Some interesting descriptions of some of these "middlemen" were given. One of the largest in Clerkenwell was a Mr. Decimus Ball, and there was also a Mr. Ross--both of whom were on the Vestry. The witness stated that these men had neglected the houses, and in many cases were very extortionate in their demands against the occupants. Mr. Ball had many houses which were inhabited by families in single rooms, but which up to a short time previously were inhabited by whole families to a house. Mr. Ball's profit is "perfectly enormous if he does not do any repairs." And he made very few; and if the rent were not paid on the Monday morning, he threatened to raise it. Probably the most notorious "middleman" was a certain Mr. Flight. "He must have been the owner of thousands and thousands of houses in the metropolis." (18,000, it was said.) "He owned property in every part of London, and the squalid nature of that property, the wretched condition in which it has been kept, the avoidance of all decent rules by which habitations are governed, was something very fearful." "Middlemen," it was stated, sometimes appeared to be making 150 per cent. per annum, but they assert that repairs have to come out of that. Repairs, however, were only executed once in three or four years, and in the others they get their 150 per cent. "If the house-farmers do no repairs for years the profits are large.... They collect their rents very sharply. "The middleman makes the tenant pay an excessive rent because he insists upon making an excessive profit." The great work which the Commission did was in the enlightenment of the public, and the material they afforded for the formation of public opinion in the right direction. Subsequent experience showed that the recommendations made--excellent and helpful as so many of them were--did not by a long way cut deep enough to extirpate the more serious evils. "It is evident," wrote the Commissioners, "that the 35th Section of the Sanitary Act of 1866 (dealing with tenement-houses) which contains a remedy for some of the evils which have been described is likely to remain a dead letter in many districts of the metropolis until some improved means be devised for putting it into action." They recommended that the local authorities who had not already made and enforced bye-laws under the section "should proceed to do so." But no compulsion was suggested to make them do so, or for the only effective alternative, the provision of other machinery to act in their default, and so the local authorities were in this matter allowed to remain in their position of complete independence and to continue their policy of inactivity--if not obstruction. As to inspection, and the inadequacy of a sanitary staff, much evidence had been given, but, they remarked:--