6. The detention in the premises for so long only as absolutely necessary of animals about to be slaughtered. The “Occupier,” it may be added, is the party responsible for the due execution of the Bye-laws.
LICENSED COW-SHEDS.
The licensed cow-sheds, 33 in number—viz., 17 in the North and 16 in the South district—have been regularly inspected. Your Vestry, after a careful consideration of the subject, and after making enquiries as to the practice adopted in other districts, have adopted a standard of capacity to be complied with in respect of cow-sheds, viz., an allowance of 800 cubic feet of space for each cow, no height of shed above 16 feet to be reckoned in the computation of cubic space; each single stall to be 4 feet, and a double stall for two cows, 7½ feet in width. It is to be desired that steps should be taken to obtain powers to frame bye-laws for regulating the structure of cow sheds, the same as slaughter-houses. Great improvements are necessary in many of the cow-sheds; some of the sheds are, in fact, ill-adapted for the purpose, and in the category I would include those that are not open to the roof—being, in fact, imperfectly ventilated stables. The importance of properly constructed—which means well drained, well paved, well lighted, and well ventilated—cow-sheds, is becoming better understood every year, and events to which reference has already been made (p. 10 ante) are likely to give an impetus in the direction of bringing cow sheds under much more strict supervision, as to construction and management than heretofore. It is not uncommon to hear complaints of offensive smells from cow-sheds, even where the premises are very well kept, and where the smell is really not greater than must needs be expected, regard being had to the number of cows kept, and the removal of manure, &c. Should cow-sheds become the subject of legislation, and precise regulation thereunder, it would be desirable to provide for a notice being posted, outside the premises, some days before the annual licensing day, the same as is done in the case of public-houses, and as ought to be done in respect of slaughter-houses, so that householders in the vicinity might, if necessary, attend and show cause against the renewal of the license.
BAKEHOUSES.
The bakehouses, 108 in number—viz., 60 in the North and 48 in the South district—have been regularly inspected during the year, and the provisions of the Act relating to them carried out as efficiently as circumstances would admit.
Complaints arising out of the neglect of Contractors to fulfil the duty of
DUST REMOVAL
occupied, as usual, an inordinate amount of time in the way of inspection, correspondence and clerical work, the letters, and other communications received during the year being 5,891, viz., 2,560 in the North, and 3,331 in the South district. The actual number of complaints was 1,010, viz., 357 in the North, and 653 in the South contract district; while the orders issued for the removal of dust were 10,177, viz., 3,868 in the North District, and 6,309 in the South. The vexatious difficulties attending this important question led your Vestry to consider again the possibility of dispensing with the assistance of contractors; but no result has hitherto come out of the trouble that was taken by a Committee and by the Clerk of the Vestry to solve the difficulty. The same as with respect to the mortuary and the disinfecting chamber, the lack of a suitable site for the storing of the dust in the intermediate stage between the dust-bins and the final disposition of their contents, has practically rendered nugatory all the labour bestowed on the question. Towards the close of the contract year the complaints became so numerous that your Vestry not only employed a staff of horses, carts, and men to make up for the deficiencies of the contractor (and at his expense) but, also, imposed heavy pecuniary penalties. A somewhat curious result of this strictly equitable and, in fact, unavoidable severity was, that the new contractors for the North district expressed unwillingness to sign the contract, and did not sign it for a period of three months, during which time, as they preferred to set about their work in their own way, which only brought matters right after a considerable interval, the complaints in this district became very numerous, and the difficulty experienced in the first quarter of 1875 in the South district, was, in the second quarter, transferred to the North. But as not seldom happens, so in this case—out of evil came good, for your Vestry temporarily appointed, at my request, a Dust Inspector, whose services having given satisfaction, and proved very useful, have been permanently retained, thus affording a very much needed accession to the strength of the sanitary staff at my disposal.
DOMESTIC WATER STORAGE.
Next to the unwholesomeness of houses arising from the neglected state of dust bins—to whatever cause the neglect may be attributable—no subject, perhaps, so often engages the attention of Sanitary Inspectors as that of water supply and the neglected state of cisterns. It would almost seem as if many householders thought that the water supply needed no more attention than that of gas, which is usually comprised in a quarterly settlement with the collector. Months and probably years elapse in some cases without any attention being paid to the condition of cisterns which, I need hardly say, ought to be cleaned out periodically, and not less frequently than once a month. It is true that the inconvenient position in which the cisterns are sometimes placed occasions difficulties in getting at them, which may in some measure account for the neglect. But in other cases where no such difficulty exists the result is the same. One among the “water regulations” by which the Companies are almost constituted a sanitary authority, and which might be enforced with public advantage, relates to the position of cisterns which are required to be placed in accordance with their views. This regulation is of a retrospective character, but so far as I know it is not carried out. Another valuable regulation would abolish the “waste pipe”—a fertile and unsuspected cause of foul water, and, in many cases of illness, being often untrapped and then serving as a ventilator to the drains, giving exit to noxious gases which the water absorbs freely. But I cannot say that I have heard of any instance in which the Companies have exercised their powers in this respect—powers, be it understood, claimed by and conceded to them, not on sanitary grounds, but simply to prevent the waste of water. It is one of my most often repeated instructions to the Inspectors to view the apparatus for water supply when making a house inspection, and to abolish waste pipes whenever practicable. Another regulation has for its object, to prevent waste of water, by the intervention of a service box for the supply of the water closet, thus limiting the discharge at each elevation of the lever to a maximum of two gallons. This regulation I have no doubt is carried out in the case of new houses; but it is perhaps of even more importance in old ones, in which, as too often happens, the domestic and the closet service are drawn from one and the same cistern. In a special report (November 20, 1872) I referred to all these points, and to many others, and I have seen no reason to modify the expressions of regret with which I then had occasion to speak of the stringency of the regulations, which is, I apprehend, the main, if not the sole cause of our being still without the constant system of water supply which it was supposed the Act of 1871 would give us. The stringency to which I allude has reference principally to the costliness of the apparatus and fittings on which the companies insist as a condition of constant service; and not to the exercise of the powers they possess, but do not as a rule employ, to improve the present system by insisting on the due carrying out of the really useful and valuable regulations quoted above. The adoption of this constant system would enable us to get rid of our cisterns, if not altogether, yet so far as the supply of water for culinary use and drinking is concerned. The neglect of cisterns to which I referred above, would then be a matter of less moment; and as the pipes would be always charged, we should be less liable, than we are now, to the contamination of water, for such an accident as I am about to mention would be almost impossible.