street shall, within seven days next after service of an order of the
commissioners for that purpose, fit up and keep in good condition a
shoot or trough of the whole length of such house or building, and shall
connect the same either with a similar shoot on the adjoining house, or
with the pipe or trunk to be fixed to the front or side of such building
from the roof to the ground, to carry the water from the roof thereof in
such a manner that the water from such house or any portico or
projection therefrom shall not fall upon the persons passing along the
street or flow over the footpath; and in default of compliance with any
such order within the period aforesaid, such occupier shall be liable to
a penalty not exceeding 40_s._ for every day that he shall so make
default” (10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 74).
In many private Town Improvement Acts, the cost of the repair necessary
under an order to do so from the urban authority may be deducted by the
occupier from the rent payable to the owner of the premises, thus
ensuring the work being done more quickly.
The following is a specimen notice to be served upon the occupier to
repair or put new shuting to his house:
I beg to give you notice that the eaves, shuting, or projecting
cornice[143] to the house or building No. in your occupation,
is out of repair. A penalty of 40_s._ will be incurred if this
shuting be not repaired within seven days from the date of this notice
(and under the Special Improvement Act the cost of such repair may be
deducted from the rent payable to the owner).[144]
I am, your obedient Servant,
______________________________
_Town Surveyor_.
To _______________
It is a common practice in most towns for the urban authority to provide
and fix trunks or troughs across their footpaths into which the down
pipes from the rain-water shutes can empty their contents.
(6.) _Blinds or Awnings over Footpaths._--
These may be dealt with as obstructions under sec. 69 of the Towns
Improvement Clauses Act 1847, which I have already quoted,[145] but they
are more particularly alluded to in the Police Clauses Act 1847 in the
following section:
“Every person who . . . places any blind, shade, covering, awning, or
other projection over or along any such footway, unless such blind,
shade, covering, awning or other projection is 8 feet in height at least
in every part thereof from the ground, shall be liable to a penalty not
exceeding 40_s._ for each offence, &c.” . . . (10 & 11 Vic. c. 89, s.
28).
Thus legalising the fixing of shop-blinds, &c., provided they are at
least 8 feet in height and consequently no obstruction to the traffic.
In order to make the blinds or awnings sufficiently secure where they
are of large dimensions, it is very usual for the owner or occupier of
the premises to which the blind or awning is to be attached, to seek and
obtain the consent of the local authority to fix iron sockets in the
kerb of the footpath into which iron or wood standards are inserted for
the purpose of supporting the outer part of the blind or awning, and
there can be no objection to this practice provided that the work is
efficiently performed and to the satisfaction of the town surveyor.
(7.) _Trees overhanging Roadways._--
It used formerly to be considered by road surveyors and others[146] that
great injury was caused to roadways by overhanging branches of trees or
bushes, which were supposed to exclude the light and air from the
roadway and thus damage it, hence powers were given to local
authorities, as surveyors of highways, to compel occupiers of premises
adjoining the roadways to cut back and prune their trees or hedges in
order to prevent this damage. The following being the form of notice
usually adopted for this purpose:
To ______________________________
You are hereby required to cut, prune, and trim your hedges adjoining
the highway leading from to and also to cut down, prune, or lop
the branches of trees, bushes and shrubs growing in or near such
hedges and other fences adjoining thereto, in such manner that the
said highway shall not be prejudiced by the shade thereof, and that
the sun and wind may not be excluded therefrom. And you will further
take notice, that if you shall neglect so to do within five days of
the delivery hereof, I shall proceed to have the said hedges, trees,
and bushes cut and pruned, according to the power and provisions of
the various Acts of Parliament relating thereto. And further, that I
shall also proceed to recover from you the penalties in this respect
imposed by the said Acts of Parliament.
Dated this day of
____________________
_Surveyor_.
It is however now very seldom that overhanging branches of trees or
hedges cause any damage to the roadways within an urban district, and
unless they are an actual obstruction to the traffic, the growth of
trees near urban roads and streets should be encouraged; indeed it is
now a common practice to plant trees close alongside the roadway, the
branches of which must of necessity hang over it, and cause no damage if
the roadway is properly formed and attended to.
(8.) _Surface Water from Private Premises running over Footpaths._--
It frequently happens that the rain-water which falls upon a front
garden or courtyard finds its way, for want of a sufficient drain, out
of the gate and across or along the public footpath, thus causing
annoyance to pedestrians even if it does no injury to the path. There
does not seem to be any clause in the Public Health Act 1875 to meet
this objection, for the section which I have given with reference to
rain-water shutes and down pipes (10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 74), does not
apply to such cases, as it only refers to water from the “roof or any
portico or projection” and not to water falling upon the surface of a
garden or courtyard, nor is there anything in the Highways Acts which
can be brought to bear upon the subject.
If, however, any injury is caused to the footpath, no doubt the cause of
offence may be stopped or the perpetrator prosecuted or indicted in
default.
(9.) _Hoardings and Scaffolds._--
When buildings are in course of erection, or repairs are being carried
out to them, it is generally necessary that the person engaged in the
work should construct either a hoarding or inclosure, or at all events a
scaffold, so as to execute the work properly. Upon this point the
following clause of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act has been
incorporated with the Public Health Act 1875:
“Every person intending to build or take down any building within the
limits of the special Act, or to cause the same to be so done, or to
alter or repair the outward part of any such building, or to cause the
same to be so done, where any street or footway will be obstructed or
rendered inconvenient by means of such work, shall, before beginning the
same, cause sufficient hoards or fences to be put up in order to
separate the building where such works are being carried on from the
street, with a convenient platform and handrail if there be room enough,
to serve as a footway for passengers, outside of such hoard or fence,
and shall continue such hoard or fence with such platform and handrail
as aforesaid standing and in good condition, to the satisfaction of the
commissioners, during such times as the public safety or convenience
requires, and shall, in all cases in which it is necessary in order to
prevent accidents, cause the same to be sufficiently lighted during the
night.[147] And every such person who fails to put up such fence or
hoard or platform with such handrail as aforesaid, or to continue the
same respectively standing and in good condition as aforesaid, or who
does not, while the said hoard or fence is standing, keep the same
sufficiently lighted in the night, or who does not remove the same when
directed by the commissioners within a reasonable time afterwards, shall
for every such offence be liable to a penalty not exceeding 5_l._, and a
further penalty not exceeding 40_s._ for every day while such default is
continued” (10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 80).
Hoardings and scaffoldings are now so scientifically erected as to be
little or no inconvenience to foot-passengers. Care must, however, be
taken to see that in the erection of a hoarding the doors or gates in it
shall not open outwards, and the police should be instructed to prevent
carts being backed in and left standing across the footpath.
The surveyor must exercise great discretion in the length of time he
allows a hoarding to remain; without undue hardship on the builder, he
must study at the same time the more important question of the public
convenience.
(10.) _Dangerous Buildings._--
This is the last, although by no means the least, of the series of
“obstructions” I have enumerated. Here, again, very grave responsibility
rests with the surveyor to determine what is a dangerous building, and
in what manner it shall be rendered safe and secure, for his opinion is
apparently legally conclusive on this matter.
The following is the clause of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act which
deals with ruinous or dangerous buildings:
“If any building or wall, or anything affixed thereon, within the limits
of the special Act, be deemed by the surveyor of the commissioners to be
in a ruinous state and dangerous to passengers or to the occupiers of
the neighbouring buildings, such surveyor shall immediately cause a
proper hoard or fence to be put up for the protection of
passengers,[148] and shall cause notice in writing to be given to the
owner of such building or wall, if he be known and resident within the
said limits, and shall also cause such notice to be put on the door or
other conspicuous part of the said premises, or otherwise to be given to
the occupier thereof, if any, requiring such owner or occupier forthwith
to take down, secure or repair such building, wall or other thing, as
the case shall require. And if such owner or occupier do not begin to
repair, take down or secure such building, wall or other thing, within
the space of three days after any such notice has been so given or put
up as aforesaid, and complete such repairs or taking down or securing as
speedily as the nature of the case will admit, the said surveyor may
make complaint thereof before two justices to order the owner, or in his
default the occupier (if any) of such building, wall, or other thing, to
take down, rebuild, repair or otherwise secure, to the satisfaction of
such surveyor, the same, or such part thereof as appears to them to be
in a dangerous state, within a time to be fixed by such justices. And in
case the same be not taken down, repaired, rebuilt or otherwise secured
within the time so limited, or if no owner or occupier can be found on
whom to serve such order, the commissioners shall with all convenient
speed cause all or so much of such building, wall, or other thing as
shall be in a ruinous condition and dangerous as aforesaid, to be taken
down, repaired, rebuilt or otherwise secured in such manner as shall be
requisite, and all the expenses of putting up every such fence, and of
taking down, repairing, rebuilding or securing such building, wall or
other thing shall be paid by the owner thereof” (10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s.
75).
Great care must be observed in seeing that the notices are properly
prepared and served in accordance with sections 266 and 267 of the
Public Health Act 1875, and the town clerk, as the legal adviser of the
sanitary authority, should be consulted (in this as in all cases
requiring notices) by the surveyor.
It sometimes happens that a tall chimney shaft, wall, or other erection
may apparently be perfectly safe, whereas in a high gale of wind it may
be blown down.
Many tall chimney shafts rock in an alarming manner in a high wind,[149]
but he would be a bold surveyor who would order some of these expensive
structures to be pulled down in the face of the opposition he would
receive.[150]
A curious case of some difficulty in connection with dangerous buildings
has come under my notice, where a house was built with the approval of
the urban authority, and after completion and occupation the attention
of the surveyor was called to the fact that a large piece of rock at the
back of the house, from which the site had been excavated for the
purpose of its erection, was in a dangerous condition and likely to fall
at any moment and cause great damage to property, or even loss of life.
