View report page

46
especially for the female employees, were found deficient and defective, both
as regards equipment and proper arrangements for flushing and cleansing.
Further, they were not in every case sufficiently isolated from the places
where bottling of beer and washing of bottles took place. I have to report
that in every case these defects have been made good.
During May, the attention of the National Telephone Company was called
to the condition of their private call offices in the Royal Albert Dock. The
Company at once realised their responsibilities and the places were cleansed,
and arrangements made for this to be repeated at regular intervals.
SMOKE NUISANCES.
During 1902, 325 complaints have been reported and dealt with. The
Port Sanitary Committee have directed the service of 114 Notices upon the
persons in default, and legal proceedings have been taken in five cases.
It will thus be seen that the question has had considerable attention at the
hands of the Committee. The result is that an improvement has been brought
about, one line of steamers at least, using the Pool, have given up the use of
coal and are using coke for their "donkey" boilers, whilst others have had
fitted patent smoke-consuming apparatus.
There are two sections of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, which
deal with the question of smoke nuisance, viz., 23 and 24. Section 23 was
made specially applicable to the Port of London, but as a matter of experience
it is both cumbersome and difficult to work. Section 24, which deals with a
nuisance from black smoke in a summarv manner, is also not altogether satisfac-
tory. A tug is observed to be offending, and the fact is reported to your
Worshipful Committee, who, being satisfied of the existence of a nuisance, direct
that a statutory Notice be served on the person by whose act, default, or
sufferance the nuisance arises or continues. It is usual to serve this Notice on the
owner, but a copy is also served upon the Master, and in future this will be
done on the engineer also.
Should the vessel be observed emitting black smoke in the course of the next
six months following the service of the Notice, a conviction would probably be
obtained were the aforesaid person summoned before a court of summary
jurisdiction, but in the majority of instances the vessel, when seen, is not
committing a nuisance, and as the Notice lapses at the expiration of six
months, the whole business has to be done over again.