View report page

114
had only been built within recent years were already becoming defective,
owing apparently to the inferior quality of material used in their construction
and to inferior workmanship," and he then gives some
typical examples. As to the absolute correctness of these remarks there
can be no question, as most of the members of the Committee are well
aware. In fact it may be said that a very large proportion of the sanitary
defects in Fulham are due to the original faulty construction of the houses.
And for this state of things it must be borne in mind the Sanitary
Authority in Fulham are in no way responsible, as it is due to the way in
which the Building Act has been administered, formerly by the
Metropolitan Board of Works and of late years by the London County
Council. I regret, too, to have to say that even with the more stringent
Building Act of 1894 things are now but little better; at the present
moment houses are being erected in Fulham in such a manner that it is
almost certain that in a very few years they will be in a ruinous condition,
and I have reported to the Council some recent violations of the Building
Act in respect of open space at the rear of houses, a point which is also
alluded to by Dr. Young as having been neglected in the past.
This report of the Council's own officer is a strong argument in favour
of the transfer of many of the powers possessed by the London County
Council under the Building Act to the Local Authority, and I would
strongly urge the Vestry to endeavour to secure the transfer of these
powers, which was, I believe, recommended by the recent Conference of
Local Authorities, seeing how they are suffering from the shortcomings
of the Central Authority who now sit in judgment on them.
Dr. Young next gives a list of the defects he found in the houses he
visited, which shows the necessity for what has often been pressed upon
the Vestry, viz., house-to-house inspection. I may say that since
Dr. Young's visit a house-to-house inspection of some small portions of
the parish has been effected, but not to the extent it should be done.
With respect to the overcrowding mentioned by Dr. Young, as I have
already reported, it is evident from the census returns that there is a good
deal of overcrowding in the parish, but it escapes notice as the staff of
inspection is too small to undertake a systematic examination, even of the
very poor property, which is so eminently desirable.
I may say, however, that overcrowding is a very difficult matter to
deal with, as, if abated in one house it probably recurs in another, and
sometimes, unfortunately, it is a question either of a family living under
overcrowded conditions or of having no roof over their heads. I hope,
however, when I am able to get all the tenement houses registered this evil
will be able to be dealt with.
With respect to the cowsheds, slaughter-houses, milk-shops and bakehouses,
I need say nothing, as Dr. Young reports favourably of them.
As to workshops some little work has been done of late, but not to the
extent I could wish.
The portion of the report dealing with common lodging-houses, the
mortuary, and the removal of refuse, calls for no remarks.
With respect to the disinfection I have more than once reported
to the Vestry on the question, the last occasion being of recent
date, and as the Vestry are about to deal with the question of refuse