The clerk to the urban authority, when consulted, was of opinion that
the surveyor could do nothing in the matter, as the case was not met in
any way by the Act.
The following is given as a specimen notice to serve with reference to a
dangerous structure:
NOTICE.
_To_ (A) _the Owner of the ruinous and
dangerous_ (B) _under-mentioned and the
occupier thereof._
Whereas a certain (B) situated at within the borough
of , in the county of , is deemed by me, the
undersigned, the surveyor of the mayor, aldermen and burgesses of the
said borough of , acting by the council as the urban sanitary
authority for the same, to be in a ruinous state and dangerous to
passengers or to the occupiers of neighbouring buildings:
Therefore take notice, that you are hereby required, in pursuance of
the provisions in that behalf of the Public Health Act 1875, and the
Towns Improvement Clauses Act 1847, to take down, repair or secure the
said (B).
And that if you do not or if neither of you does begin to take down,
repair, or secure the said (B) within the space of three days
after this notice has been served upon you or put upon the said
premises, and complete such taking down, repairing or securing as
speedily as the nature of the case will admit, I shall cause complaint
thereof to be made before two justices in accordance with the
provisions of the statutes aforesaid.
Dated this day of 18 .
____________________
_Surveyor of the said Urban Sanitary Authority._
A. The name and description of the owner or occupier, or the names,
&c., of both should be here inserted.
B. Building, wall, or anything affixed thereon.
Before closing this chapter upon “Obstructions in Streets” I give the
following clause from the “Towns Improvement Clauses Act,” which comes
after two other sections of the same Act principally dealing with
building materials, rubbish, or holes in streets, and although in this
clause the word “building” is used, the section cannot be taken as
referring to dangerous buildings, although it may undoubtedly be used
where it is required on account of waste land, &c., being left in an
unprotected and dangerous state:--
“If any building or hole or any other place near any street be, for want
of sufficient repair, protection or inclosure, dangerous to the
passengers along such street, the commissioners shall cause the same to
be repaired, protected or inclosed so as to prevent danger therefrom;
and the expense of such repair, protection or inclosure shall be repaid
to the commissioners by the owner of the premises so repaired,
protected or inclosed, and shall be recoverable from him as damages” (10
& 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 83).
I have purposely omitted any reference to temporary obstructions in the
streets, which are naturally subjects for the interference of the
police, but I think I have enumerated all those which require the
attention of the town surveyor.
[131] _Vide_ 10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 67.
[132] _Vide_ Fitzgerald’s ‘Public Health and Local Government Act
1875,’ 3rd edition, p. 166.
[133] _Vide_ 10 & 11 Vic. c. 34, s. 68.
[134] _Ibid._ ss. 69 and 70.
[135] Or _Owners_, see s. 160, 38 & 39 Vic. c. 55.
[136] _Vide_ Fitzgerald’s ‘Public Health and Local Government Act
1875,’ 3rd edition, p. 174.
[137] Or owner, see 38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 160.
[138] Towns Improvement Clauses Act 1847, s. 70.
[139] Or owner.
[140] _Vide_ ‘Fitzgerald’s Public Health and Local Government Act
1875,’ 3rd edition, p. 175.
[141] Care must be taken that the mode of construction “directed by
the commissioners” authorises this part of the notice.
[142] In the City of London these patent lights have been fixed in the
pavement round the whole of the frontage of Mansion House Buildings,
at the corner of Queen Victoria Street, and also over the whole of the
pavements in Draper’s Gardens, besides many other equally crowded
thoroughfares, without the least inconvenience being experienced.
[143] In the Act the words used are “shoot” and “trough.”
[144] These words must be omitted if there is no special Improvement
Act.
[145] _Vide_ p. 176.
[146] Sir Fred. Parnell in his celebrated work upon roads has the
following paragraph upon this subject:--
The great advantage of having a road perfectly exposed to the action
of the sun and wind will be more accurately conceived by referring to
writers of science on evaporation. Dr. Hailey states that one-tenth of
an inch of the surface of the sea is raised per diem in vapour. He
also says that the winds lick up the water somewhat faster than it
exhales by the heat of the sun. Other writers say the dissipation of
moisture is much accelerated by the agency of sweeping winds, the
effects being sometimes augmented five to ten times.
Trees are particularly injurious by not allowing the sun and wind to
have free action on the surface of roads producing evaporation.
Besides the benefit which a road receives from its drying rapidly by
an open exposure to the atmosphere, there is another of great
importance, namely, that of affording to horses the advantage of free
respiration; for it is well known that the powers of a horse to
perform work with ease, particularly when moving rapidly, depends upon
the quantity of cool and fresh air that he can pass through his lungs.
If the cause of horses tiring or becoming ill under their work be
carefully examined into, it will often be found that it is not their
muscles or limbs that fail them, but their wind; and therefore, it is
particularly important to have a road so circumstanced that a horse
may on all parts of it have the benefit of a free current of air.
[147] No person can put up hoards or scaffolds in the streets without
first obtaining the consent of the urban authority, _vide_ sections
144 and 149 of the Public Health Act 1875. Many towns also have
private improvement Acts with very binding clauses on this subject,
empowering the surveyor to demand a fee for a licence to erect a
hoarding, and empowering him to remove these after notice, &c.
[148] This is scarcely ever feasible, or of the slightest use if done.
[149] Mr. Cooper states that “a tall chimney will rock 1 inch in a
moderate wind, and even to an extent of ¹⁄₈th of an inch at a distance
of only 16 feet up from its base, and yet be safe.” (_Vide_ ‘Minutes
of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers,’ vol. xxvii. p.
100.)
[150] Whilst this work was in the press the terrible disaster arising
from the falling of an immense chimney shaft at Bradford took place,
the result of which was the death of upwards of forty persons and
great destruction of property.
CHAPTER XVII.
IMPROVEMENT OF PRIVATE STREETS.
Prior to the passing of the Public Health Act 1875 the improvement of
private roads and streets was dealt with under section 69 of the Public
Health Act 1848, but the clause under which the town surveyor now works
is that which is so well known as the 150th section of the Public Health
Act 1875, and is as follows:
“Where any street within any urban district (not being a highway
repairable by the inhabitants at large) or the carriageway, footway, or
any other part of such street is not sewered, levelled, paved, metalled,
flagged, channelled and made good, or is not lighted to the satisfaction
of the urban authority, such authority may, by notice addressed to the
respective owners or occupiers of the premises fronting, adjoining or
abutting on such parts thereof as may require to be sewered, levelled,
paved, metalled, flagged or channelled, or to be lighted, require them
to sewer, level, pave, metal, flag, channel or make good, or to provide
proper means for lighting the same within a time to be specified in such
notice.
“Before giving such notice the urban authority shall cause plans and
sections of any structural works intended to be executed under this
section, and an estimate of the probable cost thereof, to be made under
the direction of their surveyor, such plans and sections to be on a
scale of not less than one inch for eighty-eight feet for a horizontal
plan, and on a scale of not less than one inch for ten feet for a
vertical section, and, in the case of a sewer, showing the depth of such
sewer below the surface of the ground: such plans, sections and
estimate shall be deposited in the office of the urban authority, and
shall be open at all reasonable hours for the inspection of all persons
interested therein during the time specified in such notice; and a
reference to such plans and sections in such notice shall be sufficient
without requiring any copy of such plans and sections to be annexed to
such notice.
If such notice is not complied with, the urban authority may, if they
think fit, execute the works mentioned or referred to therein; and may
recover in a summary manner the expenses incurred by them in so doing
from the owners in default, according to the frontage of their
respective premises, and in such proportion as is settled by the
surveyor of the urban authority, or (in case of dispute) by arbitration
in manner provided by this Act; or the urban authority may by order
declare the expenses so incurred to be private improvement expenses.
“The same proceedings may be taken and the same powers may be exercised
in respect of any street or road of which a part is or may be a public
footpath or repairable by the inhabitants at large, as fully as if the
whole of such street or road was a highway not repairable by the
inhabitants at large” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 150).
One has only to look at the number of footnotes that follow this clause
both in “Glenn” and “Fitzgerald” to see that it requires some
considerable interpretation. I propose in this chapter to call attention
to some of its engineering discrepancies and to point out the duties of
the town surveyor in connection with its enforcement.
First then, I conclude that it is the duty of the surveyor to call the
attention of the urban authority to the fact that any street within his
district (not being a highway repairable by the inhabitants at large) is
not “sewered, levelled, paved, &c.” but there is no express order for
him to do so, but with whoever this duty rests, it is no doubt the
surveyor’s duty to be certain that the street in question has never been
dedicated to the public or repaired at the cost of the rates, but is
really a private street within the meaning of the Act.
Before proceeding to give the manner of putting the 150th section into
force, it is necessary to draw attention to some of its wording.
The word “sewered” no doubt is also meant to include all drains both for
house sewage and surface water falling on the street, &c., and may be
used in the same comprehensive manner that the word “sewerage” is
generally employed.
“Levelled” is also rather a vague term, but it has been held to refer
only to the level or cross section of the street itself, there being no
power to charge the adjacent owners with the expense of altering the
level of the street so as to make it conform to a street with which it
connects. The word “formed” would in this case have therefore been a
more appropriate phrase.
“Paved, metalled, flagged, channelled and made good” are very precise
directions, but why both the words “paved” and “metalled” are used is
not clear. Is the paving to be placed on the top of the metalling or
vice versâ? It seems ludicrous to have used both words. The word
“kerbed” also ought no doubt to have been inserted, as no street either
urban or suburban can be formed without this necessary adjunct.
