View report page

45
other Boards to superintend works, omitted to do so, but I do say
that they were far too few in number to properly superintend the
drainage works that were laid down in such profusion in all parts of their
districts. London has grown in leaps and bounds in the present
century, and has extended itself with marvellous rapidity, and public
bodies did not keep corresponding pace with its needs. Perhaps too
much blame should not be attached to them for this, because after all
the sanitary requirements of communities were not so well understood
a few years ago as they are now. Nevertheless, this fact remains that
not a few of the London districts lag a long distance behind many of
the large provincial towns in matters of sanitation.
But since the passing of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891,
there has been a steady forward movement in the Metropolis, and
possibly nowhere more than in Islington, where sanitation is so active,
that one now constantly hears of the persecution of the ״poor property
owner." That owner who for long years had everything his own way,
and who did as little as he could to make things healthy for his tenants,
knowing well that there were plenty of persons ready to occupy any
or every house. Property has rights, but so has flesh and blood; and if
it be right that property should be protected from unnecessary
exactions, it is surely righteous that the health and lives of human
beings should be safe-guarded in every way. Insanitary property
owners have had their day. But a new régime is in power now, and, as
a consequence, we find speculating builders and interested parties
banding themselves together, and even forcing one Local Authority to
actually appeal to the Local Government Board to rescind one of the
most important by-laws* ever framed for the purpose of preventing the
entrance of sewer gas into houses. And this same Board even
endeavour to make their Medical Adviser eat his own words because
he condemns their action in a report, which fortunately has found its
way into the higher official world, and into the hands of the public.
And why was this done? Solely because it was stated that the
additional cost could not be borne by the property owner. The
* Respecting the construction of intercepting traps.