View report page

83
reconstruction of the drainage system. In 313 of the 578 drainage
cases the work was carried out voluntarily, the number of instances
in which voluntary complete reconstruction was carried out being
134. The voluntary work was chiefly done in connection with the
larger houses in Hampstead, and in many cases the voluntary
drainage reconstructions were of a very extensive character. The
supervision of work of this kind occupies much of the Inspectors'
time, and it is partly for this reason that it is found impossible to
carry out a systematic house-to-house inspection.
The defective state of the law relating to combined drainage did
not inflict any considerable loss on the Hampstead ratepayers during
the year. Combined drains are of two kinds: either they are
"drains" repairable by the owner of the property, or they are
"sewers" repairable by the ratepayers. But whether a combined
drain is a "drain" or a "sewer" does not depend on any matter of
sanitation, but on a legal technicality that often depends on some purely
accidental circumstance, such as the inaccuracy of a drawing, etc.
The effect of the law is that every year the ratepayers of London are
obliged to provide a large sum—in some districts amounting to a
penny rate—for the repair of drains, which by an extraordinary legal
technicality have become ''sewers." The defects of the existing law
relating to combined drainage have been pointed out again and
again, and it is remarkable that no steps are taken to remedy what is
undoubtedly a gross injustice to London ratepayers. During 1906,
however, only one successful claim was made in Hampstead, and
this was settled by the payment by the Council of £18. Only one
of the combined drainage cases that occurred during the year involved
legal proceedings. The circumstances in this case were so
remarkable that it is worth while to state them in some detail.
In December, 1905, the drains of No. 22, Agincourt Road were
found to be defective. Intimation and Statutory Notices were
served upon the owner, who gave an order to reconstruct the drains
to Mr. R. T., who built the houses in 1893 and who still carries on
business as a builder.
When the work was completed the owner claimed to be
reimbursed the sum of £38, alleging that the drain was a ''sewer,"
f 2