The explanation of this general inaction was the simple and obvious one that on those bodies there were many whose interests ran counter to the adoption of the Act, and what its adoption entailed; the sanitary obligations, the annual lime-washings, &c., would entail expense; they were not going to inflict the cost upon themselves or upon their friends if they could avoid doing so. And as they could avoid it, the great bulk of the local authorities deliberately ignored the remedy devised by Parliament, and with most reprehensible callousness let the evils go on and increase. But while they remained inactive, death and disease did not. Progress in sanitation was retarded also somewhat by other circumstances. The Medical Officers of Health were under no obligation to reside in their district, and were at liberty to take private practice, and so the whole of their time was not given to their public duty.[156] But furthermore, they were in a state of dependence on their employers, which naturally would often prevent their reporting fully upon sanitary matters, though, happily, there appear to have been few who were influenced by this consideration. And some of the Vestries and District Boards did not hesitate to put pressure upon their Medical Officers to prevent energy on their part. It was stated in evidence before the Select Committee in 1882 that a Medical Officer would very soon "bring a hornet's nest round his ears if he attempted to do his duty strictly and independently." Lord Shaftesbury declared, in 1884,[157] that he was quite certain that-- "They would never have the laws of health properly given effect to, until they asserted the independence of the Health Officers." Nor were the Sanitary Inspectors as efficient as they might have been, though there had been a great improvement in the class of man appointed. The Chief Sanitary Inspector for Clerkenwell[158] reported:-- "The two men (in Clerkenwell) are not very active. It is the greatest trouble I have to get the men to do their duty." "The Sanitary Inspectors have not always shown as much zeal and interest as they might have done, but lately they have improved.... It is openly talked about in a good many districts in London that a system of bribing goes on."[159] But those who were energetic were also discouraged by the same pressure which damped some of the energies of the Medical Officers of Health. The Medical Officer of Health for Fulham wrote, in 1884:-- "So many are the vested interests that Sanitary Officers are obliged in the performance of their duty to interfere with, that they must be prepared to meet with injustice and opposition in almost all directions. It is not at all surprising that the dwellings of the poor in London should be in an insanitary condition seeing the great obstacles public sanitary officers have in the performance of their duties."