district suffering from the want of sewerage, 
 as well as of water. Mr. Antisell gave decisive evidence 
 on this point; and the general accuracy of the following 
 statement in Mr. Willis’s book is not disputed:— 
 
 “ The population of this parish is more dense than that of any other 
 parish in Dublin. The following comparative statement shews that 
 it also far exceeds the most crowded localities even in London:— 
 
 Inhabitants. 
 
 Houses. 
 
 Persons 
 to each 
 
 
 
 
 House. 
 
 “ London within the walls . 
 
 54,626 
 
 7,791 
 
 7*oi 
 
 Total, Metropolis. 
 
 1,873,676 
 
 250,908 
 
 7-46 
 
 St. Giles-in-the-Fields and St. George 1 
 
 \ 54,292 
 
 4,959 
 
 4 
 
 Bloomsbury . . . . J 
 
 10*94 
 
 St. Andrew’s Holborn and St. George ^ 
 Martyr, Saffron Hill . . . 
 
 j- 38,790 
 
 3,786 
 
 10*00 
 
 Citv of Dublin. 
 
 323,726 
 
 20,109 
 
 11*57 
 
 St. Luke’s Parish. 
 
 4,808 
 
 331 
 
 14*50 
 
 St. Catherine’s. 
 
 19,871 
 
 1,365 
 
 14*63 
 
 St. Nicholas’s. 
 
 11,955 
 
 863 
 
 13*85 
 
 St. Michan’s. 
 
 22,793 
 
 1,381 
 
 16*51 
 
 “ These 1,381 inhabited houses in St. Michan’s parish are returned 
 in the census of 1841 as 610 first-class houses; 674 houses of second- 
 class ; 90 of third-class; and 7 of the fourth, or lowest class. Al¬ 
 though houses are thus classed, there are very few families having 
 first, second, or even third-class accommodation.” 
 
 “ There are no gentry within the district, and the few professional 
 men, or mercantile traders, whom interest may still compel to keep 
 their offices here, have their residence in some more favoured locali¬ 
 ties. This parish, which within the last thirty years might have 
 boasted of as large a proportion of professional and mercantile wealth 
 as any in the metropolis, is now the refuge of reduced persons from 
 other districts, and very many of the houses then occupied by re- 
 
.33 
 
 spectable traders are now in the possession of a class of men called 
 house jobbers, who re-let them to poor tenants. These jobbers have 
 no interest in the houses save their weekly rents, the houses therefore 
 undergo no repair. The staircases, passages, &c. are all in a state of 
 filth ; the yards in the rear are so many depots of putrid animal and 
 vegetable matter, and if a necessary be in any of them, it is frequently 
 a source of further nuisance. The courts and back places are, if 
 possible, still worse, and are quite unfit for the residence of human 
 beings. They are almost all closed up at each end, and communicate 
 with the street by a long narrow passage, usually the hall of the front 
 house, and not more than three or three-and-a-half feet wide. Pipe 
 water, lime washing, dust-bin, privy, are things almost unknown. 
 The stench and disgusting filth of these places are inconceivable, un¬ 
 less to those whose harrowing duty obliges them to witness such 
 scenes of wretchedness. 
 
 “ In some rooms in these situations it is not an unfrequent occur¬ 
 rence to see above a dozen human beings crowded into a place not 
 fifteen feet square. Within this space the food of these wretched 
 beings, such as it is, must be prepared ; within this space they must 
 eat and drink. Men, women, and children must strip, dress, sleep ; 
 in case of sickness the calls of nature must be relieved, and when 
 death releases the inmates, the corpse must of necessity remain for 
 days within the room. Let it not be supposed that I have selected 
 some solitary spot for this description ; no, I am speaking of an entire 
 district, and state facts incontrovertible. I indulge in no theories as 
 to the causes which produce this state of things, but I may state the 
 results; they are, that every cause that can contribute to generate 
 contagion exists here in full vigour, and that disease in every aggra¬ 
 vated form, with all its train of desolating misery, is rarely absent.” 
 
 We went with Mr. Willis as our guide to the district 
 mentioned in the foregoing extract, inspected a great many 
 of the courts and passages in which the poorest class live, 
 and entered some of the houses. Everything we saw con¬ 
 firmed the literal accuracy of his statements. The want of 
 water, the deficient sewerage, the crowding of families into 
 single rooms of small dimensions, the filth and the conse¬ 
 quent corruption of the atmosphere, have all been truly de¬ 
 scribed by him. The wonder to our minds was, not that 
 disease, with its attendant miseries, was (as he states) rarely 
 absent, but that human beings could prolong life at all in 
 such dwelling-places and under such circumstances. Some 
 of the courts were not paved, and the surface of these was 
 
 c 
 
34 
 
 like that of a damp dunglieap; some of the passages were 
 filthy in the extreme; yet even in these courts and passages 
 the stench (exhaling from the houses) of human bodies 
 crowded together, frequently overcame every other stench, 
 and produced so sickening an effect, that at the end of an 
 hour we were obliged to discontinue the inspection of the 
 interiors for the time. 
 
 In more than one room we saw water in the dirtiest state 
 husbanded for further use; and in passing through the 
 district (between two and three o’clock in the afternoon) 
 we tried three public fountains in succession, and they were 
 dry. A rent is exacted for almost every room in these 
 houses. The occupier of a very small room looking into 
 one of the closest and dirtiest courts, told us that her rent 
 was tenpence a week, and we were informed that this is an 
 average rent for such a room. The wretched inmates, 
 therefore, might be lodged in buildings built on the barrack 
 system, without even an eventual sacrifice of capital. Their 
 present condition is a disgrace to a civilised country, and 
 should be amended at any sacrifice; if not for their sakes, 
 for the sake of the public health, which must be seriously 
 endangered by the existence of such never-failing sources 
 of infection in so populous a district of the city. 
 
 Mr. Willis took the streets as they occurred, and after 
 we had declined entering any more of the houses, shewed 
 us court after court, where all the outward signs of squalid 
 misery were the same. 
 