These very precise directions, if carried out in their entirety, would
cause great injustice to the adjacent owners of the property who had to
bear the expense, for although “paving” and “flagging” may be necessary
for streets situated in a town itself, they would be perfectly
unnecessary for a suburban road, and it is to this latter class of work
that the section is more frequently applied. There are generally very
few badly maintained private streets in the heart and busiest parts of a
town, much difference of opinion consequently exists in different
localities as to what the requirements shall be.
Some urban authorities insist that the roadways shall be paved with
granite setts or wood blocks, the footpaths being flagged or paved with
asphalte, while others are content with ordinary macadamised roadways
and gravelled paths.
There can be no doubt that the town surveyor must use considerable
discretion in deciding what class of work should be demanded, and he
must be greatly guided by the situation and requirements of the street
in question and the description and value of the adjoining property.
With reference to the words “or is not lighted,” my opinion is that
nearly all private streets are at once lighted by the urban authority
out of the rates, so soon as buildings are erected at its sides or it is
found necessary for the public convenience to do so. A reference to
section 161 of the Public Health Act 1875 will show that there is no
exclusion of private streets for that purpose, and for many obvious
reasons it is better that the urban authority should themselves
undertake this duty rather than throw it upon private individuals.
Having thus far drawn attention to some of the wording of the clause, it
is now necessary to discuss the duties of the town surveyor in
connection with it.
It will be seen that notice has to be addressed to the owners or
occupiers of “premises fronting, adjoining or abutting _on such parts
thereof_ as may require to be sewered, levelled, paved, &c.” It is often
found that although the greater portion of a certain private street may
be in a shocking state of repair, perhaps just a small length here and
there opposite portions of different frontages may not be so bad: for
instance, the path may be well gravelled and kerbed and a narrow channel
gutter inserted against a wretchedly constructed roadway. It is often
open to question if the owners of these properties against which these
partial improvements have been effected can expect to escape their
liability. If they can, it complicates still more the working of an
already greatly complicated clause.
“Before giving such notice the urban authority shall cause plans and
sections . . . to be made under the direction of their surveyor.”
This order involves some considerable amount of work. Very accurate
surveys must be made and plotted to a large scale, levels must be taken,
and where sewers have to be included in the notice it is often necessary
to extend the survey considerably, in order to make provision for future
extensions of streets or buildings or for the existing sewerage system.
The clause is very particular in stating that the “depth of such sewer
below the surface of the ground” must be shown, but no mention is made
about the size. The latter point being of quite as great importance it
would be thought as the depth, the question also at once arises, whether
the new sewer must be specified of such a size as only to meet the
requirements of the street alone, or may it be made of such an area as
will carry the sewage of a considerable district? It would be most
unjust to expect the owners of property to pay for a sewer larger than
was required for the street in respect of which they were responsible,
and if legal, the better plan would be for them to be charged with the
cost of such a sewer as would be sufficient for their purpose and let
any extra size that the surveyor found was requisite be paid for out of
the public rates.
It should be noted that in addition to the plans and sections “an
estimate of the probable cost” must also be prepared by the surveyor,
and this must be very carefully prepared, for it has been held to be a
“condition precedent to the recovery of the expenses, that such estimate
should have been properly made” (_Vide_ ‘Fitzgerald’ p. 160, 3rd
edition).
No mention is however made in the Act of a specification, which is of
course absolutely essential.
It may here be of use if I give a specimen form of notice to be served
in connection with carrying out the duties involved by this clause; of
course each town surveyor must alter the work specified to meet the
requirements of the case;
_To the Owner or Owners of certain premises fronting, adjoining, or
abutting upon a certain street, called in the parish of
in the borough of in the county of _
Whereas the said street is not levelled, paved, metalled, channelled
and made good to the satisfaction of the mayor, aldermen and burgesses
of , the urban sanitary authority of the above-named borough:
And whereas your said premises front, adjoin, or abut on certain parts
of the said street which requires to be levelled, paved, metalled,
channelled and made good as aforesaid:
Now therefore, the mayor, aldermen and burgesses of , the
urban sanitary authority of the said borough as aforesaid, hereby give
you notice (in pursuance of the statute in that case made and
provided) to level, pave, metal, channel and make good the portion of
the said street in which your said premises front, adjoin, or abut as
aforesaid, within the space of one month from the date hereof, in
manner following, that is to say:
(_If a sewer is to be formed, fill in this first._)
The carriage-way and water tables thereof to be formed in the mode,
according to the sections, and on the levels and at the rates of
inclination shown upon the plan, sections, and in accordance with the
specification of the work prepared by the surveyor to the said urban
sanitary authority, and now open for public inspection at his office,
during the usual office hours.
The carriage-way to be bottomed, formed, and carefully levelled up to
the form shown by the said sections; and in the following manner:
(_Here fill in specification of method._)
Construct gullies, fitted with five-bar cast-iron gratings and
frames of the form and pattern to be seen at , these gullies
to be placed in such positions as are shown on the aforesaid plan and
sections; each gully to have a six-inch glazed stoneware socket-pipe
drain connecting it with the sewer, to be laid on a solid bed, and at
an uniform inclination from gully to sewer, with joints made of neat
Portland cement.
The existing kerb to be taken up and replaced by inches by
inches granite kerb in lengths of not less than inches,
to the lines shown on plan, and to the levels marked on sections.
The water-tables or gutter to be channelled with properly laid,
and bedded on fine gravel to the levels and inclinations marked on
sections.
The footpaths shall be properly formed, bottomed, and drained where
required; the formation level made to the inclination shown on
section, and afterwards coated with .
The whole of the above-mentioned works to be executed by you in
accordance with the plan and sections hereinbefore referred to and now
open for inspection at the surveyor’s office as aforesaid, and of the
dimensions, widths and levels shown thereon, and to be done in a good,
workmanlike and substantial manner, to the satisfaction of the said
urban sanitary authority and of their surveyor.
An estimate of the probable cost of the said work, prepared under the
direction of the surveyor to the said urban sanitary authority, is
also lying for inspection at the office of the said surveyor, in
manner required by section 150 of the Public Health Act 1875.
Dated this day of 18 .
____________________
_Town Clerk_.
The clause then goes on to say “If such notice is not complied with.”
It would be a most difficult and costly proceeding for any individual
owner of property to execute the work for half the width of the street
opposite his length of frontage, and the result would be anything but
satisfactory if the owners of the properties were to comply with the
notices in this manner.
If the owners do intend to comply with the notice, and carry out the
work themselves, the best method for them to adopt is to hold a meeting
and decide upon having it done, then to appoint one of their number, or
some other person to superintend or carry out the work, and afterwards
collect the money, but this is very seldom done, and the wisest course
(which is generally adopted) is not to comply with the notice, but let
the urban authority execute the work themselves. This again entails
considerable labour upon the town surveyor, who has to superintend the
work and see that all the details contained in the statutory notices are
properly carried out, but his labour does not end here. Upon the
completion of the work the amount expended has to be recovered “from the
owners in default according to the frontage of their respective
premises, and in such proportion as is settled by the surveyor of the
urban authority, or (in case of dispute) by arbitration.”
It is scarcely necessary to point out what an immense amount of
responsible work this involves. First, a separate account of all the
labour and materials employed on the street must be most carefully kept
and totalled at the end of the work, with such additional sum for
supervision, &c., as the urban authority may think necessary.[151] The
exact length of each property “fronting, adjoining or abutting” on the
street, must be most carefully measured. A proportionate sum has then to
be calculated for each of these, and this sum is often complicated by
cross roads, cul-de-sacs, narrow passages, strips of land intervening
between the street and the properties, and many other perplexing
intricacies, in addition to those persons who are legally exempted from
any payment under the following clause of the Public Health Act 1875:
“The incumbent or minister of any church, chapel, or place appropriated
to public religious worship, which is now by law exempt from rates for
the relief of the poor, shall not be liable to any expenses under the
last preceding section as the owner or occupier of such church, chapel,
or place, or of any churchyard or burial ground attached thereto, nor
shall any such expenses be deemed to be a charge on such church, chapel
or other place, or on such churchyard or burial ground . . .” (38 & 39
Vic. c. 55, s. 151.).
The town surveyor, having ascertained what is the amount of the sum due
from each owner, shall proceed to fill in the amount upon a form a
specimen of which is now given:
_To the Owner of certain premises fronting, adjoining or abutting upon
a certain street called in the parish of in the
borough of in the county of _
Whereas the mayor, aldermen and burgesses of the urban sanitary
authority for the said , by a notice in writing pursuant to
the statute in that behalf made and provided, dated the day of
, 18 , required you being the owner of certain premises
fronting, adjoining or abutting upon a street or highway called
, within the said (and not being a street or highway
repairable by the inhabitants at large) to level, pave, metal, channel
and make good the said street or highway within the time and in the
manner specified in the said notice, and according to the plans and
sections deposited at the office of the surveyor to the said urban
sanitary authority at :
And whereas the said notice not having been complied with by you
within the time limited by the said notice, the said urban sanitary
authority have executed the works mentioned or referred to therein:
And whereas the expenses incurred by the said urban sanitary authority
in levelling, paving, metalling, channelling and making good the said
street, amount to pounds shillings and pence:
Wherefore take notice that I the undersigned, being the surveyor of
the said urban sanitary authority, in pursuance of the statutes in
that case made and provided, do hereby apportion the sum of
pounds, shillings and pence as the proportion of the
said sum of pounds, shillings and pence, to be
paid by you as such owner aforesaid, such apportionment being
according to the frontage of your said premises, fronting, adjoining
or abutting upon the said street or highway.
Further take notice that the aforesaid apportionment will be binding
and conclusive upon you unless within the period of three months from
the day of the date of this notice you shall by written notice to the
said urban sanitary authority dispute the same.
Dated this day of , 18 .
