View report page

79
The excess of chlorine and of hardness are the worst
features of the Plumstead water, and call for further investigation
and explanation on the part of the Wa er Board.
Apart from the liability to dangerous pollution suggested
by the high percentage of chlorine, the excess of hardness
is a tax on the consumers in the respect of necessitating
the use of an extra amount of soap and labour for washing
purposes, and extra expense and labour from the furring of
kettles, boilers, etc.
Dr. Houston, Director of Water Examination, has also
favoured me with the results of the chemical and bacteriological
examinations of the Plumstead Well up to the
31st March. Dr. Houston considers that there is no evidence
of any undesirable pollution.
2. Water supply in tenement-houses. An additional
tap and sink were supplied on at least one upper floor
of 18 tenement-houses, under the Public Health (London)
Act, Sec. 48, previously to the coming into force of the
London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1907, by
which a suitable water supply can be required on each
separately occupied floor of a tenement-house. Under this
Act an additional supply was required and provided at 25
houses in 1908, 30 houses in 1909, 3 in 1910, and 2 in 1911.
18 of these houses were in the Dockyard and St. Mary's
Wards, 13 in River Ward, and 22 in St. George's Ward.
There were three prosecutions in 1909, which were recorded
in full in the Annual Report for that year.
3. Defective and foul storage cisterns were found and
remedied at 34 houses, compared with 67, 35, and 51, in
the three preceding years. At 23 houses the supply was