View report page

265
[1911
63 to those found in workshops. Nuisances caused by the act or default of occupiers are
usually abated on verbal instruction, the majority of the above notices being served on
owners.
Workplaces notified to Home Office.—In accordance with the requirements of the
Public Health (London) Act (sec. 27), the addresses of 138 workshops (employing 435 females
and 4 male young persons) were forwarded to the Home Office. These were premises whose
occupiers had failed to send notice of occupation to H.M. Inspector of Factories or in which
the abstract of the Factory and Workshop Act was not affixed.
I remain, Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
M. GWYNETH DAVIES,
Sanitary Inspector of Workshops.
The Medical Officer of Health cannot close this part of his report without
expressing his appreciation of the exceedingly good work which both the
female inspectors have accomplished during the year, and of the diligence
with which they have pursued their duties.
INSPECTION OF HOUSES LET IN LODGINGS.
During last year there were 1,022 houses on the lists, which it was the
duty of Inspectors Ward and Hancock to inspect. These premises are
governed by the " Bye-laws relating to houses let in lodgings or occupied by
the members of more than one family," which were adopted by the Council
and approved by the Local Government Board in January, 1911. They were
framed to meet the objections raised against the previous set of by-laws in the
case of Arlidge v. the Islington Borough Council, decided in the High Court,
who declared the old by-laws to be unreasonable because they required the
landlord of a lodging-house to cause the work of cleansing to be done, although
he might not be able to do it without committing a trespass; and they were
also amended at the suggestion of the Local Government Board to meet their
requirements in view of the pending legislation which was then under the
consideration of the Govt rnment, and was afterwards embodied in the
Housing and Town Planning Act, 1909. These by-laws are applicable to all
houses let in the manner mentioned, although in practice in Islington they are
only applied to such houses as require special attention, and to those whose
owners have shown indifference as to the manner in which these properties
were cared for.
In the year under consideration there were 8,217 inspections and subsequent
calls, to see how the owners were executing the work required under
their notices. These inspections and calls were 2,863 less than those made in