View report page

143
In connection with the inquiry by the Special Committee,
dealt with in the next paragraph, as to the causes of the high
rate of mortality in the "Notting Dale" Special Area, an
application was made to the County Council to define the
meaning of the term "Common Lodging-house," to which a
reply was received, in October, from the Council to the
following effect:—
"The Council is advised that in order to bring a house within
the operation of the Common Lodging-Houses Acts, 1851 and 1853,
it is essential that the following facts should exist: —
1. The house must be kept by somebody for the purpose of
gain.
2. It must be open for the reception of all comers as lodgers.
3. The persons resorting to the house must be of such a class
as, if left to themselves, would either be unwilling or
unable to secure cleanliness and prevent overcrowding.
4. Some one room or rooms in the house must be used in
common by all the lodgers.
"A large variety of circumstances might arise in any particular
case which might come before the Council, but it is safe to say
that if in any case one of the four facts above mentioned were
absent, it would be a doubtful question whether the house could be
regarded as a common lodging house within the meaning and
intention of the statutes, and such a case would need special and
particular consideration.
''This opinion has been come to after a careful study of the
decisions in the following cases:—
Booth v. Ferrett.—Decision by Lord Chief Justice Coleridge
and Mr. Justice Mathew.
Langdon v. Broadbent.—Decision by Mr. Justice Grove and
Mr. Justice Lindley."
It is manifest that the houses in the "Notting Dale"
special area cannot, under the provisions of the existing law,
be dealt with as Common Lodging Houses, excepting in so far
as they may be registered as such by the Council upon the
application of the owners—a fact which the Special Committee
fully recognize in their report.