London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Croydon 1914

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Croydon]

This page requires JavaScript

80
Section E— WORK OF SANITARY INSPECTING STAFF.
GENERAL SANITARY WORK.
The usual summary is given in Table IX., which gives a fair
idea of the various matters engaging the attention of the Sanitary
Inspeetors.
Inspections.—During the year 4,185 house-to-house inspections
were made, as compared with 5,239 in 1913.
W ith very few exceptions, the houses from which infectious
diseases were notified, including tuberculosis, were thoroughly
inspeeted and the drains examined. During the year 1,129 such
houses were examined.
Combined drainage.—The number of systems of combined
drainage dealt with as single private drains during the year was
20. This work was carried out under the provisions of the Croydon
Corporation Act, 1905. The cost of carrying out the necessary
works amounted to £235 10s. 3d., and was borne by the
owners instead of by the inhabitants at large.
Horns* drains relaid,—In 159 instances the whole of the house
drains were relaid, and 155 house drains were repaired or partially
relaid
Examination of drains.—142 written applications were
received for the examination of the drains and sanitary
condition of houses by occupiers or intending occupiers.
In all these cases special reports were made by the
district Inspectors, copies of which were forwarded to the appitcants:
Where detects ere found. and in many cases where improvements
were suggested, the work was carried out by the owners
without the necessity of serving sanitary notices.
Notice and Council Order— Most of the nuisances
covered were remedied on receipt of informal notices, bet in 191
cases Council Orders had to he applied for. Of these 191 notices,
and the 132 which ere outstanding at the end of 1913. 291 were
complied leaving 32 outstanding at the end of the year.
Legal Proccedings.—One prosecutions was undertaken for
non-compliance with an ordinary nuisance notice, and defendant
had to pay costs amounting to £1 6s 6d. As the deferent did
not comply with the Court. Order to carry out the work specified
by the notice, he was later fined £5 5s. and ordered to pay 8s. 6d. costs