______________________________
_Surveyor to the said Urban Sanitary Authority._
______________________________
_Clerk of the said Urban Sanitary Authority._
There seems to be no power on the part of any owner to dispute the
question as to whether the works carried out have been necessary or not,
or whether the cost of the works have been excessive; the only point
upon which they can go to arbitration is that as to whether the
proportion settled by the surveyor is accurate or not, and this point
the arbitrator is left to decide.
It must not be lost sight of that there is a clause in the Public Health
Act 1875, which makes the expenses so settled by the surveyor very
binding upon the owner of the property in question, unless he appeals
within three months from the service of the notice, as the following
extract from the clause will show:
. . . “Where such expenses have been settled and apportioned by the
surveyor of the local authority as payable by such owner, such
apportionment shall be binding and conclusive on such owner, unless
within three months from service of notice on him by the local authority
or their surveyor of the amount settled by the surveyor to be due from
such owner, he shall by written notice dispute the same” . . . (38 & 39
Vic. c. 55, s. 257)[152] and it must also be borne in mind that the
person from whom these expenses may be recovered “is the owner of the
premises at the time when the work was done, not the owner to whom
notice requiring the work to be done may be given” (_vide_ Fitzgerald’s
Public Health Act, p. 301, 3rd edition); so that the town surveyor must
be very careful to make sure that any of the property abutting on the
street has not changed hands before he commences the work.
After the 150th section of the Public Health Act has been carried out
and a private street has been thus put into thorough repair, the urban
authority may take possession of it and declare it to be a highway
repairable by the inhabitants at large; the following section of the Act
gives the modus operandi necessary to effect this:
“When any street within any urban district, not being a highway
repairable by the inhabitants at large, has been sewered, levelled,
paved, flagged, metalled, channelled and made good and provided with
proper means of lighting to the satisfaction of the urban authority,
such authority may if they think fit, by notice in writing put up in any
part of the street, declare the same to be a highway, and thereupon the
same shall become a highway repairable by the inhabitants at large, and
every such notice shall be entered among the proceedings of the urban
authority.
“Provided that no such street shall become a highway so repairable if
within one month after such notice has been put up, the proprietor or
the majority in number of proprietors of such street, by notice in
writing to the urban authority, object thereto, and in ascertaining such
majority, joint proprietors shall be reckoned as one proprietor” (38 &
39 Vic. c. 55, s. 152).
The necessary notices in conformity with this section are usually
prepared by the town clerk, so that the town surveyor has nothing to do
with this proceeding except to maintain the street after it has been
declared a highway repairable by the inhabitants at large, in the same
manner as he does the rest of the public streets within his district.
There is still one other clause of the Public Health Act 1875, which
deals with the question of private roads, and it is as follows:
“Any urban authority may agree with any person for the making of roads
within their district for the public use through the lands and at the
expense of such person, and may agree that such roads shall become and
the same shall accordingly become on completion, highways maintainable
and repairable by the inhabitants at large within their district; they
may also with the consent of two-thirds of their number agree with such
person to pay and may accordingly pay any portion of the expenses of
making such roads” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 146).
This clause is very explicit and requires no comment, it would however
be much better for the urban authority in contemplating a case of this
description to execute the necessary works themselves and agree with the
person about the expense, for if they are intended to be afterwards
taken over it is to be feared that the roads would be very improperly
constructed in the first place by the person intending to hand them
over. It must be noted that the word “roads” is used in the above clause
instead of “streets” as in the other clauses I have quoted, and also
that the word “maintainable” is added to repairable.
Street is the term legally used in the Public Health Act 1875, and is
thus defined:
“Street includes any highway (not being a turnpike road) and any public
bridge (not being a county bridge), and any road, lane, footway, square,
court, alley or passage, whether a thoroughfare or not” (38 & 39 Vic. c.
55, s. 4.) so that whereas in the 150th section of the Public Health Act
1875, any of the above can be dealt with, it is only open for the urban
authority to deal with roads under the 146th section of the Act, and it
is sometimes rather difficult to define a road for the purposes of the
latter section.
[151] In some districts the urban authority make an additional charge
of 5 per cent. upon the total outlay to cover the cost of preliminary
surveys and supervision of the work by their surveyor; this 5 per
cent., however, is not paid to him, but is paid to the city treasurer,
and thus becomes a set off against his salary.
[152] See also 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55, s. 268, where a person who deems
himself aggrieved may memorialise the Local Government Board, &c.
CHAPTER XVIII.
NEW STREETS AND BUILDINGS.
One of the most important duties devolving upon a “town surveyor” is
that of exercising control over any new streets that may be constructed,
or any new buildings that may be erected, within the limits of his
jurisdiction.
This duty is imposed on him by the following clause of the Public Health
Act 1875:
“Every urban authority may make byelaws with respect to the following
matters; (that is to say,)
“(1.) With respect to the level, width and construction of new streets,
and the provisions for the sewerage thereof;
“(2.) With respect to the structure of walls, foundations, roofs, and
chimneys of new buildings, for securing stability and the prevention of
fires, and for purposes of health;
“(3.) With respect to the sufficiency of the space about buildings to
secure a free circulation of air, and with respect to the ventilation of
buildings;
“(4.) With respect to the drainage of buildings, to waterclosets, earth
closets, privies, ashpits, and cesspools, in connexion with buildings,
and to the closing of buildings or parts of buildings unfit for human
habitation, and to prohibition of their use for such habitation;
“And they may further provide for the observance of such byelaws by
enacting therein such provisions as they think necessary as to the
giving of notices; as to the deposit of plans and sections by persons
intending to lay out streets or to construct buildings; as to inspection
by the urban authority, and as to the power of such authority (subject
to the provisions of this Act) to remove, alter, or pull down any work
begun or done in contravention of such byelaws. Provided that no byelaw
made under this section shall affect any building erected in any place
(which at the time of the passing of this Act is included in an urban
sanitary district) before the Local Government Acts came into force in
such place, or any building erected in any place (which at the time of
the passing of this Act is not included in an urban sanitary district)
before such place becomes constituted or included in an urban district,
or by virtue of any order of the Local Government Board subject to this
enactment.
“The provisions of this section, and of the two last preceding sections,
shall not apply to buildings belonging to any railway company, and used
for the purposes of such railway under any Act of Parliament” (38 & 39
Vic. c. 55, s. 157).
The result of this power having been so given to urban authorities, is
that they have all framed sets of byelaws, which having received the
sanction of the Local Government Board, are now law in the several
districts.
In the year 1877, it being found that considerable variation existed in
the requirements set forth in the byelaws, according to the districts
from which they emanated, and experience having shown that the forms of
byelaws previously issued by the Local Government Board were inadequate,
the Local Government Board in order to assist urban authorities issued a
series of model byelaws; amongst the series being a set of byelaws
regulating the manner in which new streets should be constructed and
buildings erected.[153]
These model byelaws are too extensive to give in detail, as they contain
99 clauses, but every town surveyor should at once procure a copy, even
if his corporation have not adopted them, nor intend to do so.
One of the first difficulties that often presents itself to those who
have to enforce the observance of the necessary “giving of notices and
deposit of plans and sections by persons intending to construct new
buildings” is to prove that the building is “new” so as to bring it
under the operations of the Act.
In many cases, of course, there can be no doubt where bare land is being
built upon, but often after buildings have been partially destroyed by
fire, or where extensive alterations are being carried out, some
considerable elements of uncertainty as to what is a “new building” are
introduced.
The law attempts to settle the question as follows:
“For the purposes of this Act, the re-erecting of any building pulled
down to, or below the ground floor, or of any frame-building of which
only the frame-work is left down to the ground floor, or the conversion
into a dwelling house of any building not originally constructed for
human habitation, or the conversion into more than one dwelling house of
a building originally constructed as one dwelling house only, shall be
considered the erection of a new building” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 159).
But the difficulty at once presents itself as to what is meant by the
words “ground floor.” Does this mean the actual floor level, or the
cubical space contained by the walls, floor and ceiling of the “ground
floor” (or as it is sometimes called “ground story”) of the building?
The latter may be assumed to be the correct interpretation, for if we
order a man to hang a picture, or to fix a chandelier on the “ground
floor,” we certainly do not expect to find them placed upon the floor.
It is important that this point should be settled definitely, or some
more explanatory term employed in the Act in order to determine what is
a new building, for in the present state of uncertainty it may be urged
that the whole building must be razed to the ground, whereas if the
proper meaning of “ground floor” is taken, would the removal of the
superstructure and destruction of the ceiling only of the “ground
floor” bring the new work under the definition of a new building and
within the operation of the byelaws?
This uncertainty is now taken advantage of by builders and others, who
sometimes find it irksome and inconvenient to be obliged to construct a
building in accordance with the byelaws of any town. Somewhat sharp
practices are consequently resorted to in order to evade the law, and
old buildings are converted into new ones without any powers of
interference by the urban authority or their surveyor. This is greatly
to be regretted, as unless the building comes within the operation of
the byelaws, it is frequently erected without any sanitary precautions
or even stability.
Sometimes a so-called repair of a building is commenced by adding a new
roof perhaps, at a higher level than the old one; when sufficient time
has elapsed to allay suspicion, a new front is erected, and then new
back and side walls in due course, the alteration of the interior floors
not attracting much attention.
Cases of this description are very troublesome to the town surveyor, as
if legal proceedings are to be taken against the offender, it is
necessary for the surveyor to make surveys and drawings of the works as
they are in progress in order to prove his case, and these might extend
over a considerable period of time.[154] In order to make these surveys
it would be necessary for him to enter the premises whilst the works
were in progress, but there does not seem to be any powers conferred on
him by any Act of Parliament for such a purpose, so that really he has
no power to prevent the occurrences I have mentioned.
It must also not be forgotten that what may sometimes appear to be an
entirely new building, may only be an addition to one that existed
before the passing of the Act, and although the new work may be ten
times as large as the old, still much conflicting evidence may be
brought to bear before it can be proved to be a “new building” within
the meaning of the Act.
