View report page

148
parishioners, and the most common of recurring nuisances, arises,
from the neglect of this obligation. Proceedings have been taken
occasionally to recover penalties, but not with much success,
defendants having usually been able to satisfy the Justices of their
inability to perform the duty required of them. The difficulty
generally originates with the coachman, who will not give the
refuse away, while the farmer will not pay for it. At certain
seasons there is, no doubt, a difficulty in getting the receptacles
cleared, farmers being too busy to collect the refuse, which has
value for manurial and other purposes. The quantity made in
this large Parish, with its 177 mews, is great, and of an aggregate
value, sufficient, probably, to pay for collection and removal. 1
am of opinion that your Vestry should undertake the work of
collection and removal, as the law allows, "with the sanction of
the owner." The necessary sanction would be obtainable, probably,
in the great majority of cases, were it understood that the requirements
of the law would be enforced. The statutory "notice"
requires manure to be removed "every alternate day," but twice
a week in summer, and once a week in winter, would probably
suffice for practical requirements, were the manure stored in
properly constructed receptacles above ground.
TRADE REFUSE.
I11 a special report made by me, March 13, 1885, on
Sanitary Nuisances Removal, and other cognate Acts,* in connection
with an enquiry referred to the Law and Parliamentary
Committee (April 9, 1884), I stated that:-
"The Vestry have power, and indeed are required when called upon, to
remove the refuse of any trade, etc., upon the application and at the
cost of the owner or occupier of any house, etc.," and I added that
"the section (referred to) would apply in the case of trades which
lead to the production of 'refuse' of an offensive character ; " but,
"for a well known reason, this power is not exercised as fully as it
might be."
* Vide page 111.