Flue Epidemic

The Chimney Sweep has assumed a nostalgic and also a romantic character with associations to wedding traditions and such depictions as Dick Van Dyke in the Mary Poppins Disneyfication. 

The role still exists today and remains in demand from those looking to maintain or restore an old chimney breast fireplace and flue to a safe and functional condition. 

In the past centuries the Chimney Sweep was an important contractor bearing in mind that the multitude of properties, residential, commercial and industrial relied upon coal fires. 

If you think about even a small terraced house there remained a reliance and dependence on an open hearth for background heating, cooking, hot water supply and laundry. A two-up and two-down dwelling would normally have a chimney breast in each habitable room and so extrapolated through densely populated towns and cities in particular made for a very steady level of business for the Chimney Sweep. 

There were machines and apparatus available for cleaning and repairing a flue but Sweeps felt that they would lose business as it was still the opinion of householders that a more satisfactory the job done by small children. The customer was evidently to be pleased and so physical coercion of youngsters to climb up the often tortuous and poorly built flue chambers was perpetuated. 

The 1862 Kingsley Classic of "The Water Babies" has at its core the experiences and salvation of just such a small child engaged in this hazardous, unhealthy and exploitative practice. 

Up to a UK Parliamentary Act in 1788 it had been permissible for an under 8 child to ascend a flue.

This was repealed and changed to a minimum age of 10 in 1834 and by the Chimney Sweeps Regulation Act in 1840 only those over the age of 21 could work in such an environment. 

That is not to say that illegal child labour was not taking place as only the slightest, skinny and by definition under nourished of juveniles could fit into what was a very unstandardised sizing of flue chambers and thereby keep the Sweepers' Businesses in operation. 

In 1852, in my home town of Kingston Upon Hull there arose a Legal Case in the Police Court against a John Ward who was described as a "Chimney Doctor". 

It was announced in the local media as one of the first transgressions of the Act within Hull. 

Ironically Ward had been a prominent upholder of the Legislation in his crusade to clamp down on unscrupulous contractors who were encroaching on his livelihood and income. 

On one May evening in that year Ward was alleged to have accosted on the street the diminuitive and skinny youth, Thomas Nestor who was then 17 years old with the offer of a Chimney Sweeping job on the following day. 

A Mrs Atkinson of 40 King Street, which was adjacent to Holy Trinity Church, Hull had given Ward the commission to solve the problem of a badly smoking chimney which served her kitchen. 

As a self professed Doctor of Chimneys the entrepreneurial Ward had diagnosed the issue causing the unpleasant back draught as an accumulation of mortar and rubbish in the brick lined flue. 

The young Nestor duly attended as agreed with the homeowner, ascended the chimney and dislodged the offending debris. 

Mrs Atkinson expressed her satisfaction with the job. 

Thomas Nestor claimed later that he never got paid for his labours. 

The transgression of the 1840 Act, specifically sub-section 3 was the reason for Ward being brought before the Court, that being the age restriction of 21 years for undertaking such work. 

The principal witness, Mrs Atkinson was not able to identify the lad who had gone up the chimney. That could have been down to a number of factors such as her not taking any notice whatsoever in who had turned up, the inherent snobbery between householders and tradespersons, that Nestor was in no way capable of being differentiated from other 17 year old youths or simply that having done a good job up the chimney he had been blackened by soot and debris so as to conceal any actual character features.

Ward also put up a strong defence through his Legal representative as he will have been fearful for his reputation and liberty in the Action. It was claimed on his behalf that the job of ascending the chimney had been delegated to Nestor's Master and that it had been that person and not Ward who had sent the lad to the address. 

In the light of the poor evidence at the disposal of the Prosecuting Authority the Court had no other option but to dismiss the Case. 

It was not until 1875 that the inhumane practice of child labour in chimneys was curtailed.