View report page

39
In my Annual Report for 1930, when referring to the problem
of the slums, I pointed out that it had always been the object of
the Public Health Department to oppose the lessening in any way
of the housing accommodation available in the borough by way
of closing orders, although, on the other hand, to "represent" an
area before there was reasonable assurance that clearance or improvement
schemes would follow meant that there would be considerable
additional difficulty in enforcing the abatement of nuisances
under the Public Health (London) Act. I went on to say:—
' 'Closing and demolition used to be a way out of the
difficulties experienced by sanitary authorities in dealing
with this class of property. Thus, in a report by Dr. King
Warry, to which I have referred, he states that 36 houses to
which his attention was drawn were inspected, closed and
demolished that year to make room for the erection of a factory.
A considerable amount of housing property has been bought in
this Borough for demolition for industrial purposes and will be
demolished just as soon as the opportunity arises. "Closing"
is no longer practicable, it has become only a procedure of
despair, or because of danger of accident from the condition
of a dwelling. There are in various parts of the Borough
blocks of houses, as in Middlesex Place and Milbourne Street,
that have been bought for demolition and the erection of factories
on the site."
"The Architect's Journal" of 26th October, 1933, referring
in a special number dealing with London slums to the survey,
quoted from my Annual Report for 1930, as follows:—
General Notes.
"The Borough is mainly residential, less mixed than the
'immediate' East End, though the conversion of dwellings
into factories and workshops is now increasingly important.
The North and West are, of course, the better parts, with
Upper Clapton and Stamford Hill best.
Homerton and Hackney Wick are very bad. Nisbet
Street and Oswald Street and the areas surrounding are the
worst parts; the Banister Street and Duncan Square areas are
a little better. 22,000 houses in the Borough are 50-100 years
old.
Probably about 4,000 houses in the Borough could be
described as being of very poor type, patched and worn, varying
from houses that could be made fairly habitable by the
expenditure of far more money than owners are likely to be
induced to spend, to houses that could not be made decently
habitable by any form of reconstruction,"