View report page

93
tion is why was it not enforced? In a district of this
character, with so many small owners, this is a very vital
question, and although the menace to health is not so great
probably where there are no wells to be polluted, there is
ample evidence that a sewage polluted soil close to the back
door is a factor in the causation of disease, and I am convinced
that this matter will require great attention in the
future if danger is to be averted.
During the past year a report on intercepting traps has
been issued by the Departmental Committee that was appointed
to consider this matter. The report is very careful
to avoid any very definite recommendation, but to anyone
who reads the evidence it will be obvious that the day of
intercepting traps is beginning to wane. The Council have
had under consideration the revision of their building byelaws,
but before finally going forward have decided to wait
for some guidance from the Local Government Board on the
matter. If these traps are to be abolished it is certainly
desirable to make the drains as air-tight as possible, and
iron seems to lend itself to this end very much better than
the ordinary stoneware pipe. Then there is the question of
the provision or not of the inspection chambers, which also
requires full consideration before the Council commits itself
to a definite line of action, and here, too, the guidance of
the Board would be of extreme value. The Council's byelaws
at present in force with regard to drainage certainly
require revision, but no amount of revision will make up for
non-enforcement. I would respectfully suggest to the Council
that great care be exercised in adopting or modifying the
bye-laws, but that once adopted no excuse be accepted for
not enforcing them.