View report page

188
watercloset not being of a solid and satisfactory character. The words
of the Bye-law governing this matter are:—" He shall construct
" such water-closet so that on any side on which it would abut on a
" room intended for human habitation, or used for the manufacture,
" preparation or storage of food for man, or used as a factory,
" workshop or workplace, it shall be enclosed by a solid wall or
" partition of brick or other materials extending the entire height
" from the floor to the ceiling." The Owners received notice from
me to the effect that the partition was unsuitable, but they took 110
steps to comply with the requirements of the Bye-law ; therefore in
due course a statutory notice was served upon Messrs. Chambers &
Sons, Ltd. The Sanitary Authority is the judge of what interpretation
shall be placed on section 38 (1), as will be seen by reading
section 38, sub-section 2, which is as follows:—"Where it appears
" to a Sanitary Authority that this section (38 (1) ) is not complied
" with in the case of any factory, workshop or workplace, the Sanitary
" Authority shall, by notice served on the owner or occupier of such
" factory, workshop or workplace, require him to make the altera"
tions and additions necessary to secure such compliance, and if
" the person served with such notice fails to comply therewith he
" shall be liable to a fine not exceeding £20." But in cases where
the unsuitabiltty of the water-closet is owing to some infringement
of the London County Council Bye-laws, the London
County Council may allow an appeal to be made to an Arbitration
Committee of its own. as is clear from section 41 (3):—
" Any person who thinks himself aggrieved by any notice or
" act of a Sanitary Authority under this section in relation to any
" water-closet, earth-closet, privy, ashpit or cesspool may appeal to
" the County Council, whose decision shall be final." But in all
cases taken out under Section 38 of the Public Health (London)
Act, 1891, the Sanitary Authority has the power and right of saying
whether or not the construction of the water-closet is suitable.
Whichever way, therefore, the matter be viewed, it is evident that if
Messrs. Chambers or their builder had constructed a partition which
did not meet with the approval of the Sanitary Authority—in this
instance the Finsbury Borough Council—the matter could be
settled either by the Sanitary Authority, Section 41 (3), or an
appeal to the London County Council, Section 41 (3).