Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Islington, Parish of St. Mary ]
This page requires JavaScript
40
ARCHWAY ROAD.
The Vestry, as was pointed out in the last annual report, had
agreed to maintain this road on behalf of the London County Council
upon the understanding that the Council would repay the Vestry the
expenses incurred. The Council subsequently offered £120 per annum
towards the cost of its maintenance, but upon the Vestry expressing
its dissatisfaction with the proposal, it paid the account sent in by
the Vestry for maintenance for the half-year ending Michaelmas, 1889,
amounting to £68. 4s. 10d. This amount excluded the cost of
lighting, that duty being apparently thrown upon the local authority
by Sec. 11 (sub-sec. 11) of the Local Grovernment Act. The account
for maintaining the road from the latter date up to Lady Day last
(£905. 18s. 8d.) has been sent in to the Council.
The desirability of widening this road and archway for the purpose
of tramway traffic was again brought under the notice of the Vestry
during the year. That body being of opinion that the responsibility
for the maintenance of the archway structure had been transferred,
together with that of the roadway, to the London County
Council requested the Council to make arrangements with the
Middlesex County Council or the Hornsey Local Board as the case
might be for such widening of the roadway and alterations to the
archway as might be necessary, and offered to bear a proportion
of the Council's share of the cost. The members of the County
Council representing Islington were urged to support this application
and a communication was addressed to the Vestry of St. Pancras
asking that body to request its representatives at the Council to take
similar action. The Council however, shielding itself behind the
provisions of sections 5 and 7 of the London Street Tramways
Company's Act of 1888, declined to admit any responsibility for the
reconstruction of the archway, but intimated that should the work be
undertaken by the Vestry in conjunction with the Hornsey Local Board
a contribution towards the Vestry's proportion of the cost might be
made. As was pointed out to the Council, the London Street
Tramways Act of 1888 dealt with the Vestry because that body
was at the time the highway authority in respect of Archway Road,