The poor and the ignorant did not know “the extent of their misfortune;”
or if they did, the majority “did not seem to grumble at their lot, or to
think it hard.” If a voice of complaint was occasionally heard, the
generous landlord said, “it came from an ill-conditioned, discontented
wretch, whom it was useless to attempt to satisfy; and the sooner he left
the parish, the better.” Cries, indeed, from the feeble and the timid
went up to heaven for redress, and heaven alone was left to answer them.
The ground-landlords, at length, seeing the cottages had served their
turn, made an attempt to remove this evil, by clearing them away; and
many a bitter curse was uttered by those who were evicted; for in the
simplicity of their dealings they had made no legal provision for
compensation for capital invested; and, although some compensation was
granted by the Great Western Railway Company to the small tenants they
displaced, yet the ground-landlords did not follow their example; and
down to the present time, no dream of comfortable and healthful lodgings
for the poor on their estate, has even entered their heads; no, not even
the idea of a “Thanksgiving Building,” so far as we know by any sign that
has been given.
Another source of disease and death was to be found on the banks of the
Paddington canal, which was opened with so much _éclat_, on the 10th of
July, 1801. No less than 20,000 people came to Paddington, to hurrah the
mighty men who so altered the aspect of this quiet village; and who, in
doing so, offered to the Londoner a new mode of transit for his goods.
Unfortunately, for the people of Paddington, on the banks of this canal
were stowed many other commodities than “dry goods.” Not only the dust
and ashes, but the filth of half London were brought to “that stinking
Paddington,” (as it was now called,) for convenience of removal. The
time of removal was made to suit the convenience of those who traded in
these contaminating materials; but the living sensitive nerves and active
blood corpuscules of the people who dwelt near its banks, were not
considered. And so, instead of having no doctor in the parish, as was
the case within the memory of many now living in it, both doctor and
sexton found full employ.
That this is no over-drawn picture of the condition of Paddington for the
first quarter of the present century, there is plenty of evidence to
prove.
The disbursements of churchwardens and overseers, in 1793, two years
before the passing of the Bishop’s Building Act, amounted to £402 6_s._
11_d._; but the overseer’s account alone, in 1815, amounted to £3,375
12_s._ 4_d._ And although there were more to pay the rates, still, even
at the later date, many of the cottages were not rated at all; and the
greatest difficulty was experienced in squeezing out of the hard earnings
of the poor men who occupied them, the small pittance (to them a great
sum,) which was at length obtained, towards defraying these serious local
charges.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account