View report page

The notice required when animals were to be slaughtered
was given in every case, thereby facilitating the examination
whilst killing was actually in progress.
Rent (Restrictions) Acts, 1920 and 1923.—Under these Acts,
three applications were received from occupiers of premises
requesting that inspections be made as, in their opinion, the
owners had failed in their obligations. In each case a complete
survey of the house, both internal and external, was made and
a notice prepared specifying the works to be executed in order
to make the premises in all respects reasonably fit for human
habitation.
The applications were submitted to the Committee, together
with a report as to the conditions existing and, in each case,
the issuing of a certificate was authorised. In one case the certificate
was subsequently issued as the work required to be done
had not been satisfactorily executed.
Water Supply.—The water supply was withdrawn from 37
houses during the year, for the following reasons:—16 by request;
16 owing to arrears of rates; and 5 for other reasons.
Employment Agencies.—There were ten licensed Keepers
on the Kegister at the end of the year and periodical visits have
been made to each of the premises. Visits were also made in
company with the Surrey County Council's Officer with the
object of explaining the provisions of the Bye-laws, etc., to the
Keepers. With one or two minor exceptions the Bye-laws have
been well observed.
Employment Of Children Bye-laws.—Observations in connection
with the employment of children have been maintained
throughout the year, but few breaches have been observed.
Practically the whole of the work is done outside office hours,
on Sundays and public holidays. It was deemed advisable in
four cases to report the circumstances to the Education
Authority.
Fouling of Footways by Dogs.—Whilst every endeavour is
being made to enforce the Bye-law and to maintain the
Borough's standard of cleanliness, it is regrettable that some
dog owners should make such a Bye-law necessary. The practice
of taking dogs for exercise is commendable and will, I trust, be
continued; but there should be no need to ask those in charge
to be mindful of the comfort of human beings by preventing the
fouling of our footways.
In one case legal proceedings were instituted, the defendant
being fined 2s. 6d.
35