View report page

London County Council.
HOUSES LET IN LODGINGS.
Report by the Medical Officer of Health presenting report by Dr. Hamer, Assistant
Medical Officer of Health, as to the operation of by-laws dealing with houses
let in lodgings in London.
(Printed by order of tlie Public Health Committee, 25th June, 1896.)
I present Dr. Hamer's report on the result of his inquiries as to the operation in London of
by-laws concerning houses let in lodgings. These inquiries show that in every district where
by-laws or regulations have been given a fair trial, the opinions of those best qualified to judge are
strongly in favour of this method of dealing with houses of this character. Any difficulty which has
been anticipated in thus regulating such houses has always disappeared when the work is seriously
undertaken and a sufficient staff provided for the purpose. The very fact that a house has been
registered, and is subjected to inspection, has been found to be productive of good, and there is no
doubt still better results would have been attained if larger use had been made of the power conferred
by by-laws to proceed directly for penalty instead of adopting the method of serving notices. This
would be particularly the case when the condition to be dealt with is that of overcrowding.
In every London district by-laws or regulations for houses let in lodgings now exist, but in only
a limited number of districts has any considerable effort been made to enforce them.
Under these circumstances the Committee will no doubt desire to consider the course they
should themselves adopt, having regard to the responsibilities of the Council under the Public Health
Act, and to the fact that it is obligatory on sanitary authorities to make and enforce the by-laws.
Shirley F. Murphy,
Medical Officer of Health.
Dr. Hamer's Report.
I have made inquiry as to the extent to which by-laws or regulations dealing with houses let in
lodgings have been enforced in London, and have endeavoured to obtain knowledge as to the advantages
or disadvantages which have been found in practice to be associated with their use. More particularly
an attempt has been made to learn whether or not the putting in force of a code of by-laws or regulations
enables conditions to be dealt with which are not capable of being remedied, or can only with
difficulty be remedied, under the general provisions of the Public Health Act. For these purposes
I have consulted medical officers of health of London sanitary districts, to whom I am indebted for the
information which they have placed at my disposal. In the following report I propose in the first place
to indicate the circumstances which have led to the statutory provisions under which by-laws or regulations
for houses let in lodgings have been made, and then to consider how far experience shows that
advantage has accrued from their enforcement, and what degree of importance must be attached to
some of the objections which have been raised to their use.
Special difficulty appears to have been experienced in London with respect to tenement houses
as long ago as the end of the 16th century, for an Act of Parliament of 1598 (35 Elizabeth, cap. 6),
makes reference to the great mischiefs which " daily grow and increase by reason of pestering the
houses with divers families, harbouring of inmates, and converting great houses into several tenements,
and the erecting of new buildings in London and Westminster." When, however, the importance of
remedying insanitary conditions began to be appreciated in the present century, overcrowding did not
at first receive attention, indeed, no power of control of overcrowding is found in the earlier Public
Health Acts beyond that of making by-laws for fixing the number of lodgers who might be received
into any common lodging-house.
Under the Nuisances Removal Act of 1855, the local authority was authorized to take proceedings
to abate overcrowding in a house occupied by members of more than one family, and certain limited
powers of entry were given to the authority and its officers. The recognition by the legislature of the
fact that overcrowding constitutes a condition "dangerous or prejudicial to the health of the inhabitants "
of a house was no doubt regarded at the time as a distinct new departure, and it is not matter for
surprise that the application of the new provision was in the first instance limited to cases in which a
house was occupied in the manner stated. While however the overcrowding section of the Nuisances
Removal Act enunciated a principle, its value in its application to concrete instances was evidently
limited, as may be judged bv the statement of Sir John Simon who, in commenting upon the working
of the Nuisances Removal Acts in 1864, alluded to " the want of precision and efficiency in the law
relating to overcrowded dwellings " as one of the points concerning which amendment was particularly
required.
Considerable advance was made in 1866 when section 35 of the Act of that year empowered the
Secretary of State, on the application of the nuisance authority, to declare the enactment in force in a
sanitary district authorising the authority to make regulations dealing with houses let in lodgings.
The subject matter with which such regulations might deal was specified by the section and included
fixing the number of persons who may occupy such house, and the registration, inspection, cleansing,
Sold by Edward Stanford, 26 and 27, Gockspurstreet, Charing-cross, S. W.
No. 302. Price 2d.
[1412