London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Wimbledon 1906

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Wimbledon]

This page requires JavaScript

33
The following Pages, including Table VI., give particulars of
some of the work carried out by the Staff of the Sanitary
Department (tor which Mr. Johnson is directly responsible), in
addition to the work in the investigation of cases of Infectious
Diseases, Disinfection of Clothing and Rooms, Inspection of
Workshops, etc., set out in the foregoing Pages:—
House Drainage.—It will be seen on reference to the
Appendix Table VI. that the drainage systems of 130 houses have
been entirely reconstructed, while repairs or alterations of a more or
less extensive character have been carried out at 62 houses, as
against about 50 during last year.
At 14 houses the main drains were reconstructed as sewers
within the meaning of the Public Health Act, 1875, at the Corporation's
expense, and the following groups of houses were redrained
during the year:—
83 to 89, South Road—4 houses.
** 63 to 73, Hubert Road—6 houses.
72 to 76, South Road—3 houses.
12 to 18, Deburgh Road—4 houses.
14 to 20, Dundonald Road—4 houses.
56 to 60, Hubert Road—3 houses.
30 to 38, Deburgh Road—5 houses.
* 27 to 39, Hartfield Road—7 houses.
72 to 86, Russell Road—8 houses.
* 42 to 58, Hill Road—9 houses.
** 88 and 90, Amity Road—2 houses.
72 to 76, Norman Road—3 houses.
** 28 to 34a, Russell Road—5 houses.
The question of liability for the repairs and maintenance of
combined drains is a complicated one, and is becoming more so in
consequence of the recent decisions of the Courts. That which is a
drain to-day may become a sewer to-morrow, and a drain again shortly
afterwards, simply through change of ownership of one or more houses.
It is particularly hard that the public should be called upon to
pay for the reconstruction or repair of combined drains originally
constructed at the cost of the building owner at a considerable saving,
by reason of the Local Authority not insisting on a separate drain for
each house. Had the Authority not granted this concession it would
have necessitated the drain passing under each house, a method that
*The main drain reconstructed by the Corporation at the cost of the owners, they
having made default by non-compliance with the notices served upon them.
** The main drain reconstructed by the Corporation as a sewer within the meaning
of the Public Health Act, 1875.