View report page

61
that this increase was more apparent than real, inasmuch as before the passing of the Public Health
(London) Act, 1891, the police were concerned in the abatement of smoke nuisances, and 48 constables
were, before 1891, engaged in this duty, 25 of whom were wholly occupied in connection with it and
the remaining 23 partially. Moreover, in the interval between the two returns, a further increase in
the work devolving upon sanitary authorities was brought about by the passing of the Infectious Diseases
(Notification) Act, the Housing of the Working Classes Act, the Public Health (London) Act, and the
Factory and Workshop Act.
By-laws.
Under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, the duty devolved upon the Council of making
by-laws in respect to the following subjects which were not before subject to by-law.
Under section 16 (2). For prescribing the times for the removal or carriage by road or water
of any faecal or offensive or noxious matter or liquid in or through London, and providing that the
carriage or vessel used therefor, shall be properly constructed and covered so as to prevent the escape
of any such matter or liquid, and as to prevent any nuisance arising therefrom.
Under section 39 (1). With respect to water-closets, earth-closets, privies, ashpits, cesspools,
and receptacles for dung, and the proper accessories thereof in connection with buildings, whether
constructed before or after the passing of this Act.
By-laws were accordingly, after due inquiry, made by the Council, and were confirmed by the
Local Government Board on the 28th of June, 1893. (For By-laws, see Appendix III.)
Special Inquiries.
Rotherhithe.—During the year 1892 the sanitary conditions and administration of the parish of
Rotherhithe received the attention of the Public Health Committee on the representation of the
Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the Poor, and I was instructed to report on the subject.
Inquiry was accordingly made on behalf of the County Council by Dr. Young, and on the 21st
February, 1893, the Council adopted the following report of the Public Health Committee—
Insanitary conditions in Rotherhithe.
On the 19th of March, 1889, Messrs. D. Cubitt Nichols and Shirley P. Murphy submitted a report
showing the result of an inquiry made by them, in pursuance of the instructions of the Secretary of
State, as to the immediate sanitary requirements of the parish of St. Mary, Rotherhithe. This report,
which was presented to Parliament, stated that it was no exaggeration to say that the results of lax
administration abounded in Rotherhithe, and especially in houses occupied by poor persons, and that
there was a complete absence of any system which would ensure the remedy of unhealthy conditions
on their becoming known to the vestry. In summarising the immediate sanitary requirements of
Rotherhithe, the Commissioners stated that in their opinion the work of the sanitary department should
be reorganised, that a system of house to house inspection of the district should be instituted, which
would necessitate the employment of three inspectors until the condition of the parish was materially
improved, that the complaint-book and record of the various steps taken by the vestry or its officers,
with the result, should be better kept, and that the provisions of the Sanitary Acts generally should be
more fully enforced.
On the 29th of April, 1892, the Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the Poor communicated
to the London County Council a list of sanitary defects found in houses during a special inspection of
the parish of Rotherhithe by that body, and on the 22nd of November forwarded a second list, showing
the conditions then existing. This second list referred to 1,493 defects alleged to be present in 576
houses.
On the 19th of December, 1892, the Local Government Board wrote to the County Council, enclosing
a copy of correspondence between the Mansion House Council and the Board on this subject. The
Board in this correspondence referred to the powers of the County Council under Section 100 of the
Public Health (London) Act, 1891.
We referred these communications to the medical officer for report, and upon his recommendation
Dr. Young was instructed to make a detailed inspection of the houses referred to in the second list
forwarded by the Mansion House Council. We informed the Local Government Board, the Mansion
House Council and the vestry of this instruction, and the vestry, on the 3rd of January, stated in reply
that they had directed their medical officer and sanitary inspector to take immediate steps to remedy
any defects in these houses.
On the 1st of February Dr. Young reported that he had inspected the houses and found that four
houses had been closed. In the case of 10 houses notices had been served by the vestry on the owner
for repairs to be executed. In 34 houses repairs of an incomplete character had been effected. As
regards 26 houses, some were unlet at the date of visit, or Dr. Young failed to obtain admission.
With regard to the remaining 502 houses, we think it desirable to submit to the Council the following
extract from Dr. Young's report, from which it will be seen that the complaint of the Mansion House
Council was well founded—
" In the remaining 502 houses the insanitary conditions described by the Mansion House
" Council were found to be still present, and though in a few of these the defects noted may be
" regarded as of a trifling character, in nearly all houses additional defects were observed, which
" were not included in the list communicated by that body.
" The greater number of the defects which were observed were due to neglect of the con"
dition of the houses as regards the state of repair and cleanliness. These defects include
" leaky roofs, defective or entire absence of guttering and stack-pipes, and defective pointing
" of brickwork causing dampness of the walls; broken and rotten floors, in many cases due to the
" absence of any means of ventilation of the space beneath, in some instances the floor being laid
" on the ground without any intervening air space; dirty and broken walls and ceilings inside, and
" a dilapidated condition of walls externally.
" Yards and forecourts were found frequently to be insufficiently or badly paved, and though
" in nearly all cases a trap was provided for the drain inlet in the yard, many of these were broken,
" or defective from the dilapidated condition of the setting. As a consequence of the faulty condi"
tion of the paving, the yards were dirty and the ground close to the house often in a damp or
" sodden condition.
" The water-closets, with few exceptions, were situated in the back yard. A considerable
" number were unprovided with a proper water supply, and the pans, which were of the long hopper
" form, were found frequently to be foul, and in a few cases cracked and broken.