Turning again to section 159 of the Public Health Act 1875, these words
will be found as defining also what is a new building: “or the
conversion into a dwelling house of any building not originally
constructed for human habitation.”
It would have been better in the interests of sanitation if the Act had
prohibited the conversion of any building at all into a dwelling house
without the approval of the urban authority, for as the law stands at
present, it is open for an owner of property to convert stables or
warehouses, &c., into dwelling houses, by simply asserting and bringing
witnesses or other evidence to prove that they were “originally
constructed for human habitation” irrespective of whether they are
adapted for the purpose or not, thus defeating the intention of the
Public Health Act to secure a better description of dwellings than those
that were erected before the passing of the Act.
When a dispute does arise with anyone as to whether a building comes
within the definition of “new” or not, it is well if possible to agree
upon certain points of fact and upon plans, &c., before the case comes
into court, and then to endeavour to get the magistrates to “view.” This
course if pursued often saves lengthy litigation, and a great waste of
time and money.
With reference to the deposit of plans of new streets or buildings, the
following clause of the Public Health Act 1875 provides that this shall
be done:
“Where a notice, plan or description of any work is required by any
byelaw made by an urban authority to be laid before that authority, the
urban authority shall, within one month after the same has been
delivered or sent to their surveyor or clerk,[155] signify in writing
their approval or disapproval of the intended work to the person
proposing to execute the same; and if the work is commenced after such
notice of disapproval, or before the expiration of such month without
such approval, and is in any respect not in conformity with any byelaw
of the urban authority, the urban authority may cause so much of the
work as has been executed to be pulled down or removed” . . . (38 & 39
Vic. c. 55, s. 158.).
The result of these clauses of the Act with reference to new streets and
buildings is, that some of the most arduous and irksome duties of the
town surveyor are embodied in the few words they contain. These duties
consist of, first, the careful examination of, and report upon all plans
of new streets and buildings; secondly, the constant supervision of
these streets and buildings whilst the works are in progress; and each
of these duties will be considered in the course of this chapter.
First then, as to the deposit and examination of the plans of new
streets or buildings.
The byelaws of which I have already made mention should contain some
such clause as the following:
“Every person who shall intend to make or lay out any new street,
whether the same shall be intended to be used as a public way or not,
shall give notice to the urban authority of such intention, by writing
delivered to them at their office, or at the office of their surveyor,
and shall at the same time leave or cause to be left at the office of
the urban authority, or of their surveyor, a plan and section of such
intended new street, drawn to a scale of not less than 1 inch to every
44 feet, and shall show on every such plan the names of the owners of
the land through or over which such street shall be intended to pass,
the level, width, direction, the proposed mode of construction, the
proposed name of such intended new street, and its position relatively
to the streets nearest thereto; the size and number of the intended
building lots, and the proposed sites, height, class, and nature of the
buildings to be erected therein, and the proposed height of the division
and fence walls thereon; and the name and address of the person
intending to lay out such new street, and he shall himself sign such
plan, or cause the same to be signed by his duly authorised agent.
“Such person shall show on every such section the level of the present
surface of the ground above some known fixed datum, the level and rate
or rates of inclination of the intended new street, the level and
inclination of the streets with which it will be connected, and the
level of the lowest floors of the intended new buildings.
“Every person who shall intend to erect any new building shall give
notice to the urban authority of such intention by writing delivered to
them at their office or at the office of their surveyor, and shall at
the same time leave or cause to be left at the said office detail plans
and sections of every floor of such intended new building, drawn to a
scale of not less than 1 inch to every 8 feet, showing the position,
form and dimensions of the several parts of such building, and of the
watercloset, earth closet, privy, cesspool, ashpit, well, and all other
appurtenances; and together with such plans and sections he shall leave
or cause to be left at the office of the urban authority, or of their
surveyor, a description of the materials of which the building is
proposed to be constructed, of the intended mode of drainage, and means
of water supply.
“Such person shall at the same time leave or cause to be left at the
office of the urban authority, or of their surveyor, a block plan drawn
to a scale of not less than 1 inch to every 44 feet, and shall show the
position of the buildings and appurtenances of the properties
immediately adjoining, the width and level of the street in front, and
of the street, if any, at the rear of such building, the level of the
lowest floor of such building, and of any yard or ground belonging
thereto.
“Such person shall likewise show on such plan the intended lines of
drainage of such building, and the intended size, depth and inclination
of each drain; and the details of the arrangement proposed to be adopted
for the ventilation of the drains.”
With reference to the deposit of plans as required by the above byelaw,
the following suggestions as to the best manner of effecting this may be
of some use:
(1.) The town surveyor should see that the person, or his agent,
intending to carry out the work, deposits tracings of the proposed
street or building signed by himself, so that there should be no after
dispute as to what really has been deposited; these tracings should be
on good paper properly inked in and coloured so as to be indelible. In
some towns it is the practice for original plans to be deposited
temporarily with the surveyor, who is expected to have them traced and
then returned to the owner, but this not only tends to the possibility
of dispute as to the correctness of the tracings, but it also takes up a
large amount of the surveyor’s time, or of such other officer as may
have charge of this branch of the duties.
In order to insure that the plans deposited shall not be afterwards
claimed by the person making the deposit, it might be well to add these
words to the clause of the byelaws which I have quoted:
“All such plans and sections so left at the office of the urban
authority or of their surveyor, shall remain the property of the urban
authority.”
(2.) It is advisable for the town surveyor to have in his possession a
number of printed forms on which application should be made by the
person intending to erect a new building and filled in and signed by him
or his duly authorised agent. The following is given as a specimen form
for this purpose:
_To the Surveyor of the Urban Authority of _
I hereby give you notice that it is my intention to erect certain
buildings in street, and that the following particulars relate
thereto:
---+-----------------------------------++---+-------------------------
No.| Questions. ||No.| Answers.
---+-----------------------------------++---+-------------------------
1 |Christian and Surname _in full_, || 1 |
|Address and Occupation of || |
|persons for whom buildings to || |
|be erected. || |
| || |
2 |Number of drawings deposited. || 2 |
| || |
3 |Name of architect, if any. || 3 |
| || |
4 |Description of buildings and of || 4 |
|the materials to be used in || |
|construction of same. || |
| || |
5 |Situation of buildings. || 5 |
| || |
6 |Level, or intended level of cellar,|| 6 |
|or ground floor, with reference || |
|to surface of street. || |
| || |
7 |Thickness of walls. || 7 |
| || |
8 |Height of building in stories. || 8 |
| || |
9 |Area of clear open space at rear || 9 |
|or side of buildings exclusively || |
|belonging thereto. || |
| || |
10 |Distance across such open space. ||10 |
| || |
11 |Description of ventilation. ||11 |
| || |
12 |Width of street or open space ||12 |
|opposite buildings. || |
| || |
13 |Size and description of drains, ||13 |
|and traps, and if ventilated. || |
| || |
14 |Inclination of drains. ||14 |
| || |
15 |Description of outlet to drains. ||15 |
| || |
16 |How supplied with water. ||16 |
| || |
17 |Situation, dimensions, and ||17 |
|particulars of apparatus of w.c.’s.|| |
---+-----------------------------------++---+-------------------------
And I herewith leave detail plans and sections of every floor of such
intended new buildings, drawn to a scale of not less than 1 inch to
every 8 feet, showing the position, form, and dimensions of the
several parts of such buildings, and of the watercloset, privy,
cesspool, earthcloset, ashpit, well, and all other appurtenances; and
also, a block plan drawn to a scale of not less than 1 inch to every
44 feet, showing the position of the buildings and appurtenances of
the properties immediately adjoining, the width and level of the
street, the level of the lowest floor of the intended building, and of
the yard or ground belonging thereto.
Dated this day of 18
Signature in full,
Address,
Occupation,
A similar form may be prepared relating to plans of proposed new
streets, but of course the number of the questions contained in it will
be less.
(3.) When the necessary notices have been given and the tracings
properly deposited with the surveyor, he should carefully examine them
to see if they are in accordance with the byelaws which are in force in
his district. They should then be folded and placed in a large envelope,
which should be endorsed with the name of the person proposing to carry
out the work, the description of the work proposed, the name of the
architect, if any, the name of the builder, if any, the date of the
deposit, and a blank left for the date of approval. Each envelope should
also have a large number stamped upon it.
(4.) These particulars should be entered in a book of reference against
a corresponding number, so that at any future date it may be easy to
find and refer to any plans that have been deposited by means of an
index and the number on the envelope.
(5.) If on examining the plans the surveyor finds anything in them
which does not conform to the byelaws, he should be empowered by the
urban authority to return them at once to the person depositing them,
without having to wait to lay them before a committee, as this is a
great saving of time. In returning the plans the surveyor should write a
letter setting forth a schedule of his objections and the particulars of
the manner in which the plans and sections fail to comply with the
requirements of the byelaws.
(6.) If the plans are redeposited unaltered or showing still some
non-compliance with the byelaws, the surveyor must lay them before his
committee and explain in what respects they are defective, leaving it to
the committee to decide whether they shall be approved or not.
(7.) If the plans are in accordance with the byelaws, the surveyor
reports the fact to the committee, whereupon the plans should be at once
signed by the chairman of the committee.
(8.) All plans which the committee decline to approve of should be at
once returned to the person who deposited them with a written
notification of the reasons.
(9.) Plans which are approved of by the committee and afterwards
ratified by the general meeting of the urban authority, should be
carefully put away in pigeon-holes, so that by means of the reference
book previously described they can be easily found at any future time.
This is very important, as no extension of a building the plans of which
have been thus approved by the urban authority can ever afterwards be
carried out without their consent; and the plans of any alteration which
would not involve building upon an increased area must be deposited as
in the case of a new building.
