View report page

146 Annual Report of the London County Council, 1914.
The appeal of the Council, against the magistrate's decision in the proceedings against the keeper
of certain premises in Crescent-street, Kensington, for keeping common lodging houses without a
licence, referred to in last year's report,* came on for hearing during the year. As a result the appeal
was dismissed.
Seamen's
lodging
houses,
During the year 35 licences to keep seamen's lodging-houses were granted in respect of 34 premises.
Legal proceedings were instituted against one person for keeping an unlicensed seamen's lodginghouse.
A conviction followed, and a fine of £50, with £l 3s. costs, was imposed. Legal proceedings
were also instituted against three licensed seamen's lodging house keepers for infringements of the
by-laws, and fines amounting to £6, with £2 10s. costs, were imposed.
Slaughterhouses,
cowhouses
and
knackers'
yards.
The numbers of slaughterhouses, cowhouses and knackers yards licensed during the year were
211 slaughterhouses, 163 cowhouses, and 4 knackers' yards, the actual number of licences issued being
213, 164 and 4 respectively.
Complaints.
Various complaints were made to the Council under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, as
to insanitary conditions or failures in sanitary administration. The practice adopted is, in the case of
signed complaints, to forward the complaint to the sanitary authority, and to take no further action
unless the complainant appeals again to the Council. In the case of anonymous complaints the purport
of the complaint is sent to the medical officer of the district, and, unless an intimation is received that
action has been taken, an inspection is subsequently made, and, if then found necessary, a further
communication is sent to the sanitarv authority concerned.
Offensive
businesses.
In pursuance of the authority conferred upon the Council by section 19 of the Public Health
(London) Act, 1891, the transfer of certain tripe-boiling premises in Pleasant-grove, Islington, to new
occupiers was sanctioned, and the register of offensive businesses was amended accordingly.
The Council on 3rd March, 1914, decided to institute legal proceedings against the Bermondsey
Metropolitan Borough Council for the recovery of such of the expenses incurred in the prosecution of
Freeland and Smiths, Limited, for establishing anew the business of a manure manufacturer at certain
railway arches in Almond-road, Bermondsey, as had not been recovered from the company, the Council
contending that it had taken action in default of the borough council. The summons came on for
hearing at the Tower-bridge police court on 10th June, 1914, when the defendants admitted the facts,
but contested the point that they were the authority under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, to
enforce the provisions of section 19 of the Act. The magistrate after reserving his decision delivered
judgment dismissing the summons with £10 10s. costs, but agreed to state a case for the opinion of the
High Court. As the question was of considerable importance, determining as it would whether it was the
duty of the Council or the metropolitan borough council to enforce the provisions as to the establishment
anew of offensive businesses in London, the Council gave authority for the necessary steps to be taken
to appeal to the High Court. The appeal had not been decided at the close of the year under review.
Businesses
of fish curer
and fried-fish
vendor.
By-laws relating to the businesses of a fried fish vendor and fish curer, respectively, made by the
Council in 1913 under the powers conferred by Section 9 of the London County Council (General Powers)
Act, 1908, received the approval of the Home Office on 24th March, 1914, and of the Local Government
Board on 28th February, 1914, and are now, therefore, in force. With regard to the by-laws made
by the Council on the same date with regard to the business of rag and bone dealer, certain points were
raised by the Local Government Board which were still under consideration at the close of the year.
Maternity
and infant
welfare.
The Local Government Board on 30th July, 1914, issued a circular addressed to county councils
and sanitary authorities in which attention was directed to the desirability of schemes being formulated
with the view of securing improved conditions in respect of maternity and infant welfare. The Board
stated that an estimate had been laid before Parliament for a grant to be distributed by the Board in
aid of expenditure incurred by local authorities and voluntary agencies under such schemes. These
grants would normally amount to one-half of the approved expenditure and the first would be in aid
of expenditure incurred in the half-year ended 30th September, 1914.
The Board at a later date directed attention to the fact that health visitors would be employed
in connection with this maternity and infant welfare work, and the question was raised whether the
portion of the salaries of such officers which would not be borne by the funds of local sanitary authorities
in London should be met out of the Local Government Board's grant referred to above, or should be
paid by the Council under the powers conferred upon it by section 6 of the London County Council
(General Powers) Act, 1908. Sub-section 3 of the above-mentioned section empowers the Council
to pay out of the county fund and charge to the Exchequer Contribution Account contributions
towards the salaries of health visitors, not exceeding in the case of any such person one-half of her
salary. Grants amounting to £111 were paid under this authority out of the exchequer contributions
for the year 1909-10, and £1,328 out of those for 1913-14. No grants were paid in the intervening
years, as in those years the exchequer contributions were insufficient to meet the grants under the Local
Government Act, 1888, which, the Council is advised, take priority of the voluntary grants under the Act
of 1908. The Council, while of opinion that the appointment by London local sanitary authorities of
health visitors should be encouraged, realised that under the conditions obtaining these authorities
were, for the reasons stated above, always in doubt whether a contribution towards the salaries of these
officers would be paid by the Council, and, in these circumstances, came to the conclusion that contribtions
towards the salaries of health visitors employed under schemes referred to in the Local Government
Board's circular should be paid regularly out of national funds, rather than intermittently by
the Council. This, decision does not, however, affect claims for contributions from the Council in
respect of the salaries of health visitors for duties other than those included in the above-mentioned
schemes.
* Annual Report of the London County Council, 1913. Vol. III, p. 228.