 The impossibility of acquiring precise information com¬ 
 pels us to be much more general in our descriptions and 
 observations than may be thought desirable. It cannot be 
 difficult, when a map or plan of a system of pipes or drains 
 is once made, to mark down additions or alterations as they 
 occur; yet we found, on calling for plans of the existing 
 sewers (as on calling for plans of the water-pipes), that 
 little or no reliance was to be placed on those produced, 
 many additions and alterations having been marked down, 
 without much regard to accuracy, since we opened our in¬ 
 quiry. As already intimated, the age and bodily infirmities 
 
35 
 
 of one of the supervisors may in part account for the ne¬ 
 glect ; but enough appeared on the maps, imperfect as they 
 were, to shew the want of uniformity as well as of com¬ 
 pleteness in the present system; small and large sewers 
 being often found running parallel to or intersecting each 
 other, without any apparent reason for the difference in 
 size. There exist no means of what is called flushing the 
 sewers of Dublin, the occasional necessity for which is 
 pointed out in the passage quoted from the Report of the 
 Paving Board; and it appeared that many of them had not 
 been cleansed or examined for many years. The Paving 
 Board have power to make sewers at the expense of the 
 owner or occupier, and when the inhabitants of a wealthy 
 locality call for sewers, they are made; but in poorer locali¬ 
 ties, where the repayment of the money expended is a matter 
 of difficulty, the sewers are very seldom made. The Paving 
 Board have no funds to lay out in the first instance. The 
 supervisors said they rarely examined the sewers, unless re¬ 
 quired so to do by the inhabitants; and it seemed their 
 general practice to take for granted that, if anything went 
 wrong, some individual sufferer would call attention to it. 
 In the first place, however, such complaints generally entail 
 the expense and trouble of having their own sewers broken 
 up and altered on the complainants, who are therefore found 
 reluctant to complain; and, in the next place, the resulting 
 evil (as already intimated) may be widely diffused before 
 attention is attracted to the cause. 
 
 So far as can be collected from the very imperfect evi¬ 
 dence laid before us touching all matters of a scientific 
 character, we should say that the City of Dublin affords 
 facilities for a complete and connected system of sewerage, 
 if the River Liffey, or the river level, could be safely made 
 available as the main outlet. At present all the sewerage 
 of the city is discharged into the river, but (from causes 
 described in Mr. Antisefl’s evidence) much of the soil, in¬ 
 stead of being at once carried off into the sea, is deposited 
 on the bed of the river near the sides, and in dry and warm 
 weather is the cause of great annoyance to those who 
 
 c 2 
 
36 
 
 occupy houses on the quays. To obviate this very serious 
 inconvenience, it has been proposed to construct two large 
 closed sewers (one on each side) following the level of the 
 river to the sea or to reservoirs near the sea. 
 
 Schemes of this sort, so far as the essential feature is 
 concerned, have been in contemplation for many years. 
 The chief difficulty seems to be the level; as the fall from 
 the part of the river where the sewerage begins, to the sea 
 (about three miles), is not more than six feet. We had no 
 means of obtaining the information necessary to enable us 
 to give any opinion on the practicability of such a scheme. 
 The city surveyor stated that his attention had been called 
 to it only a few days before our inquiry commenced, and he 
 was not prepared to speak on this or any other scheme for 
 the purpose. The small salary paid to this officer (50/. 
 a year) would hardly justify an expectation that he would 
 devote the necessary time to such schemes unless specially 
 employed. 
 
 The proposed evidence as to the markets being obviously 
 conflicting, it was agreed by the promoters and objectors 
 that these should be inspected by one of the surveying 
 officers (Mr. Brassington), and that our Report on this head 
 should be in accordance with his impressions. His opinion 
 is, that the markets of Dublin, although not so handsome 
 or commodious as many markets newly erected in other 
 cities, are not open to any material objections as regards 
 size, situation, number, or arrangement. 
 
 We have already mentioned the occasionally bad state of 
 the streets in respect of scavenging, and the necessity that 
 still remains (notwithstanding all that has been effected by 
 the Wide Street Commissioners) for widening certain streets 
 and places, not merely with a view to the appearance of the 
 city, but for the sake of health and convenience. 
 
 The complaint made by the promoters of the bill on be¬ 
 half of the inhabitants, that they are too highly taxed in 
 proportion to the benefits enjoyed, strikes us to be well 
 founded; and there can be little doubt that the excess of 
 local taxation is in some measure attributable to the absence 
 
37 
 
 of controlling power in the rate-payers. Nor was it denied 
 in any quarter that both cheapness and efficiency would be 
 promoted by consolidation and combined management. As 
 regards efficiency, we have only to point to the altercations 
 between the Pipe Water Committee and the Paving Board, 
 and suggest the advantages to be derived from vesting the 
 exclusive control of the water supply, the sewerage, and 
 the cleansing of the streets, in one department. As regards 
 cheapness, it is obvious that the expenses of collection and 
 management might be materially reduced by consolidation, 
 though not to the extent anticipated by the promoters. 
 This brings us to the question, how far the hopes held out 
 by the town-council of Dublin, in case the proposed bill 
 should pass, are likely to be realised. To prepare the way 
 for just conclusions on this question, we shall now describe 
 the constitution and character of this body. 
 
 The Corporation of Dublin. —Their proper title is, “ The 
 Bight Honourable the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Bur¬ 
 gesses of Dublin.” The governing power is vested in the 
 town-council, consisting of sixty members, namely, the lord 
 mayor, fifteen aldermen, (the lord mayor being one), and 
 forty-five councillors. The borough is divided into fifteen 
 wards, six on the north, and nine on the south, of the Liffey; 
 each ward returns four members of the council, namely, one 
 alderman and three town councillors. The members of the 
 town-council are elected by the burgesses, i.e ., by 10/. house¬ 
 holders who have paid their rates and taxes within the time 
 mentioned in the Irish Municipal Act (3 Viet. c. 108), to 
 which we beg leave to refer for more detailed and precise 
 information, if required. Accounts of the property of the 
 corporation (inserted in the Appendix) were furnished to us 
 by the town-clerk, and a great deal of explanatory evidence 
 was given by him. Their chief revenues are derived from 
 a borough-rate of 3d. in the pound, the pipe-water rates, 
 and the proceeds of the city estate, the rental of which 
 averages between 14,000Z. and 15,000/. a year. 
 
 The town-council is at present divided into four com- 
 
38 
 
 mittees for the despatch of business; namely, the Pipe-water 
 Committee (already mentioned); the Law and Lease Com¬ 
 mittee, which has the management of the estates; the 
 Finance Committee, and the Mansion-house Committee. 
 Each consists of twenty members, and three form a quorum. 
 Alderman Boyce stated in his evidence, that the attendance 
 of the members has been irregular, and that the business of 
 the Law and Lease Committee, in particular, has been some¬ 
 times injuriously delayed in consequence. The town-clerk 
 admitted the occasional laxity of attendance for the trans¬ 
 action of business, though he denied that any actual injury 
 had been sustained; but the loss of time by persons having 
 to transact business, is in itself an injury and a fair subject 
 of complaint., 
 
 It was an essential part of our duty to ascertain the 
 grounds of opposition to the bill, as well as the relative 
 numbers of persons favourable or unfavourable to it. By 
 way of introduction to what we have ascertained on these 
 points, we shall now (having described the constitution of 
 the competing bodies) shortly sum up the broad general 
 arguments advanced by the promoters and objectors re¬ 
 spectively. 
 
