View report page

105
On December 4th the owner of 31, Lamb Street, was summoned for non-compliance
with notices served to remedy a defective drain and yard paving.
The Magistrate granted an order to complete the work within 14 days, with 25s.
costs.
On December 11th the owner of 71, Commercial Street, was summoned for
non-compliance with notices served to remedy a defective soil-pipe and drain.
The Magistrate granted an order to complete the work in 14 days, with 27s. costs.
Mr. J. Moss, the owner of Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29, Wheeler Street, and 1,
Quaker Street, was summoned for allowing the premises to be in such a state as to
be unfit for human habitation.
Summonses were withdrawn on payment of £6 18s., on his undertaking to put
the premises into habitable condition.
On December 19th Mr. Grotski, of 43, Grafton Street, the owner of 45, Repton
Street, was fined £5 and 23s. costs for not complying with the Council's order to
remedy the defective waterpipe.
On December 24th Mr. Cohen, of 1, Bancroft Road, owner of 21, Durham
Row, was fined 20s. and 23s. costs for not complying with the Council order to
provide a proper and sufficient water supply.
Legal Proceedings under Bye-Laws.
On May 22nd Mr. J. H. T. Keeves, of 14, Highbury Terrace, was summoned for failing
to give notice before constructing drainage works at 68, Nicholas Street. He
was fined 20s. and 23s. costs.
For non-compliance with Section 14 of the London County Council Bye-laws,
by not giving notice, at 62, Nicholas Street, Mr. Keeves was fined 20s. and 2s. costs.
On September 20th James Kelsey, a registered milk-seller, of 66, Salmon Lane,
was summoned for having in use a dirty milk measure. He was fined 20s. and
12s. 6d. costs.
On October 3rd Isaac Leventon, of 242, Oxford Street, was summoned for
having dirty milk utensils on the premises. Defendant did not appear. The
summons was adjourned to October 10th, when defendant was fined 25s.
Smoke Nuisances.
A great deal of attention was devoted to the abatement of black smoke during
the year, and notices were served for its abatement on 125 premises. Most of these
had no smoke consumers of any kind, and in others the nuisance was caused by the
carelessness of the stoker.