View report page

97
(London) Act. This the Chief Inspector pointed out to the
Justices was not the case; if there had been existing accommodawhich
was insanitary, the Vestry could proceed for the abatement
of the nuisance under the Public Health (London) Act, but the
question in this case was that no urinal accommodation existed.
The Justices decided to view the premises (although they had
twice previously adopted a similar course upon the Vestry's
representation), and consequently adjourned the renewal of the
licence for this purpose. The renewal of the licences in respect
of the under-mentioned premises were also adjourned in order
that the Justices might view the same.
"The Waterman's Arms," "The Royal Arms," "The
Eagle," "The Prodigal's Return," "The Collingwood Arms,"
whilst the following cases, the "Rose & Crown," "The True
Briton," and the "New Park Tavern," were adjourned in order
that plans might be submitted to them respecting the alterations
which the proprietors of the premises proposed to make.
At this meeting he also submitted report, by direction of
the Health Committee, relative to an application by Mr. Lane to
slaughter cattle at No. 82 Usk Road, that the facts which were
laid before the Licensing Committee of the London County
Council on the 25th October, 1897 (when application to renew
the licence was refused) respecting the premises were reiterated,
and that the Licensing Committee decided not to grant the
licence.
He also reported with reference to the sanitary conveniences
provided in connection with the London Steam Saw Mills, at
which some eighty-six men were employed, that the water-closet
and urinal accommodation were not in a satisfactory condition.
The Committee gave directions for notices to be served, and the
necessary works were subsequently carried out to meet the requirements
of the Public Health (London) Act.
G