 The promoters contend that all powers of local govern¬ 
 ment and taxation should in all cases be placed under the 
 control of the rate-payers, through their representatives; 
 that the town-council are the representatives of the rate¬ 
 payers of Dublin; but that (with rare exception) all such 
 powers are there vested in boards or authorities constituted 
 in such a manner as to be liable to undue influence and 
 exempt from all responsibility to the parties most interested 
 in controlling them. The consequence (they allege) is, that 
 the powers in question are often misapplied or insufficiently 
 exerted, the public money wasted, and the local burthens 
 needlessly increased: they rely strongly on the advan¬ 
 tages of consolidation; and they assert that there is nothing 
 in the local circumstances of Dublin to affect the general 
 principles of representation and responsibility, or to prevent 
 the corporation from being invested with the same powers 
 
39 
 
 which (they say) have been repeatedly conferred on other 
 corporate bodies similarly constituted. 
 
 The objectors reply that the local circumstances do most 
 materially affect the general principles in this instance; 
 that whatever may be the case with other town-councils or 
 corporations, the town-council of Dublin do not fairly re¬ 
 present the rate-payers; that the influence of the poorer 
 classes has a most undue preponderance in it; that its 
 powers and patronage have hitherto been, and probably will 
 be in future, exclusively employed to favour the dominant 
 party; that it has already given ample and decided evidence 
 of administrative incapacity; and that a body so consti¬ 
 tuted will neither possess the required knowledge, nor be 
 able to devote the required time and attention to the multi¬ 
 farious objects of which it seeks to assume the exclusive 
 management. 
 
 The hasty and intemperate manner in which this bill was 
 pressed forwards, without due preparation or consulting the 
 wishes of the rate-payers, was also strongly urged as indica¬ 
 tive of the manner in which the powers demanded would be 
 used. 
 
 The existing boards deny the charges of mismanagement 
 and inefficiency, and maintain that nothing is wanting 
 but the amendment, extension, and consolidation of their 
 powers. 
 
 It is obvious that the main ground on which the pro¬ 
 moters of the bill rely is cut from under them, if it can be 
 shewn that the town-council do not fairly represent the 
 rate-payers. The following is the chief argument to shew 
 that they do not:— 
 
 “ Dublin is at present divided into fifteen wards, differing im¬ 
 mensely in the property, the extent, and the inhabited houses in¬ 
 cluded in each. In London the wards return members to the common 
 council, ranging in number from two to sixteen, according to the 
 wealth and importance of the ward ; in Dublin, however, each ward 
 returns the same number, without any reference whatever to the 
 wealth, the taxation, or even the inhabited houses. A comparison of 
 some of the wards thus returning the same number of representatives 
 will manifest at once the unreasonableness of this arrangement. 
 
40 
 
 
 
 Inhabited 
 
 Amount of 
 
 
 
 Houses. 
 
 Rating. 
 
 Stephen’s 
 
 - 
 
 - 1,035 
 
 - £79,270 
 
 Andrew’s 
 
 - 
 
 - 1,296 
 
 72,661 
 
 George’s 
 
 - 
 
 - 1,831 
 
 68,696 
 
 £220,627 
 
 Four Courts - 
 
 - 
 
 - 1,301 
 
 - 
 
 - £18,335 
 
 Catherine’s 
 
 - 
 
 919 
 
 - 
 
 18,561 
 
 Paul’s - 
 
 - 
 
 938 
 
 - 
 
 17,933 
 
 £54,892 
 
 “ Thus it will be seen that three wards constitute nearly one-third 
 of the entire assessment of the city, such being under 700,000?.; that 
 any one of those wards exceed considerably in amount of taxation the 
 aggregate of the three we have selected to compare them with. 
 
 “It is impossible to defend the principle upon which these six 
 wards have an equal voice in the municipal council of the city. 
 
 “ This is not, however, the entire of the injustice that has been 
 done to the citizens of Dublin in the division of their city into wards. 
 Commissioners appointed by Government, before the introduction of 
 the Municipal Bill, apportioned Dublin into wards very different in 
 their boundaries from those into which it is now divided. 
 
 “ In the present division, with its fifteen wards, that prepared by 
 the Commissioners of Municipal Boundaries has been, to a great ex¬ 
 tent, departed from. By whom the present division was actually 
 made, has never been disclosed ; but we have the strongest reason to 
 believe that it could be established before a Parliamentary tribunal 
 of inquiry, that the divisions of wards made by the Boundary Com¬ 
 missioners were altered for the express purpose of giving an ascend¬ 
 ancy to one party, and that this alteration was made by persons, and 
 under circumstances, that can leave no doubt of its object, while those 
 who had the conduct of the bill were imposed upon to assent to this 
 unjust alteration. 
 
 “ The most cursory inspection of the map of Dublin, as distributed 
 into wards, must satisfy any impartial person that the present divi¬ 
 sion has not been made with reference to any consideration of local 
 convenience, of relative extent, or of ancient divisions of the town. 
 The present division, if made without some sinister object, is mani¬ 
 festly inconvenient and absurd, including in one ward streets utterly 
 remote from each other, and drawing the boundary lines in the most 
 fanciful and irregular deviation.” 
 
 We copy this, as conveying the objection in the clearest 
 shape, from a printed statement signed and submitted to 
 
41 
 
 the Chief Secretary of Ireland by ten members of the 
 town-council, two of whom (Alderman Butt and Alderman 
 Boyce) adopted it, justified it, and gave additional evidence 
 to the same effect. We refer particularly to the evidence 
 of Alderman Butt, (Queen’s Counsel, and formerly Pro¬ 
 fessor of Political Economy at Trinity College, Dublin), 
 should it be deemed necessary to go further into details, 
 and some useful statistical tables will be found in his evi¬ 
 dence and the Appendix. Attempts were made to vary 
 the proportion; but whichever way the admitted data 
 were presented to us, it appeared that property was not 
 adequately represented; that is, not represented according 
 to the principle and understood intention of the Municipal 
 Corporation Act. The actual inequality of the wards was 
 distinctly admitted by the promoters of the bill; and think¬ 
 ing that we were not called upon to decide with what pecu¬ 
 liar views, if any, this irregularity had been created, we de¬ 
 clined examining an officer of rank who had been employed 
 on the division, and who was called as a witness to silence 
 surmises as to motive, which his character and position are 
 quite sufficient to repel. 
 
