View report page

In addition to these proceedings your Committee's attention having
been directed by the Vestry Clerk in 1885-6 to the provisions of the
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, with regard to the liability of owners
(which Act had only just become law), it directed him to communicate
with the owner of the two houses in question as to their character. A
correspondence accordingly ensued between the owner and his agent (to
whom the former referred) on the one part, and the Vestry Clerk
on the other which lasted for a considerable period, and although
your Committee had reason to complain of the indifference of the
owner in question to his responsibilities, and has even found it
necessary recently to threaten him with proceedings under the Act
if he did not immediately get rid of a tenant who was using one
of the houses for immoral purposes, it has reason to believe that
(his correspondence led to an active interference on his part with
the letting of these houses, and that this has done more to abate
the evil in regard to these particular houses than even the previous
prosecutions.
lour Committee deems that these facts are sufficient to refute
the statement that either your Committee or the Vestry Clerk have
neglected their duty in regard to the houses in question.
All which is submitted.
FRANCIS JOHN BUCKELL,
Chairman pro tern.
January 14th, 1890.