View report page

9
Independently of the want of a due proportion of light and air for the
rooms facing the Court, the rooms themselves are very faultily constructed.
In the first place, there are no passages to the houses, but the entrance
doors open directly from the Court iuto the front rooms.
2ndly. From the construction of the staircases, the foul air of the
lower rooms will pass directly into the rooms above, the staircases forming
ventilating shafts to the lower rooms.
3rdly. There is no other way for the inhabitants of the front and upper
rooms to pass into the back yards, except through the back rooms of the
houses—a most indecent practice.
For the above reasons, I consider that if these houses are completed in
accordance with the accompanying plan, they will be unfit for habitation.
If these houses are being built in conformity to the provisions of the
Building Act, then it is full time that a new Building Act was in force, so
that the erection of similarly constructed houses may be prevented.
No builder should be allowed to erect dwelling-houses unless the local
authority approved of the plans in all their details. A power of appeal to a
central authority might be allowed to the builder if his plans were not
approved by the local board.
I am, Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant,
15, Great Alie Street. JOHN. LIDDLE."
Upon the reading of this report, it was resolved that a communication
be addressed to the Metropolitan Board of Works explaining the farts and
enclosing a copy of the Medical Officer's Report; and that a notice of the
contents of the Medical Officer's Report be sent to the builder or owner of
the houses referred to.'
The Clerk accordingly wrote to the Architect of the Metropolitan Board,
and in his letter he stated that the Whitechapel Board are of opinion that
houses such as those proposed to be erected are highly objectionable in such
a locality as that in which it is intended they shall be built.
In reply, the following letter, addressed to the Clerk, dated 15th September,
1871, was received from Mr. Vulliamy, the Superintending Architect to
the Metropolitan Board of Works:—
" Dear Sir,
I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of tlie 13th instant
relative to the erection of buildings in Little North Street and Nelson Court in which
you request me to bring the matter before the Board for the purpose of preventing
that which your Special Committee and Medical Officer of Health unanimously
consider objectionable.
I quite concur in the view taken that the erection of buildings in so limited a
space should be restricted as much as possible, but I do not see how I can bring the
subject before this Board with any likelihood of a satisfactory result. It appears to
me that unless your District Board take action under the 74th section of the Metropolitan
Local Management Amendment Act and compensate the proprietor for
widening the existing public ways, there is nothing to prevent him from erecting a