 The objectors further argued that representation with a 
 view to political rights, was different from representation 
 with the exclusive view of dealing with property; and it 
 was suggested that, if the representatives of the rate-payers 
 are the only fit persons to be trusted, they should be elected 
 for the express purpose and according to a scale of property 
 qualification, as in the case of poor-law guardians. This is 
 the mode of electing Commissioners of local improvement 
 recommended in the Beport of the Committee of the Health 
 of Towns Association. 
 
 The promoters of the bill having been allowed to give 
 evidence with the view of shewing that the existing boards 
 were, from their constitution, open to indirect influences of 
 one sort, we could not reject evidence tendered with the 
 view of shewing that the town-council was, from its consti¬ 
 tution, open to indirect influence of another, though not less 
 injurious, sort; but we earnestly deprecated the introduction 
 
42 
 
 of topics calculated to produce irritation, and repeatedly- 
 announced that the peculiar object of the inquiry was to 
 collect and sift relevant information which could only be 
 well collected and thoroughly sifted upon the spot. 
 
 The objectors asserted that the town-council were exclu¬ 
 sively influenced by party motives in the exercise of their 
 present power and the distribution of their present patron¬ 
 age. The promoters positively denied this charge; but it 
 was admitted that 50 out of the 60 members of the council 
 were pledged to support a repeal of the union, and, on going 
 through the list of new appointments made by or under the 
 new corporation (containing 43 names), we found that all 
 without exception had been conferred on persons professing 
 the political creed of the majority. 
 
 The mischief of such a system is illustrated by a case 
 mentioned in the evidence of Mr. Long, Mr. Costigin, and 
 Mr. Nevin. It was clearly proved that a pipe-water col¬ 
 lector (one of the 43) had antedated a receipt to prevent a 
 voter of the same party from being disqualified, and that, 
 though the circumstance was made the subject of complaint 
 and discussion in the presence of the treasurer (another of 
 the 43), it was passed over as undeserving of notice, and as 
 in no respect affecting the confidence of the treasurer in the 
 collector. It is to be feared that officers of an inferior 
 class, appointed from political motives, will be always apt 
 to regard such acts as services fairly due to the party which 
 appointed them. 
 
 Other evidence was offered to show the detailed working 
 of this alleged system of partizanship, but we declined in¬ 
 vestigating the merits of a large number of individual cases, 
 and requested the objectors to confine themselves as much 
 as possible to broad definite indications of unfitness. They 
 adduced as such the conduct of the corporation on the two 
 following occasions of disputed right or authority. The 
 essential facts were not denied. 
 
 The act 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 63, gave rise to a question, 
 whether the Lord Mayor of Dublin or the grand jury were 
 entitled to have the custody of the standard weights and 
 
43 
 
 measures, and appoint the inspectors of weights. The mat¬ 
 ter was amicably arranged whilst the old corporation lasted, 
 but so soon as the new corporation came into office, a contest 
 began, which is still in full vigour. In the course of the 
 last year the question came before the Court of Queen’s 
 Bench (Ireland), which decided in favour of the grand jury 
 as regards the custody. Immediately afterwards a placard 
 was issued by the appointees of the Lord Mayor, warning 
 the traders of the city against the appointees of the grand 
 jury, and cautioning them to “be sure to ask for the Lord 
 Mayor’s warrant, and bear in mind that all summonses and 
 complaints in respect to weights and measures must be 
 brought before the Lord Mayor, and no other magistrate.” 
 One of the inspectors who issued this document, stated that 
 it was issued in answer to one by the rival inspectors; that 
 it had been largely circulated, and that copies had been 
 stuck up in the windows of the office at the time of issuing 
 it, and had remained there ever since, but that no notice 
 whatever had been taken of it by the Lord Mayor or the 
 towm council. In fact, it was admitted that no attempt had 
 been made in any quarter to put a stop to a state of things, 
 which has gone far towards rendering the law regarding 
 weights and measures nugatory or positively injurious in the 
 city of Dublin for lour or five years, independently of the 
 scandal such unseemly proceedings must bring on the au¬ 
 thorities.—(See the evidence of C. B. Mosse and E. 
 Dowling.) 
 
 The protection which the public are entitled to expect at 
 the hands of the authorities was alleged to have been in like 
 manner very insufficiently bestowed in another department, 
 in consequence of a difference of an analogous sort. It is 
 the duty of the inspector of markets to stop all bad and 
 fraudulent hay and straw, and either sell it and confiscate 
 the proceeds, or fine the owner and have the hay or straw 
 removed. Under the old corporation the bad hay or straw 
 was sold, and the proceeds were regularly given to the 
 parish officer for the poor. Under the new corporation (as 
 was stated by Mr. Long, a churchwarden of one of the 
 
44 
 
 parishes in which the haymarket is situate), nothing reaches 
 the poor in any shape from this source; and, from his and 
 other evidence, it appeared that the common practice, under 
 the new system, has been for the inspector merely to exact 
 a fine, and that the duty of seeing the fraudulent hay and 
 straw removed has been very irregularly performed. 
 
 It was admitted that the inspector did not account for 
 the fines to any one ; and the only explanation given was, 
 that the weighmasters, who, under the old corporation, used 
 to pay the inspector, had resisted the authority of the new 
 corporation and refused to pay him any longer, and that he 
 was therefore allowed to keep the fines to pay himself and 
 his men. Mr. Long stated that he had called the attention 
 of three Lord Mayors in succession to this state of things, 
 and that one of them had expressed himself much annoyed 
 at it, but said he did not like to remove the inspector because 
 he had been appointed by the preceding Lord Mayor. 
 Down to the time when this evidence was given, nothing 
 had been done towards a correction of the abuse. 
 
 It was alleged that a great deal of public money had 
 been wasted by the town-council in unnecessary and 
 vexatious litigation; and our attention was called to a 
 printed letter (dated January 26th, 1847) from Mr. Gregory, 
 one of the members for the city of Dublin, announcing 
 that he was about to move for (among others) the following 
 Return: 
 
 “ Return of the number of suits in which the corporation have 
 been engaged from the 1st November 184], stating the names of the 
 parties, the cause of action, the ultimate verdict or decision of the 
 Court, and the sum incurred for law or equity costs in each year, to 
 the 31st December, 1846, and what sum has been paid or is still due 
 of said costs.” 
 
