View report page

122
Statement of Case.
"The appellant was summoned before me sitting at the Guildhall Justice Room
in the City on the said 3rd June, 1902, to answer an information laid by the
respondent, the Sanitary Inspector appointed by the Sanitary Authority of the
said City, in respect of the following offence, namely, for that he the appellant
on the 9th day of May, 1902, in the said City, at No. 13, Shaftesbury Place,
Aldersgate Street, E.C., being a house let in lodgings or occupied by members
of more than one family, did knowingly cause or suffer a greater number of
persons than would admit of the provision of air space required for each to
occupy at one time, as a sleeping apartment, a room used exclusively for that
purpose contrary to the third By-law made by the Sanitary Authority of the
said City, and contrary to the Statute. The By-law in question is as follows:—
The landlord of a lodging house or a lodger therein shall not knowingly cause
or suffer a greater number of persons than will admit of the provision of 350
cubic feet of free air space for each person of an age exceeding 10 years, and
of 175 cubic feet of free air space for each person of an age not exceeding
10 years, to occupy at any one time as a sleeping apartment a room which is
used exclusively for that purpose and which is under the control of such
landlord, or which has been let to or is occupied by such lodger respectively, as
the case may be. A copy of the said By-laws is hereto annexed, numbered 1.
On the hearing of the said summons the following facts were proved:—(a)
No. 13, Shaftesbury Place is an ordinary six-roomed house, and was not
specially constructed to be let in separate tenements. It was rated as one
hereditament. It consists of three floors and a basement. It has one common
internal staircase and one common front door, which door is always kept open.
On each floor there are two rooms, and each floor is separately let to and
occupied by a separate family. The ground and first floors have each one door
opening on to the staircase. The top floor has a door from each room opening
on to the staircase. There is no separate washing or sanitary accommodation
for the different floors, but in the basement there is a scullery and washhouse,
and in the yard there is a tap and a w.c., all of which are used in common by
the tenants of the different floors. A plan of the premises in question is annexed
hereto and marked No. 2. (b) The appellant is the landlord of the said premises
and lets the different floors therein to different families, all of whom are ordinary
weekly tenants and pay rents of from 5s. to 5s. 6d. per week. (c) The first
floor was let to one Cornelius Edward Liddington at 5s. 6d. per week and was
occupied by him, his wife, his son aged 11, and his three daughters, each under
10 years old. (d) The appellant does not reside on the premises, nor has he
any representative there. He attended every week to collect the rents, but
beyond that there was no evidence of control over the tenants. He knew the
number of people who were sleeping in the back room in question, but until
after the date of the alleged offence he took no steps to alter the condition
of things by giving the tenant notice to quit or otherwise. It was contended
on behalf of the appellant that the said house was not a lodging house within
the meaning of the said By-laws, and in support of that contention the case of
Weatheritt v. Cantlay (1901), 2 King's Bench, 285, was cited. I, however,
decided that the said house was a lodging house within the meaning of the said
By-laws, and that the appellant being the landlord thereof had knowingly
caused and suffered a greater number of persons than would admit of the
provision of air space required for each to occupy at one time as a sleeping
apartment a room, to wit, the said back room on the first floor used exclusively