(10.) A notification in writing should be sent to the person who has
deposited the plans when they have been approved by the urban authority;
and in sending this notification it is well to draw his attention to the
fact that notice must be given to the surveyor of the commencement of
the work, in order that the foundations, drains, &c., may be examined
by him before the ground is filled in.
The importance and necessity for the deposit of plans with a sanitary
authority cannot be over-estimated, but this deposit is of but little
practical good unless it can be insured that all the buildings are
erected strictly in conformity with these plans, and this, according to
the Act, is the duty also of the town surveyor. As a matter of fact, it
is quite impossible for any single person in any large town to perform
this duty, and a staff of assistants is consequently necessary if the
sanitary authority really wish their byelaws to be enforced.
Anyone who is practically acquainted with the difficulties that even
architects experience in superintending buildings they have _themselves_
designed, and how much they have to trust to the clerk of works (of
which there is generally one to every building), will readily see what
an absurdity it is to suppose that a town surveyor, with his multitude
of other duties and attendances at committees and meetings, can even
pretend to see that the 99 detail clauses of such byelaws as those
emanating from the Local Government Board Office, or even those of a
less stringent character, can possibly be enforced, especially when it
is remembered that many of the buildings he has to inspect have no
superintending architect, but are being erected for purposes of
speculation by what are commonly known as jerry builders.
Laws may be passed, books on sanitary questions may be written, but
until a change is made in the machinery and manner of the inspection of
buildings in the course of erection, and a large staff of inspectors or
sanitary police or some such officials are kept by a sanitary authority,
very little real advancement will be made with the poorer classes of
buildings.
It must in fairness to the builder be stated that to erect houses in
strict accordance with the model byelaws would probably mean loss of
money to him, as they could not possibly be built with any prospect of
a reasonable return upon the outlay. This partly arises from the
stringent clauses inserted with respect to the structure of walls and
other precautions for the prevention of fires. I cannot help thinking
that too much interference is now made by sanitary authorities for the
protection of property from fire.[156] It is not a sanitary question,
and is certainly one which chiefly affects insurance companies. Every
one should be able to pay his small insurance premium and the companies
should look after their own interests, and not expect it to be done by
others. If the sanitary authority wish to interfere in the question of
fire, why should not the protection of _life_ be considered as much as
property? Yet no clause can be discovered in the model byelaws rendering
it compulsory to make some provision in dwelling-houses or factories for
the easy escape of the inmates in case of fire. Indeed, as the Public
Health Act does not authorise the enactment of a byelaw for such a
purpose, such a clause would most probably be held to be _ultra vires_.
Another cause of expense to builders is the necessity imposed on them to
provide a comparatively large open space at the back or sides of new
dwelling-houses, thus sacrificing land, and sometimes making it almost
impossible to build at all. This necessity for open gardens or yards at
the back of even small labourers’ dwellings is in some towns pushed to
an extreme. If such houses are erected in a thoroughly sanitary manner
in all points of detail, it is questionable if this open space is really
beneficial. My experience has shown me that the space is often misused,
animals, such as rabbits, chickens, pigeons, &c., being kept there, or
it is made into a so-called garden, really a refuse heap which is a
receptacle for all the garbage and filth of the house, soon becoming a
fruitful source of disease to the occupants of the house itself and the
neighbours. It is also difficult to ensure that the space thus provided
and approved of in the deposited plans shall not be built upon at some
future period. It would be better if the streets in front of such
dwellings were wide, and a narrow street or “drangway” constructed at
the back for the dust-cart service, supply of coals, &c. The houses
themselves should have their rooms properly and thoroughly ventilated;
underground kitchens or living rooms should be prohibited. The drainage,
water-supply, and all the apparatus in connection with them, should be
perfect but simple. At the back of the house should be a small yard or
court well paved with asphalte or other impervious material, in which
should be placed the wash-house, w.c., &c. These and public parks and
plenty of fresh air in the streets and in the dwelling-houses themselves
should take the place of the large open spaces at the back of small
dwelling-houses, which, as I have already stated, are generally so much
misused.
The model byelaws with regard to new streets and buildings issued by the
Local Government Board contain most admirable clauses--valuable
suggestions which should receive attention from any town surveyor who
has to advise his corporation upon the subject of framing a set of
byelaws for his district--but they necessarily contain many clauses
which are not suitable equally well for towns in the north, south, east,
and west of England.
Many of the clauses are too stringent to be enforced, but this arises
not from any fault in the byelaws themselves, but rather from the
machinery employed in carrying them into effect. To secure all that they
require adequate inspection is needed, and this might be effected if
there was a fee charged by the urban authority of any town for the
purposes of proper inspection of buildings in course of construction;
and although it must be admitted that any provision which increases the
cost of construction of small dwelling-houses which shall be complete
in all sanitary requisites is undesirable, the extra cost of such
inspection would be too small to be appreciable, while the advantages
arising from such improved supervision would, even from a pecuniary
point of view, be of immense advantage not only to the community as
tending to improve the public health, but also to the owner as ensuring
good honest work in return for his money. In larger and more expensive
buildings this supervision is exercised by the architect, but as a rule
there is no architect employed in the case of small houses, and the
builder is accordingly left to his own devices, with frequently
unfortunate results.
[153] ‘Model Bye-laws issued by the Local Government Board for the use
of sanitary authorities. New Streets and Buildings, IV.’ Printed by
George E. Eyre and William Spottiswoode, 1877.
[154] It is open also to question whether in the case of an old
building being gradually altered into a new one, it would be possible
to prosecute, as there is the following limitation as to proceedings
in the Public Health Act 1875: “Any complaint or information made or
laid in pursuance of this Act shall be made or laid within six months
from the time when the matter of such complaint or information
respectively arose” . . . (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 252). The complaint
could not be made when the work was first commenced, as no offence
would have been committed, and if made after the work was finished, it
might be urged that the offence was commenced more than six months
prior, and that the complaint should have been made “when the matter
of such complaint or information respectively arose.”
[155] Plans are usually deposited with the surveyor as being the
officer who would be most likely to understand them.
[156] Nothing can be more vexatious than the bye-law compelling the
party walls of new buildings to be carried up above the roof to at
least 12 inches; not only does this frequently spoil the architectural
appearance of a building, but it causes great expense in order to keep
the wet out: a very difficult thing with a wall treated in this
manner.
CHAPTER XIX.
SCAVENGING.
In a great number of towns in this country the town surveyor has charge
of the unostentatious, though very necessary sanitary work of the
scavenging of the district over which he has charge, and the following
are the clauses of the Public Health Act 1875, under which he carries
out his duties:
“Every local authority may, and when required by order of the Local
Government Board shall, themselves undertake or contract for--
“The removal of house refuse from premises;
“The cleansing of earthclosets, privies, ashpits, and cesspools;
either for the whole or any part of their district: Moreover every urban
authority and any rural authority invested by the Local Government Board
with the requisite powers may, and when required by the said board
shall, themselves undertake or contract for the proper cleansing of
streets, and may also themselves undertake or contract for the proper
watering of streets for the whole or any part of their district.
“All matters collected by the local authority or contractor in pursuance
of this section may be sold or otherwise disposed of, and any profits
thus made by an urban authority shall be carried to the account of the
fund or rate applicable by them for the general purposes of this Act;
and any profits thus made by a rural authority in respect of any
contributory place shall be carried to the account of the fund or rate
out of which expenses incurred under this section by that authority in
such contributory place are defrayed.
“If any person removes or obstructs the local authority or contractor in
removing any matters by this section authorised to be removed by the
local authority, he shall for each offence be liable to a penalty not
exceeding five pounds: Provided that the occupier of the house within
the district shall not be liable to such penalty in respect of any such
matters which are produced on his own premises and are intended to be
removed for sale or for his own use, and are in the meantime kept so as
not to be a nuisance” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 42).
The next clause imposes a penalty on the local authority if they fail
“without reasonable excuse after notice in writing from the occupier of
any house” to cleanse the ashpit, &c., within seven days if they have
“themselves undertaken or contracted for the removal of house refuse”
&c., and the next clause is as follows:
“Where the local authority do not themselves undertake or contract for,
“The cleansing of footways and pavements adjoining any premises;
“The removal of house refuse from any premises;
“The cleansing of earthclosets, privies, ashpits, and cesspools
belonging to any premises;
“They may make byelaws imposing the duty of such cleansing or removal,
at such intervals as they think fit, on the occupier of any such
premises.
“An urban authority[157] may also make byelaws for the prevention of
nuisances arising from snow, filth, dust, ashes, and rubbish, and for
the prevention of the keeping of animals on any premises so as to be
injurious to health”[158] (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 44).
There is also another clause in the Public Health Act 1875, which is as
follows:
“Any urban authority may, if they see fit, provide in proper and
convenient situations receptacles for the temporary deposit and
collection of dust, ashes, and rubbish; they may also provide fit
buildings and places for the deposit of any matters collected by them in
pursuance of this part of this Act” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 45).
The result of the above comprehensive clauses upon the subject of
scavenging is that the following duties fall upon the town surveyor
where that officer is responsible for such work:
(1.) “The removal of house refuse from premises.”
This work, like all the rest which follows, can be done either by the
local authority themselves or by contract, the former method, as I hope
presently to show, being much the best system.
In connection with this first duty of the removal of house refuse, the
following points will have to be considered:
(_a._) What is house refuse?
(_b._) What is the best manner of storing it on the premises pending the
visit of the scavenger?
(_c._) Which are the best methods for its collection?
(_d._) Which are the best methods for its disposal?
(2.) “The cleansing of earthclosets, privies, ashpits, and cesspools.”