 On February 2nd we requested that such a Return might 
 be furnished to us, and the town clerk engaged to furnish 
 it. On February 15th a Return, stating merely the gross 
 amount of the law costs (mixed up with items for stamps) 
 and the gross amount of the taxed costs actually paid, was 
 delivered. On the following day we gave it back to the 
 
45 
 
 town clerk, as not conveying the required information. 
 On the 18th February his attention was again called to 
 this Return, but it was not until the 26th (the day before 
 .this Report was necessarily signed and despatched) that the 
 Return printed in the Appendix was delivered. This Re¬ 
 turn is confessedly incomplete, and requires no comment; 
 but it is clear, even from the printed accounts of the new 
 corporation, that a large proportion of the law costs in 
 question have been occasioned by the manner in which offi¬ 
 cers and servants of the old corporation have been removed, 
 with very little apparent reference to fitness, and without 
 giving them the option of serving for reduced salaries 
 where reduction was required. For example, an ill-con¬ 
 sidered attempt to dismiss Sir John Kingston James from 
 the office of treasurer without equitable compensation, 
 cost them 2 551. 9s. 3d. 
 
 A Report of the Finance Committee of the town-coun¬ 
 cil, dated the 18th April, 1843 (inserted in the Appendix), 
 was laid before us to show that the new corporation had 
 pursued a sound system of economical reform in super¬ 
 seding and pensioning off many of their officers; but the 
 main principle on which they therein justify their proceed¬ 
 ings is unsound; for we cannot think that, in all cases 
 where an old officer is dismissed or pensioned off or a new 
 one appointed at a lower salary, it is sufficient to show 
 that no direct pecuniary loss is incurred, or even that a 
 saving is effected, since this is tacitly assuming that cha¬ 
 racter and experience are of no account. Sir John Kingston 
 James’s successor in the office of treasurer (a man named 
 Finn) ran off to America with a considerable sum belonging 
 to the corporation, and (though the security taken may turn 
 out sufficient) was the cause of considerable embarrassment 
 to them. 
 
 The conduct of the new corporation towards the officers 
 and servants in question is an important feature in the pre¬ 
 sent inquiry, for they demand power to deal with the officers 
 and servants of all the existing boards in the same manner. 
 
46 
 
 and assert that the majority are superfluous, and must be 
 instantly dismissed. 
 
 It is plain that the secretaries of these boards (Mr. Reilly, 
 Mr. Sherrard, and Mr. Darley), would be dismissed among 
 the first; yet they are all active, intelligent men, thoroughly 
 conversant with the business of their respective departments; 
 and, in our opinion, any new system of management must 
 be radically defective which starts by assuming the expe¬ 
 diency of dispensing with their services, or the services of 
 men similarly qualified. 
 
 The credit claimed by the Finance Committee for a judi¬ 
 cious reduction (see Appendix) of the expenses of the bo¬ 
 rough revision, appears to us to be fairly due to the new 
 corporation. We also think it right to state that no case 
 of maladministration from corrupt or improper (other than 
 party) motives was established against them. It struck us, 
 after listening reluctantly to a mass of crimination and re¬ 
 crimination, that the most important objections to which 
 they are fairly open, are precisely those which would lie 
 against any corporate body, representing a popular consti¬ 
 tuency, in a place where political questions of a highly 
 exciting character are unceasingly discussed. The warmth 
 of feeling and spirit of rivalry that have been kindled in 
 the party struggle, are unconsciously carried into other dis¬ 
 cussions ; and it is difficult to help arriving at the conclu¬ 
 sion that the new corporation of Dublin have not yet ac¬ 
 quired those habits of calm investigation, dispassioned judg¬ 
 ment, and conciliatory action, which are most desirable in 
 the possessors of public powers of every kind, and posi¬ 
 tively indispensable to the safe and beneficial exercise of 
 the very large and very peculiar powers to be transferred 
 or created by this bill. 
 
 The manner in which this bill has been brought forward 
 would of itself go far towards justifying a conclusion that 
 bodies so constituted are ill adapted to deal with matters 
 requiring knowledge, temper, comprehensive views, and 
 patient attention. 
 
47 
 
 We need not inform those to whom our Report is ad¬ 
 dressed of the recent advance and present state of know¬ 
 ledge on subjects of local administration, nor of the amount 
 of condensed experience and scientific calculation that have 
 been brought to bear on them. For example, it has been 
 stated, on high authority, (see Health of Town Association 
 Report, page 30), that the expense of complete house drain¬ 
 age and cleansing may be brought down to a rent of 1 d. a 
 week for the lowest class of tenements, and that constant 
 supplies of filtered water may be carried into the lowest 
 class of tenements for another Id. a week. Schemes for 
 the purpose have been suggested in printed reports; and 
 the question in what manner rates should be imposed and 
 levied, so as to distribute the burthen equitably, has been 
 fully discussed by statistical and economical writers of emi¬ 
 nence, particularly by Mr. Chadwick, who, in his “ Report 
 on the Sanatory Condition of the Labouring Population of 
 Great Britain,” has thrown light on every branch of the 
 complex subject of his inquiry. The least, therefore, that 
 could have been expected from the promoters of such a 
 bill was, that they should have ascertained the real diffi¬ 
 culties that lie in the way of the desired improvements, 
 and have made a careful selection among the different 
 methods that might be suggested for encountering them; 
 that they should come prepared with the results of scien¬ 
 tific investigation, as well as with carefully considered esti¬ 
 mates of the probable expense of the improvements they 
 proposed to execute. But no specific plan or matured 
 scheme of any sort was produced or mentioned by the pro¬ 
 moters as their own; they stated that they had not thought 
 it necessary to procure scientific surveys, or consider spe¬ 
 cific schemes, till they had obtained powers to execute them; 
 and in default both of scientific surveys and specific schemes, 
 their estimates of probable expenditure were necessarily of 
 the most vague description. 
 
 This want of preparation maybe regarded as a non-com¬ 
 pliance with the act under which this inquiry was directed, 
 
48 
 
 as well as an indication of unfitness. We therefore stated 
 at an early stage, that, in our opinion, the act was passed 
 for the express purpose of making scientific surveys and 
 regular estimates an indispensable preliminary to legisla¬ 
 tion on subjects of local improvement, and might be deemed 
 a parliamentary declaration that such powers as the town- 
 council required would not be granted till the intended 
 modes of application had been illustrated and explained with 
 sufficient fulness to enable a sound judgment to be passed 
 upon them. As no such interpretation, however, had to 
 our knowledge been officially put upon the act, we did not 
 feel justified in stopping or suspending the inquiry. 
 
