Wites 
1828. ] British Sub-ways. 607 
The first of these gentlemen considers that the carting away the accus 
mulation of mud, occasions a very great portion of the defect in our 
pavement. <“ Few are aware,” says he, “ of the source whence, the vast 
quantities of mud are derived, which we see daily taken from the 
streets ; but the truth is, the foundations of our pavements are actually 
carried away as a nuisance ;” and this is, no doubt, in a great measure; 
the cause, but were the mud not carted away, it would be blown away 
on the first day dry enough to convert it into dust. The second gentle- 
man gives a most feeling description of the state of our streets, the truth 
of which must be acknowledged. “ The dust, in dry weather,” says 
Mr. Deykes, “is greatly annoying, and highly injurious to goods and 
furniture, to say nothing of personal feeling and annoyance, in having 
the eyes blinded, and the mouth choked therewith; and no sooner is 
there a wet day, than the streets become ponds of mud. By the time 
the accumulation is almost intolerable, the scavenger commences the an- 
noyance of sweeping, and scooping it into his carts, and splashing and 
bespattering every passer-by, not prudent enough to cross out of his 
way, and be content to be covered over the ankles with mud, rather 
than over neck and ears.” Now nobody can deny the nuisances com- 
plained of in this feeling description, by Mr. Deykes, but we must say a 
word or two in favour of our friends the “mud-larks,” as the scaven- 
gers are facetiously termed, and rescue them from the unmerited blame 
of unskilfulness, of which Mr. Deykes would accuse them ; for, we 
confess, we have often been led to admire the adroitness with which the 
slush and mud is thrown into the carts by these purveyors of cleanliness ; 
and many, as must of necessity, being Londoners, have been the times 
- that we have passed these mud carts, in the midst of the operation, 
although we may have trembled as we have seen the uplifted scoop 
brimful of M‘Adam’s mud, and heard it slush into the vehicle, yet we 
_ never remember to have received a spot of its contents to soil either our 
face or our clothes. No; the scavengers certainly perform this opera- 
tion scientifically, and it is our province to give men’ of science their 
due. That the cleverness with which this operation is performed is the 
effect of practice, and is considered as “ something’ in the science of 
scavenging, may be deduced from the fact of our having once over- 
heard two of these persons discussing the merits of a contemporary— 
when one of them exclaimed, “‘ Why, yes, he’s clever enough, as you 
say—he may do very well for the broom—but, bless ye, hell never do 
for the scoop.” This is a distinction in scientific operation, of which, 
perhaps, our readers in general are not aware. They are, however, per-= 
fectly sensible that scavenging is not the only instance in which men of 
science throw mud at each other, as witness the many learned and scien~ 
tific controversies, in all nations, and in all ages. 
In addition to the efforts of Mr. Telford, and M‘Adam, we have 
“MCarthy’s Patent Pavement”—iron pavement—“ Robertson’s Prac- 
tical Instructions ;” “ Maceroni’s Hints to Paviors ;” and a variety of 
other works and inventions, that prove how widely the nuisance has 
been felt, and how deeply it has been considered, by many who are well 
qualified to advise upon the subject. But we are ourselves convinced 
that the pavement of no metropolis can be certain of good preservation, 
while continually liable to disturbance, occasioned by the repairs of the 
works beneath it; and nothing would prevent this perpetual nuisance,’ 
but the adoption of sub-ways, similar to those proposed by the present’ 
plan. The disturbance of pavement for these purposes alone, annually 
. 
