Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Report for the year 1908 of the Medical Officer of Health
This page requires JavaScript
68
In the year 1907, at the initiative of the St. Pancras Borough
Council, steps were taken by the Metropolitan Borough Councils
to secure an amendment of the law relating to combined drainage
in order to relieve the ratepayers of the heavy burden which the
present admittedly defective state of the law imposes upon them.
Conferences were held at the St. Pancras Town Hall on June
24th, and December 6th, 1907, and a Bill was prepared. On March
5th, 1908, the Bill was introduced into the House of Commons
by Mr. W. H. Dickinson, M.P. for North St. Pancras, and was
read a first time. The Bill was backed by the following
members of Parliament:—Mr. Dickinson, Sir William Bull, Mr.
Bowles, Sir William Collins, Mr. Crooks, Mr. T. Davies, Sir
George Fardel 1, Mr. Claude Hay, Sir Henry Kimber, Earl Percy,
Sir Albert Spicer, and Mr. Waterlow. The Bill is set out in full
below.
METROPOLITAN SEWERS AND DRAINS BILL.
Memorandum.
The object of this Bill is to amend the law relating to combined
drainage.
There are two kinds of combined drain, the "combined drain"
which in law is a "drain," and the "combined drain" which in law
is a "sewer." The former is repairable by the private owner; the
latter by the public authority.
In the opinion of builders, owners, and local authorities,
combined drains were originally constructed as drains, and were
mutually regarded as such until the retrospective case of "Travis
v. Uttley" (1893), the effect of which has been to convert thousands
of drains, which had been privately owned and privately maintained,
into sewers vested in the local authorities, and maintainable at the
expense of the ratepayers.
The state of the law has been described by the Lord Chief
Justice, who said in a recent decision, "It seems to me, as I have
before pointed out, to be essential "that there should be some
"amendment of the law upon this subject. The state of the
"authorities is such that it appears to be impossible either to
"reconcile the various decisions or to deduce from them any logical
"rule."