 The marks of haste and imperfect knowledge were almost 
 equally discernible in what took place in relation to the 
 rating clauses, though this was the part of the bill on which 
 most time and attention had been professedly bestowed. 
 
 In the first printed draft of the bill delivered to us the 
 principal rating clauses stood thus: 
 
 Sect. 27. “ And be it enacted, that for the purpose of effectually 
 
 sewering and draining such streets and thoroughfares, and for the 
 purpose of paving, lighting, and improving the same, it shall be lawful 
 for the council, and they are hereby empowered, twice in every year, 
 to assess, levy, and apply a rate to be called the sewer, paving, and 
 lighting rate, upon all houses, buildings, tenements, wharfs, quays, 
 and property within the limits of this act, according to the annual 
 value of the same respectively ; and such rate shall be assessed and 
 levied twice in every year after the passing of this act, to be computed 
 from the first day of January and the first day of June in each year, 
 and so as such rate or rates shall not exceed in any one year the sums 
 hereinafter mentioned : that is to say, where the annual value shall 
 not exceed 20/., the sum of Is. 6d. in the pound ; and where the an¬ 
 nual value shall exceed 20/., and shall not exceed 50/., the sum of 2s. 
 6d. in the pound ; and where the annual value shall exceed 50/., and 
 shall not exceed 80/., the sum of 3s. 6d. in the pound ; and where the 
 annual value shall exceed 80/., the sum of 5s. in the pound ; and such 
 rates shall be diminished and varied in the proportions aforesaid ac¬ 
 cording to the sums to be raised, and such rates shall be applied in 
 the manner and subject to the provisions in this act contained.” 
 
 Sect. 249. “ And in order to raise money for the carrying the 
 
 several purposes of this act into execution, be it enacted, that it shall 
 be lawful for the said council, twice in every year, to make a rate to 
 
49 
 
 fee called the general rate, for the purpose of maintaining the Dublin 
 Borough Police, and for securing, raising, and paying any monies, 
 and the interest thereof, which may be borrowed on the security of 
 the police rate, in pursuance of the provisions of this act, and for the 
 purpose of discharging the amount presented for by them, and hated 
 by the Court of Queen’s Bench any Hilary Term as aforesaid ; and 
 for securing, raising, and paying any monies, and the interest thereof, 
 which may be raised on the security of the said presentment rate, in 
 pursuance of the powers of this act; and also for the purpose of de¬ 
 fraying all sums made payable by this act out of such rate, together 
 with the salaries of all officers acting in the execution of this act, un¬ 
 less otherwise provided ; and also all incidental costs, payments, 
 compensations, charges, and expenses attending the execution of the 
 powers, duties, and authorities hereby imposed and given to the said 
 council, and which are not herein otherwise specially provided for : 
 and such general rates shall be made upon the occupiers of all houses, 
 buildings, tenements, quays, wharfs, and other hereditaments within 
 the limits of this act, according to the annual value of the same, so as 
 such rates or assessments do not exceed in any one year the sums 
 hereinafter mentioned; that is to say, where the annual value shall 
 not exceed 20/., the sum of 6d. in the pound ; and where the annual 
 value exceeds 20/., and shall not exceed 50/., the sum of Is. in the 
 pound ; and where the annual value exceeds 50/., and shall not ex¬ 
 ceed 80/., the sum of Is. 6c/. in the pound ; and where the annual 
 value exceeds 80/., the sum of 2s. in the pound ; and that such rates 
 shall be diminished or varied in the proportions aforesaid, according 
 to the sums to be raised.” 
 
 The limited application of sect. 27, and the extended 
 application of sect. 249, are shewn by sect. 248 :— 
 
 “ And be it enacted, that the council of the borough shall have 
 power to water the streets thereof, and shall defray the expenses 
 thereof out of the ‘ general rate ’ hereinafter directed to be raised.” 
 
 A few days before the inquiry opened copies of the pro¬ 
 posed bill were delivered with the following “ clauses pro¬ 
 posed to be added in committee, instead of sections 27 and 
 249 ” 
 
 “ And be it enacted, that for the purpose of effectually sewering 
 and draining such streets and thoroughfares, it shall be lawful for 
 the council, and they are hereby empowered, once in every year, 
 to be computed from the 1st day of January in each year, or 
 oftener if they should think it necessary, to assess, levy, and apply 
 •one or more rate or rates, to be called sewer rates, upon all houses, 
 buildings, tenements, wharfs, quays, and property within the limits 
 
 D 
 
50 
 
 of this act, according to the annual value of the same respectively, so 
 as such rates or assessments shall not exceed in any one year the sum 
 of Is. in the pound; and such rates shall be diminished or varied ac¬ 
 cording to the sum to be raised, and shall be applied in the manner 
 and subject to the same provisions as in this act contained. 
 
 “ And be it enacted, that for the purpose of defraying the costs and 
 expenses of carrying this act and all the powers and provisions there¬ 
 of into execution (save the powers and provisions relating to the 
 drainage and sewerage hereinafter contained), it shall be lawful for 
 the Council, once in every year after the passing of this act, to be 
 computed from the 1st day of January in each year, or oftenerif they 
 should think it necessary, to make one or more rate or rates, assess¬ 
 ment or assessments, to be called the 4 General Rate/ upon the occu¬ 
 piers of all houses, buildings, tenements, quays, wharfs, and other 
 hereditaments within the limits of this act, according to the annual 
 value of the same, so as such rates or assessments shall not exceed 
 in any one year the sums hereinafter mentioned; (that is to say), 
 where the annual value shall not exceed 20/., the sum of Is. 6d. in the 
 pound; and where the annual value exceeds 20/. and shall not exceed 
 80/., the sum of 3s.; and where the annual value exceeds 80/., the sum 
 of 4s. 6d. in the pound; and that such rates shall be diminished or 
 varied in the proportions aforesaid, according to the sum to be raised; 
 and such rates shall be applied in the manner and subject to the pro¬ 
 visions in this act contained : provided always, that no person shall 
 be rated for or in respect of any arable, meadow, pasture, or wood 
 land, or any stable or building used for the purposes of husbandry 
 only.” 
 
