View report page

6
'Regulations for houses let in lodgings or which are occupied by members of more than one family.'
Could these regulations be carried out effectively they would probably be found adequate for
enforcing cleanliness and for preventing overcrowding." He comments on the fact that the sanitary
inspector cannot give sufficient attention to these houses, however, "seeing how many and various
are the duties of his office, how extensive the area in which he works, and how many the cases
calling for his attention." A committee of the vestry made inquiry concerning this area in 1893, and
reported "what appears to be most needed in these districts is frequent house to house inspection, and
with a view to secure this your Committee recommend the appointment of a temporary sanitary inspector,
and that it be referred to them to make the appointment." A temporary inspector was
accordingly appointed, and for a time one inspector had sole charge of the special area. After readjusting
the inspectors' districts it was arranged that an area, including that referred to and
containing a population of 16,000 persons comprised in about 3,700 families, should be in the charge
of one inspector.
Dr. Dudfield pointed out in his monthly report, dated March, 1896, that it is impossible for one
man to carry out in this area the "frequent house to house inspection" recommended by the Sanitary
Committee in 1893. He says—"It is impossible to make a single thorough inspection of each of
these tenements in the course of a year much less "frequent house to house inspection.'' Yet in the
latter part of 1895 it was decided to add an additional area to this inspector's district.
The report of a special committee of the vestry upon the area in 1896 contains, among many
others, the recommendation "that it be referred to the Works and Sanitary Committee to arrange for
the suggested increase of sanitary inspection in the district in question with a view to the more strict
enforcement of the existing by-laws of the vestry relating to houses let in lodgings." In September,
1896, a committee of the vestry recommended that "the district formerly known as north-west (division
B) shall be reconstituted and allotted to one inspector."
Thus at the present time a single inspector still has charge of the district, concerning which the
medical officer of health wrote in March, 1896, "it is impossible for one man to carry out in this area
the frequent house to house inspection recommended by the Sanitary Committee in 1893."
Dr. Dudfield has drawn attention to the differing extent to which common lodging-houses as
compared with other houses in this district are subject to supervision. The Council's inspector visits
the common lodging-houses four times a month, while with regard to the rest of the houses it is found
"impossible to make a single thorough inspection of each of these tenements in the course of a year."*
The report of a special committee of the vestry, dated June, 1896, contains the statement: "It is but
right to say that the condition of these houses which are already registered as ' common lodging-houses '
is superior to those which are not so, or cannot be so registered."
I visited a number of houses registered as houses let in lodgings in this locality, and found on
every hand evidence of the need of an increased amount of supervision. A large amount of improvement
had obviously been effected in these houses within recent years. Yards had been paved, the
drainage of houses reconstructed, additional water-closets had been provided where the number of
occupants rendered this necessary, and in some instances cleanliness had been enforced, and the
attempt to abate overcrowding had been made. But to adequately control in this district the recurring
conditions which only frequent visits of inspection can deal with, was manifestly altogether beyond the
power of a single inspector. The requirement that rooms should be cleansed annually was not being
enforced; in many cases, more particularly in rooms let furnished, the walls and ceilings bore evidence
of being infested with vermin; again, overcrowding was not infrequently admitted by the tenants to
exist, and stopped water-closets and other sanitary defects were of common occurrence.
I further visited a number of registered houses in North Kensington, and here too similar
evidence was forthcoming. A district with a population of upwards of 30,000 inhabitants, and containing
a large proportion of houses requiring frequent inspection, was in charge of a single inspector.
Here, too, dirty conditions and overcrowding are of common occurrence, and the need of an increased
amount of supervision is apparent.
Dr. Dudfield, in his annual report for 1892, points out that there are in Kensington some 20,000
tenements of less than five rooms each, and he says "a very large proportion of these tenement
dwellings require attention, and an amount of attention which it is at present impossible to give to
them." Changes have been made in the staff since this opinion was expressed by the medical officer of
health, but at the present time the position as regards tenement houses appears to remain substantially
unaltered, inasmuch as the parish is now, as then, divided into six districts, each in charge of a single
inspector. There is now, in addition to this, a special inspector of workshops, but the need for an
increased amount of attention being given to tenement houses remains.
Lambeth.— Regulations were made in 1873, only a few houses however were placed upon the
register. New by-laws were recently made under the Public Health Loudon, Act, 1891, these were
confirmed on the 11th May, 1897, by the Local Government Board.
Lee.— No use was made of regulations under the Sanitary Act of 1866. In 1895 by-laws made
under section 94 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, came into force in this district, but up to
the present time no houses have been registered in any one of the parishes (Lee and Kidbrooke, Charlton
and Eltham) which together make up the area under the jurisdiction of the Lee Board of Works.
It may be noted that a considerable part of this area is not yet built upon, and it is more rural in character
than other parts of London. Dr. Burton writes, "with regard to houses let in lodgings there are no
*In his annual report for 1896 Dr. Dudfield gives the following details with regard to the amount of
inspectious made during the year in the special area— "Of the 275 houses 23 are common-lodging houses under
the administration of the County Council, each such house being inspected at least once a week; of the remaining
252 houses 159 were inspected once, 46 twice, 18 thrice, 14 four times, one house five times, and one house six
times."