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

View report page

Kensington 1893

The annual report on the health, sanitary condition, &c., &c., of the Parish of St. Mary Abbotts, Kensington for the year 1893

This page requires JavaScript

204
Royal Crescent Mews.—In October I represented to
the Sanitary Committee, under the provisions of the Housing
of the Working Classes Act, that sixteen dwelling houses in
Royal Crescent Mews were "in a state so dangerous or
injurious to health as to be unfit for human habitation." The
Sanitary Committee having inspected the said houses, and
concurring in my opinion, proceedings were instituted to
secure the closing of the houses as the Act directs. On
two occasions the proceedings were vitiated, by objections
having been taken on account of merely formal and technical
defects in the terms of the summonses, the defendant at the
same time protesting, through his solicitor, that he had a
perfect defence on the merits; and on the first occasion he
had provided himself with a Medical Officer of Health, in
support of his case. Meanwhile, the defendant's Surveyor,
recognizing the badness of the case, and the practical hopelessness
of a defence on the merits, had proposed to the
Committee to close the houses voluntarily, and to carry out
whatever works the Committee might deem to be necessary to
place the houses in a proper state of repair, so as to be fit for
human habitation. I ventured to advise that no other course
than that for compulsory closure by Justice's Order, would be
satisfactory, seeing that the houses when thus closed, could
not be re-opened without a rescinding order, on completion of
the repairs to the satisfaction of the Committee. The Committee
decided to adopt this course, and their decision having
been communicated to the defendant, he at once agreed to
closing orders being obtained, and they were obtained, subject
to a condition to which the Committee would have consented
from the first, viz., that the houses should be closed in four
successive groups of four each. At the present writing eight
of the houses have been so farrenovated as to justify an application
for a rescinding order. It is a question however, whether
it would not have been to the advantage of the owner, had we
applied for a demolition order for each of the sixteen houses.