This work where necessary (owing to the want of a system of sewerage)
can be carried out simultaneously with the collection of house refuse
and in almost the same manner.
(3.) “The proper cleansing of streets.”
In connection with this duty the following points must be considered:
(_a._) The best methods for sweeping and cleansing streets.
(_b._) If machinery effects such work better and more economically than
hand labour.
(_c._) The extra work involved by the bad construction of streets, or
the ill chosen materials of which they are formed.
(_d._) Whether private streets, courts and alleys, “not repairable by
the inhabitants at large,” should be swept and cleansed by the local
authority?
(_e._) The ultimate disposal of excessive accumulations of mud.
(_f._) The removal and disposal of snow.
(4.) “The proper watering of streets for the whole or any part of their
district.”
In considering this question it is necessary to note:
(_a._) The best form of vehicle for carrying and spreading the water.
(_b._) The number, position, and description of standpipes.
(_c._) Whether vehicles, or fixed standpipes and hose are best.
(5.) If the local authority do not impose a byelaw they must themselves
cleanse the “footways and pavements adjoining any premises;” and this in
excessively muddy weather, or after a heavy fall of snow, is no
inconsiderable work.
(6.) An _urban authority_ may make provision for the “temporary deposit
and collection of dust, ashes and rubbish.”
This involves public dust-bins being placed in suitable positions in the
town, the points in connection with this work being,
(a.) The most suitable sites for such accommodation.
(b.) The materials and form of which they shall be constructed.
Having thus stated all the heads under which the work of scavenging may
be grouped, it is necessary to decide what is “house refuse;” for unless
this is satisfactorily settled, considerable onus and expense will be
put upon the local authority if they are to include in the removal
trade, garden, and other similar refuse.[159]
It may be assumed that all house refuse which it is the duty of the
scavenger to remove, is really so removed by the direction of the local
authority without dispute, but that the following articles, which
frequently find their way into a domestic dust-bin, are not in the
strict terms of the Act expected to be removed by him. (1) Plaster from
walls and brick bats, (2) Large quantities of broken bottles and flower
pots, (3) Clinkers and ashes from foundries and green-houses, (4) Wall
paper torn from the rooms of a house, (5) Scrap tin (but not old tins
which have contained meats, &c., and which, although very useless and
bulky, may be fairly assumed to be house refuse), (6) All garden refuse
such as grass cuttings, dead leaves, and the loppings from trees and
shrubs.[160]
As a matter of fact, out of ninety towns with which I communicated on
this subject only thirteen of them directed the removal of both trade
and garden refuse without any special extra payment being made by the
householder, and this is only done when these materials are placed in
the ordinary dustbin or ashpit attached to a house. Several towns,
however, it appears remove such materials on special payments being made
of sums varying from 1_s._ 6_d._ to 3_s._ per load.
Disputes frequently arise between the men employed in scavenging and the
householder on these vexed questions as to the difference between house,
trade or garden refuse: a dispute often raised by the scavengers
themselves, in the hope of obtaining a gratuity or reward for the
clearance of a dustbin, which no doubt, legally, they are perfectly
justified in refusing to empty; and in order to lessen the chance of
such disputes and to attempt to settle this question, the following
suggestions may be of value.
It would no doubt be vexatious if any sanitary authority were to
absolutely refuse to remove the “garden” refuse from those houses to
which a small flower garden was attached, whilst it would on the
contrary be an unfair tax upon the general community if the refuse of
large gardens was removed without payment. A good rule would therefore
be to remove only such _garden_ refuse as was contained in the ordinary
dustbin or ashpit attached to a house, and that as the removal of any
kind of _trade_ refuse would no doubt lead to abuses if done
gratuitously by the sanitary authority, that this material should only
be removed on payment of some sum, which should be previously fixed by
the local authority, and each case should be reported to the officer
superintending the work before it was removed.
The next question is the important one of the manner and place in which
house refuse shall be temporarily stored pending the visit of the
scavenger.
The Public Health Act of 1875 enacts that: “Every local authority shall
provide that all drains, waterclosets, earthclosets, privies, _ashpits_,
and cesspools within their district be constructed and kept so as not to
be a nuisance or injurious to health” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 40).
And section 35 of the above Act states, “It shall not be lawful newly to
erect any house or to rebuild any house pulled down to or below the
ground floor without a sufficient watercloset, earth closet, privy, and
an _ashpit_ furnished with proper doors and coverings. Any person who
causes any house to be erected or rebuilt in contravention of this
enactment shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds” (38
& 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 35).
The same Act also gives power to local authorities to enforce provision
of ashpit accommodation for houses where such accommodation does not
already exist, and to frame byelaws with respect to ashpits.
There can be no doubt that the position of the dustbin or ashpit, as
regards its site with reference to the main dwelling-house, is of
primary sanitary importance, for if the garbage and domestic
accumulations therein are allowed to remain for a few days, especially
when the weather is close, damp, and warm, they become very offensive,
and the emanations therefrom may even be highly deleterious and
dangerous to health; this effect is aggravated by persons emptying
vegetable refuse and other matters which are _wet_ into the dustbin, as
decomposition of these matters is greatly assisted by this addition, and
it would be well that all such matters should be burnt on the kitchen or
scullery fire along with a large percentage of the ashes which could be
sifted and saved from those which too readily find their way into the
dustbin, and are thus wasted. Care would of course have to be taken in
this process that no smell or nuisance was caused by the process of
burning.
It is open to considerable doubt if the fixed dustbin or ashpit is the
best or most sanitary receptacle for the house refuse; they may be
necessary and suitable for Public Institutions, or for large isolated
private dwellings, or for schools or any places where excessive
quantities of refuse may accumulate, but where this refuse is
systematically and properly removed by the order of the local authority,
at such times and in such manner as will be hereafter pointed out,
moveable or portable dustbins, boxes or baskets are far preferable to
the large immoveable, inconvenient fixed ashpit, recommended and
enforced under the Act.
The next point to consider is that of the collection of the house
refuse, which should be effected satisfactorily, economically and
expeditiously.
The following are the three methods by which this is attempted:
(1.) By a house to house call at intermittent periods.
(2.) By the scavengers giving notice of their approach by ringing a bell
or by other signal, and requiring the householder to bring out the
refuse to the cart.
(3.) By placing public dustbins in different localities, and expecting
householders in their vicinity to place the house refuse in these
dustbins, which are then cleared from time to time by the local
authority.
Experience alone can teach which of these is the best method to adopt in
any district, and it is usually found that some modification of all
three is necessary.
It is, however, difficult sometimes to adopt public dustbins not only on
account of their first cost, but from the objections raised by the
occupiers of adjacent houses to their being fixed in their
neighbourhood.
If these dustbins were constructed with properly balanced self-closing
lids, these objections might be overcome, and their first cost would be
but trifling when compared with the benefit to be derived by placing
them in some of the thickly populated courts and alleys which are
unfortunately to be found in nearly every town. Where there are no
public dustbins the inhabitants of these courts throw their waste
products upon the surface of the streets or courts, from time to time
throughout the day, as it cannot be expected nor desired that such
materials should remain, even for twenty-four hours, in their one living
room, which is frequently over crowded, and has but little spare space
even for the common necessities of life; but that these waste products
should be thus strewn over the surface of the street or court is almost
equally objectionable, and points to the advantage to be gained by
placing in convenient situations covered dustbins which could be easily
emptied once a day.
Undoubtedly the best method for the removal of refuse is the house to
house call, but except in suburban districts and for the collection of
refuse from the better class of dwelling-houses and public institutions,
the expense, delay and difficulty which would be incurred in calling at
every house throughout a town, would make it almost impracticable, and
consequently this system is universally combined with that which is
known as the bell or signal system, which simply means that the
scavenging cart in going its rounds has a bell attached to it, or the
horse, which bell rings automatically as the cart proceeds on its way;
or the man in charge blows a trumpet, or calls in stentorian tones,
“Dust oh!” On hearing this signal, _but not before_, the householder is
expected to bring out the refuse in some convenient receptacle, which is
then emptied into the cart by the scavenger.
As a matter of fact, the receptacles containing all the waste products
of these householders are brought out and are placed in the gutter of
the street close to the kerb, long before the cart makes its appearance
or can be reasonably expected to do so.
The result of these (generally inappropriate) receptacles filled with
heterogenous collections of house refuse being left unprotected in the
public streets, is that their contents are quickly strewn about the
surface of the street, by their being upset accidentally, or purposely,
and the appearance of the street, which has probably been carefully
swept and garnished during the night or early in the morning, quickly
assumes, especially in a high wind, a very offensive character, and
probably has to be entirely re-swept and cleansed before the ordinary
traffic of the day commences.
To obviate this evil I must refer my readers to a small book on the
subject of scavenging, entitled ‘Dirty Dustbins and Sloppy Streets,’
published by Messrs. Spon & Co., written by myself, in which I have
suggested moveable iron cylinders being placed in the streets for the
reception of the house refuse.
The “house to house” call system in the suburbs of a town may be greatly
assisted by a very simple remedy, which has already been tried in some
towns with considerable success. It consists in the householder placing
a card bearing the letter D, or some other distinguishing mark, in a
conspicuous place in a window, when the services of the scavengers are
required; these cards should be printed and circulated by the Sanitary
Authority of the district, who should state on the back of the card the
days on which the scavengers would visit each neighbourhood, with the
approximate hour of the day in which they would appear, in order that
the householder may not be unnecessarily inconvenienced by being obliged
to keep the card for any length of time in his window.
The scavengers in passing observe the signal, and call at the house;
otherwise they pass on, unless specially called in by the occupants,
thus avoiding any unnecessary delay in their rounds.
A visit from the scavengers either before seven or after ten in the
morning is generally very inconvenient for households of a superior
class, and should be, if possible, carefully avoided by the sanitary
authority.
