View report page

226
excavated in the ground shall be used for the storage or
reception of water supplied by the Company, unless the use
of such cistern shall be allowed in writing by the Company."
Application was made to the several Companies to ascertain
whether they had "allowed in writing" the use of such
cisterns, and it was suggested that the use of them should be
discontinued. The Grand Junction Waterworks Company
stated that there were no underground tanks in their district;
the other two Companies (West Middlesex, and Chelsea)
replied to the effect that they no longer permitted the construction
of underground cisterns, but felt it difficult to
interfere with the use of those already in existence. The
Companies should, in my opinion, be deprived of the power
to allow of the use of underground cisterns for storing potable
water. Possibly something may be done towards the abolition
of these receptacles by the bye-laws, which it is the duty
of the Sanitary Authority, under section 50 of the Public
Health (London) Act, to make, for the cleansing of cisterns.
The section reads as follows:—
"Every Sanitary Authority shall make bye-laws for securing the cleanliness
and freedom from pollution of tanks, cisterns, and other receptacles
used for storing of water used or likely to be used by man for drinking or
domestic purposes, or for manufacturing drink for the use of man "—
as some of these underground cisterns or tanks are. They can
never be properly cleansed, arid no bye-laws worthy of the name
could be carried out properly in respect of such improper
receptacles. It will be remembered, moreover, that by section
2 of the Act, "any cistern so foul or in such a
state as to be a nuisance or injurious or dangerous to health,"
is included in the list of nuisances liable to be dealt with
summarily under the Act.