View report page

119
far in the construction he had put on by-law 21, but his Lordship did not
need to criticize that particular view. If by-law 17 had in terms said that
in the case of old houses when a broken trap was repaired a certain system
of ventilation must be put in, that might be a perfectly good by-law. He
saw no reason why it should not. By-law 21 applied these by-laws to old
buildings, and must be read most strongly against the person who was
doing the work. Was it right to say that the work contemplated by that
by-law must be the construction of a water-closet under by-law 17?
That was going too far. But if the local authority meant to say that
putting in a new trap was the construction of a water-closet, or that the
doing of repairs which had been rendered necessary by some part of the
closet being broken when some other work was being done, brought
by-law 17 into operation, they ought to have said so in plain words.
By-law 21 did not inform a person that if he required a trap or pan he
was constructing a water-closet. Notwithstanding the difficulties arising
in this case, he had come to the conclusion that the by-law was not
sufficient to make that which was done the constructing of a water-closet
within by-law 17, and these penalties ought not to be enforced. He did
not agree that by-law 21 was ultra vires, but the local authority had not
brought within it what was done in this case.
The other learned Judges delivered judgment to the same effect, and
the appeal was accordingly allowed.
CLANDON STREET AREA.
The following article appeared in The Times of February 29th, 1904.
The Ecclesiastical Commission and the Housing of the Pook.
The annual report of the Ecclesiastical Commission, which has been
presented to the two Houses of Parliament, and of which the main
financial portions were described in The Times of Saturday, contains an
appendix dealing with a question of high concern to the community and
involving great credit to the Commissioners, who, from the Primate
downwards, have hown the greatest interest in the proposals it involves.
Such credit comes to them at a time when they seem to stand in need of it.
Nobody with equally enormous territorial and financial responsibilities can
expect to escape criticism; but certainly the management of Church
estates has recently come in for quite its share of denunciation. The
falling in of some leases of old houses behind the Abbey led to a rising of
the antiquaries and to a reply from the Commission that it was bound to
dispose of its property to the best advantage. At the recent sittings of