 On the 11th February (the 16th day of the inquiry) it 
 was formally announced to us on behalf of the promoters, 
 that the rating clauses were to undergo further change, and 
 that the following Report of the Parliamentary Committee 
 of the town-council contained the modified views of the 
 promoters:— 
 
 44 Report of the Parliamentary Committee on the Dublin Improve¬ 
 ment Bill. 
 
 44 Your Committee having learned that a considerable portion of the 
 rate-payers are opposed to the graduated scale of local taxation pro¬ 
 vided for by the 249th section of your bill, have reconsidered same with 
 a view of adopting a scale for a general rate calculated to afford more 
 satisfaction to all classes of the rate-payers. 
 
 “ After a careful examination of various intelligent persons inti¬ 
 mately acquainted with the house property of this city, your com¬ 
 mittee find that a very large portion of the houses, 13,400 in number, 
 valued from 11. to 20/., are the property of wealthy persons and house 
 
51 
 
 jobbers, who have same let in tenements, or at rack-rents, to poor and 
 industrious persons. 
 
 “Your Committee are therefore unanimously of opinion, that the 
 graduated scale (copied from the Belfast Improvement Act) would 
 not afford much relief to the poor, nor give general satisfaction to the 
 householders of this city. Under all the circumstances your com¬ 
 mittee have deemed it their duty to alter the rating clause, and have 
 substituted a uniform maximum rate of 35. in the pound on the 
 poor-law valuation, to defray the paving, lighting, cleansing, water¬ 
 ing, police, grand jury, and wide-street taxes. The aggregate of those 
 taxes, as at present assessed by irresponsible boards, exceeds the amount 
 above stated; and your committee confidently hope, that when the 
 city is relieved from overpaid and unnecessary officers, the maximum 
 rate for the purposes already stated will not exceed 25. in the pound 
 on the poor-law valuation. 
 
 “ Referring to the very defective state of the sewerage of the city, 
 your committee find that a sum of about 80,000/. is required to 
 complete same; and feeling the necessity of carrying out this im¬ 
 portant work within two years, your committee deemed it advisable 
 to seek the power of levying a sewerage rate of 15 . in the pound, 
 which upon this calculation would have terminated at the expiration 
 of that period. On a reconsideration of this important branch of city 
 improvement, your committee have decided on reducing the sewer¬ 
 age rate from I5. to id. in the pound, thereby spreading the tax over 
 a period of eight years, at the expiration of which period the sewer¬ 
 age tax must cease. Power will be taken in the bill to borrow money 
 at a low rate of interest, on the security of the rate, for the more 
 rapid completion of the sewerage. By this arrangement your com¬ 
 mittee confidently hope to complete the sewerage of the city within 
 two years, and without any severe pressure on the rate-payers. 
 
 “ Referring to the 212th section of the bill, your committee have 
 directed that the power to levy one halfpenny in the pound for the 
 support of a fire-police shall be expunged, and that such expense shall 
 be defrayed by the general rate of 35. in the pound on the poor-law 
 valuation. 
 
 “ Your committee deem it their duty to call the attention of the 
 council to the unceasing efforts of interested and prejudiced parties to 
 defeat the corporation in their efforts to relieve the rate-payers from 
 the present oppressive, extravagant, and insulting mass of local abuses 
 under which they suffer; and your committee have again to state, 
 that under the proposed Dublin Improvement Bill, the general rate 
 to defray the expenses of paving, cleansing, lighting, watering, police, 
 grand jury, and wide street, cannot under any circumstances exceed 
 35. in the pound on the poor-law valuation, and that the sewerage- 
 rate spread over a period of eight years cannot exceed id. in the 
 pound. 
 
“ That the general and sewerage rates can he only assessed once a 
 year; and that parties paying those rates at the general tax-office 
 within three months after assessment will be allowed a discount of 
 five per cent, on the amount paid. 
 
 “ All which I certify and submit as our report, this 9th day of 
 February, 1847. 
 
 (Signed) “ John Reynolds, 
 
 “ Chairman.” 
 
 This document is by no means calculated to restore con¬ 
 fidence. A gentleman who occupied a house valued at 
 120/. a year according to the poor-law valuation, stated that 
 his liabilities for the last year (allowed to be a fair average 
 year) on account of the rates which the town-council pro¬ 
 pose to replace by the general rate, amounted to 17/. 16s. 
 (see the evidence of Mr. John Whitty). According to 
 the graduated scale these liabilities would amount to 27/., 
 and according to the proposed scale, 18/. This is quite 
 irreconcilable with the assertion of the parliamentary com¬ 
 mittee, that the aggregate amount of the taxes in question 
 exceeds the amount above stated (3s. in the pound). 
 
 No evidence was laid before us to justify a confident 
 hope, that “ when the citizens are relieved from overpaid 
 and unnecessary officers, the 2s. in the pound on the poor- 
 law valuation will suffice; ” in other words, that the rate 
 may then be safely reduced one-third; for the assessable 
 value of the city being about 666,000/., a third of the gene¬ 
 ral rate (or Is. in the pound) would be 33,300/. Such 
 statements have evidently been hazarded without even com¬ 
 puting the amount actually paid or payable under any cir¬ 
 cumstances to officers; and, with reference to prospective 
 reductions under the head of salaries, it is to be observed, 
 that the greatest mischief and waste of money might ensue, 
 should the town-council persevere in the system (hitherto 
 pursued in the pipe-water department) of employing officers 
 of an inferior class for duties requiring scientific knowledge 
 as well as experience and integrity. As to the present 
 number of collectors, the number is of little moment so long 
 as they are paid by a fixed per centage, though a collector 
 might be content with a lower per centage if he had a 
 
53 
 
 larger amount to collect from the same rate-payers. No 
 collector is at present paid more than the proposed discount 
 for prompt payment, namely, five per cent. 
 
 The statements in the foregoing report respecting the 
 sewer-rate have also been made without due consideration. 
 A sewer-rate of Is. in the pound for two years would yield 
 but 66,600/., making no allowance for the expenses of col¬ 
 lection, or for unpaid arrears, which would be considerable; 
 for we collect from Sir Drury Dickenson’s evidence, that 
 arrears of pipe-water dues have been remitted in about 600 
 instances per annum, on an average; and a clause (sect. 263), 
 of the proposed bill gives the town-council full power to 
 reduce or remit rates on account of poverty or sickness. 
 The sum that could be raised by a loan on the security of a 
 rate, would of course be considerably less than the aggre¬ 
 gate sum payable under it; and even the rate of 4 d. in the 
 pound for eight years would not meet the exigency, for its 
 immediate value (making no allowance for arrears or ex¬ 
 penses of collection) would not exceed 72,000/.; and no 
 prudent lender would advance 60,000/. on it. 
 
