View report page

20
Passing on wards to Rotherhithe Wall, we omitted the houses occupied
by Messrs. Rix, Newham and Clark, they having already been
brought under the notice of this Vestry ; and proceeded to Nos. 379,
378, 377, 376, and 375, Rotherhithe Wall. In all these dwellings
the privies are without water supply. Some of the drains are untrapped,
and where they have trapped, the trap is either broken or
not used. I could not help remarking in several cases, the absence
of a dust bin or ashpit; the consequence of which is, that the dust
mixed with the refuse vegetable matter of the house lies strewn
about the premises, making a disgusting appearance, offending the
nostrils with foul smells, and generating disease. I think that
no house ought to be without an ashpit, which should be removed
as far as possible from the dwelling, and often emptied. I have
called the attention of the Inspector to this point. At No. 374,
tenanted by Russell, the privy is placed in a sort of confined outhouse,
and consists of a cesspool, without pan or water, and the
drainage of the sink has literally been carried into the open street;
a state of things much to be condemned.
Two houses in King Street, No. 27 and 28, were next visited.
The back premises are here much cleaner and in better condition
than in any of the former cases, the buildings being comparatively
of much more recent date, the water supply appearing to be
abundant, and used as it ought to be used, viz., to wash and cleanse
the drains. As, however, there are cesspools and no water to the
closets, and the drains are merely five-hole sinks and without trap,
notices have been served.
One of the parochial medical officers having informed me that
there existed at No. 20, Church Street, a nuisance of imperfect
drainage, which had occasioned fever and other severe ailments to
an elderly couple inhabiting the house, I went there on the 19th
May. On entering the front door, I was met by a very strong
smell, evidently proceeding from some drain or cesspool. On
approaching the wall between Nos. 20 and 19, the stench was
intolerable, particularly round the fire-place. At No. 19, the same
nuisance existed on the other side of the wall. I am inclined to
think that a drain runs near or under the houses. Notices were
served.
On the same day I examined the cesspools at 24, Princes Street,'
and at No. 13, West Lane. In both cases the liquid portion of the
soil was overflowing. Notices have been served.
On the 20th May I visited the back yards of Nos. 3 and 4, on the
west side of Clarence Street. The drains (if any exist) appear
choked up. At No. 3, there was a stagnant pool of water in the
middle of the yard, in which acquatic plants (confervse) had been
quietly vegetating for some time ; the cesspool was nearly full. At
No. 4, the state was still worse, the liquid portion of the privy contents
covered nearly the whole of the place, so that the inmates of
the house had been obliged to put down boards to pass from one part