 Again, until the sewers have been carefully examined, 
 plans settled, and estimates made by competent persons, it 
 is impossible to do more than guess what a complete and 
 improved system of sewerage will cost. Mr. Tassie, one of 
 the supervisors, stated that he had found the oval-shaped 
 sewer answer best, but that the original expense was more 
 than double that of the ordinary sewer. If, therefore, it 
 were eventually determined to construct oval-shaped sewers 
 throughout Dublin, this would more than double the re¬ 
 quired outlay; and if it were further determined to con¬ 
 struct two main sewers along the river, an additional 70,000/. 
 might be required. We merely suggest these points to 
 shew how delusive all statements of probable expense must 
 be at present. 
 
 There was no evidence before us to shew that (as stated 
 in the above report) a very large proportion of the houses, 
 13,400 in number, valued from 1/. to 20/., are the property 
 of wealthy persons and house jobbers.” But if by house 
 
54 
 
 jobbers be meant leaseholders or other persons with limited 
 interests, the fact should have been clearly ascertained in 
 the first instance; not merely for the purpose of testing the 
 propriety of the graduated scale, but in order to determine 
 in what manner rates imposed with a view to durable 
 improvements should be distributed. This consideration is 
 strongly pressed by Mr. Chadwick, who says: “In many 
 town districts the great bulk of the house property is owned 
 by lessees; and the lower the description of property, com¬ 
 monly the greater the state of subdivision of complexity of 
 the ownership, and the shorter the terms of interest on which 
 it is held. In Liverpool the expenses of draining, paving, 
 and improving extensive house property, fell (according to 
 the provisions of Lord Normanby’s Bills, upon persons de¬ 
 fined as owners e in receipt of the rents and profits,’) upon 
 lessees who had only four or five years of their leases unex¬ 
 pired; and these charges for imperfect works amounted, in 
 many instances, to a confiscation of their remaining pro¬ 
 perty.” We quote this to illustrate the injustice that may 
 be done by ill-considered legislation; for most of the works 
 that, on a scientific survey, would be found necessary in 
 Dublin, would be works of a durable character for the 
 general improvement of the city. It is therefore a very 
 important question, which has evidently met with little 
 attention from the promoters, over how long a period the 
 expense should be distributed. 
 
 We give the promoters credit for the best intentions 
 when they say, that the general rate cannot under any cir¬ 
 cumstances exceed 35. in the pound, nor the sewerage rate 
 4 d. in the pound. Of course the assigned limit could not 
 in either case be exceeded without a renewed application to 
 Parliament. But it is obvious that, if the required powers 
 are granted and the improvements commenced, it will be 
 no longer possible to stop. Estimates founded on accurate 
 data may, even in the first instance, far exceed the sums 
 named by the promoters; and if the works are ordered 
 without a comprehensive survey, or without proper precau¬ 
 tion, a great deal of money may be uselessly expended, and 
 
55 
 
 the eventual cost indefinitely increased. In such a contin¬ 
 gency additional powers of taxation would be demanded, 
 and could hardly be refused. 
 
 We were told of other corporations, which (it was said) 
 enjoyed powers similar to those claimed for the Corporation 
 of Dublin, but it did not appear whether such powers had 
 been beneficially employed or the contrary. 
 
 So far as the public opinion of a large city can be ascer¬ 
 tained, it appeared to us that a great majority of the rate¬ 
 payers who from intelligence and property were most enti¬ 
 tled to attention on such a subject, were decidedly adverse 
 to the bill, on the ground, principally, that they did not think 
 the town-council fit to be trusted with the powers claimed 
 for them. ( See the evidence of Messrs . Chamberlayne, Brooke , 
 Crosthwaite, Butt, Boyce , Sfc.) 
 
 No evidence was offered on behalf of the promoters to 
 prove that the constituent body agreed with their repre¬ 
 sentatives in the town-council as to the bill. 
 
 It is no part of our duty to suggest measures, and we do 
 not think it advisable to go further into details. One 
 marked effect of the local inquiry was, that all the parties 
 most interested were thereby made aware of the real scope 
 and importance of the proposed enactments; and even the 
 promoters must now be convinced that surveys and calcula¬ 
 tions of a far more systematic and scientific character than 
 any they have set on foot yet, must be instituted, before 
 this bill, or any bill like it, can safely pass into a law. 
 
 A. Hayward. 
 
 Charles P. Brassington. 
 
 Dublin, 27 February , 1847 . 
 
56 
 
 3 
 
 98432658 
 
 LIST 
 
 OF 
 
 DOCUMENTS FORMING THE APPENDIX IN THE 
 PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS. 
 
 1. —Abstract of the Wide Street Acts. 
 
 2. —Return of Receipts and Expenditure of Commissioners of Wide 
 
 Streets, from 1833 to 1845 inclusive. 
 
 3. —Return of Debts due by the Corporation. 
 
 4. —Expenses consequent on the passing of the Acts 3 & 4 Viet, c. 
 
 108 & 109. 
 
 5. —Return of Parliamentary Costs incurred by the Corporation of 
 
 Dublin from November 1841 to 1st January 1847. 
 
 6. —List of Persons appointed by the new Corporation, shewing the 
 
 Name, Office, Salary, Religion, and Politics of each. 
 
 7. —List of Protestant Officers of the present Corporation. 
 
 8. —List of Offices wholly abolished. 
 
 9. —List of Officers removed whose compensation is paid by their 
 
 Successors in office. 
 
 10. —Statement of the Attendance of the Council of the Corporation. 
 
 11. —Statement of the Attendance of the Committees of the Corpor¬ 
 
 ation. 
 
 12. —Return of the Number of Meetings of the Pipe-water committee. 
 
 13. —Summary showing Receipts and Disbursements of Pipe-water 
 
 Department, from November, 1841, to January, 1847. 
 
 14. —Analysis of Property rated to the Relief of the Poor, with a 
 
 proposed Scale of Taxation for local purposes. 
 
 15. —Number of Houses, and Value, in Stephen’s, Andrew’s, and 
 
 George’s Wards. 
 
 16. —Statement of Number of Houses in each Ward rated at 10L 
 
 and upwards, and Number of Representatives each is entitled 
 to return to the Town Council. 
 
 17. —Report of the Finance Committee to the Corporation, dated 18th 
 
 April, 1843. 
 
 18. —Return of Litigated Causes in which the Corporation have been 
 
 engaged; Costs therein, &c. 
 
 19. —Statement submitted to the Chief Secretary of Ireland by cer¬ 
 
 tain Members of the Corporation, dated 8th January, 1847.