The cart usually employed for scavenging is that known as the ordinary
“tip cart,” strongly, if not clumsily, constructed of an oak frame, with
elm or deal sides of considerable height; it holds about a couple of
cubic yards of material, and costs from sixteen to twenty pounds.
These carts are not only clumsy and heavy, but they give an overweighted
diminutive appearance to the horse between the shafts, especially as the
quality of horses employed for work of this character is frequently none
of the best. The height, too, of the cart is often so great as to
necessitate the use of a short ladder, up which the scavenger has to
climb, the result being a shower of dust when it is being loaded with
house refuse, and spatterings of mud, when it is being used as a slop
cart.
It is difficult also to effectually cover a cart of this description.
The imperfect mode at present adopted is to cover it with a tarpaulin,
which is tied down as tightly as the circumstances of the case will
admit, but which as a rule does not effectually answer the purpose for
which it is intended. In towns where the house refuse is not collected
separately from the road scrapings, a judicious mixture of the two in
the cart considerably assists in preventing any mud from splashing over
or the dust from blowing about.
The employment of wooden carts for this work is bad economy, their rough
usage, and the mode adopted for emptying them by “tipping,” renders
their life a short one; a cart in constant work frequently costs from
4_l._ to 5_l._ per annum in repairs, and having but little of the
original material of which it was constructed left in it at the end of
six years. They are also difficult to cleanse or disinfect.
With a view to obviate these and other objections, several improved
carts and waggons have been introduced by different makers, who have
styled them by a variety of names. Amongst others they are called dust
carts, general purpose carts, sanitary carts, slush carts, tumbler
carts, mud waggons, tip waggons, slop waggons, &c. These are constructed
with iron bodies fixed upon wooden frames and wheels; they are of
various forms and designs, the principal objects aimed at being
lightness of construction combined with strength, so balanced as to bear
with a minimum of weight upon the horse; economy in their cost has not
been lost sight of, and they are usually provided with some special
means for emptying, either by being tipped by a chain and windlass, or
by some mechanical arrangement of the tailboard; they are built very low
upon their axles, so as to be easily filled, are either completely
covered over with a moveable lid, or are fitted with hinged side boards,
so as to prevent any splashing over of their contents, and as they are
nearly all constructed with iron; they are easily cleansed and
disinfected whenever it is thought necessary to do so.
With reference to the important question of the ultimate disposal of
house refuse, street sweepings &c., no rules can be laid down, as so
much depends upon the position of every town and the character of the
district in which it is situated, as the following replies to some
questions which I addressed to several English towns will show.
In many towns it is stated that the whole of the refuse is used by brick
makers, in others it is simply “tipped to waste.” In one case the answer
is, “Sold by auction twice a year,” but to whom it is sold, and for what
purpose, does not transpire. In some towns it appears to be mixed with
lime and used as manure upon the fields, and in others it is mixed with
the sludge of the sewage farms, and is then ploughed or dug into the
soil of the farm. This seems a better plan than that of another town,
where it is “given or thrown away,” although the difficulty of disposing
of the old iron, tins, &c., is not touched upon in any of the foregoing
answers. The next reply states that “it is riddled, and the cinders and
vegetable refuse are burnt to generate steam, the fine dust is used with
the manure manufactory (tub system), the old iron is sold, and the pots,
&c., used for the foundations of roads.” In one case the whole of the
refuse is taken out to sea in hopper barges, and sunk in deep
water.[161] In a great number of towns it is sold by tender for the
year, but what eventually becomes of it does not transpire. But the most
favoured methods, where it cannot be sold as manure to farmers, seem to
be either that of carting it away to some spot outside the town, and
there using it for the purpose of filling up hollows and depressions, or
that of giving or selling it to brick-makers.
The practice of filling up hollow places with such materials cannot be
too strongly deprecated if there is any chance of dwelling houses being
erected on them, as the unsanitary condition of sites thus formed has
been frequently demonstrated.
Where towns are unable to dispose of their refuse by sale to farmers or
market gardeners, the best method, and one which is gaining in
popularity every day, is that of its destruction by fire.
With this object in view a Mr Fryer has invented an apparatus which he
styles a “Patent Carboniser, for the conversion of garbage, street, and
market sweepings, also other vegetable refuse, into charcoal.” This
apparatus consists of a structure somewhat resembling, externally, a
brick kiln. It is divided into hopper-shaped compartments, which at the
bottom are furnished with a furnace, fitted with a reverberatory arch. A
fire is lighted in this furnace, the necessary combustion being
obtained, and the heat maintained, by burning the cinders, which are
sifted out of the house refuse for this purpose. All the street
sweepings, refuse, garbage, &c., is then thrown in at the top of the
kiln, and it is there and then completely destroyed by the action of the
fire, and converted into charcoal, which is withdrawn through a sliding
door fixed at the bottom of the kiln.[162]
The next point which has to be considered, and which is the second in
order of the list of duties I have given at the commencement of this
chapter, is “the cleansing of earth closets, privies, ash-pits, and
cesspools.”
This is generally effected in conjunction with the collection of the
house refuse and the work is carried out at night. Under the Goux-tub
system the ashes of the house refuse are largely used as a deodorant or
absorbent as a lining for the tub,[163] but in the pail systems this
mixture is not effected until the tubs and refuse arrive together at the
depôt.
For descriptions of the manner in which the pail system for the
collection of excreta is carried out in Birmingham, I must refer my
readers to an article written by myself in a number of _The Sanitary
Engineer_ of New York published on the 1st Sept. 1881, in which I have
entered fully into the method there adopted and its advantages and
disadvantages, but which are too long to recapitulate in this chapter.
The next duty which has to be considered is that of “the proper
cleansing of streets.”
There is no doubt that for the sake of the appearance as well as the
health of any town its streets cannot be too well cleansed. Muddy and
wet streets cause dampness in the subsoil of neighbouring dwellings, and
dust is not only injurious to tradesmen’s goods but also to the lungs of
those who have to breathe an atmosphere loaded with silicate and organic
impurities.[164]
Street cleansing is effected either by hand-sweeping and hand-scraping,
or by machinery. As to which is the most economical much depends upon
the value of labour, and also upon the condition of the roads to be
dealt with, but in point of time and as a general rule the value of a
horse rotary brush-sweeping machine is undoubted, the only time at which
such a machine fails to do effective work is on the occasions when the
mud to be removed (owing to a peculiar condition of the atmosphere), has
attained a semisolidity, and is of a stiff and sticky consistency, when
it either adheres to and clogs the brushes of the machine, or is
flattened by them on to the road instead of being removed.[165]
The brushes of a machine last about 180 hours constant work, and then
the old stocks can be easily refilled with bass at no great cost. The
comparative work which can be done by a sweeping machine is about 11 to
1 of that effected by manual labour, so that the economy involved by the
former method is evident.
The strength and durability of the brooms used for the work of sweeping
the streets is of some importance, as affecting the ultimate cost of the
work, and some care and skill is required in their selection. Bass
brooms are better than birch brooms for this purpose, and the bass of
which the brooms are made should be sufficiently stout and of regular
thickness; it should be tough and elastic, not old, dry, and brittle,
each knot should be of uniform size and be firmly set, and the number of
knots in each broom head is also a matter of choice. A convenient and
fair test of the soundness of a broom is to soak it for a few days in
water before issuing it to the sweeper, and then note the time it will
last. The handles of the brooms should be made of alder wood.
On the question of the extra work involved in street cleansing by its
bad construction or by the materials of which it is constructed, climate
must be considered, as well as the amount of traffic it has to bear, and
also its gradient and the habits of the people residing in it.[166]
The Superintendent of the Scavenging Department at Liverpool has made
some observations and obtained some valuable information on these
points, which he has detailed in a report he presented to the Health
Committee of that borough in the year 1877, an abstract of which is as
follows:
GROSS COST FOR EACH TIME OF CLEANSING 10,000 YARDS SUPERFICIAL OF
DIFFERENT DESCRIPTIONS OF ROADWAY IN THE BOROUGH OF LIVERPOOL.
--------+---------+--------+-------+------+------+------+------------
| | | Con- | | | | Gross
| | | dition| Area | Loads| Times| Cost per
|Descrip- | | of re-| of | re- | swept|10,000 Yards
|tion | |pair of| Car- | moved| in | Superficial
| of | When | Road- |riage-|in one| one | for each
Street.|Pavement.| paved. | way. | way. |Month.|month.| cleansing.
--------+---------+--------+-------+------+------+------+------------
| | | | Yds. | | |
| | | | supr.| | |£ _s._ _d._
Lord |Granite | 1877 | Very | 4,503| 15 | 26 |0 6 5¹⁄₂
Street |setts, | | good | | | |
|asphalte | | | | | |
|joints | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
North | Ditto | 1872 | Good | 3,287| 17¹⁄₂| 26 |0 8 10¹⁄₂
John | | | | | | |
Street | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Tithe- |Granite | 1872 | Bad | 5,150| 38 | 26 |0 11 2
barn |setts, | and | | | | |
Street |ordinary | 1874 | | | | |
|joints | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
West |Ditto, | 1876 | Very |11,980| 35 | 13 |0 9 4³⁄₄
Derby |asphalte | | good | | | |
Road |joints | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Great | Ditto | 1877 | Good |16,860| 85 | 13 |0 14 4¹⁄₂
Howard | | | | | | |
Street | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Great |Ditto, | Not as-| Mod- |15,900| 85 | 13 |0 14 1
Homer |ordinary |certain-| erate | | | |
Street |joints | able | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Kensing-|Macadam | Ditto | Good |14,540| 76 | 13 |0 14 3³⁄₄
ton |breasted | | | | | |
Street |with sett| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Stanley | Ditto | Ditto | Bad |16,534|186 | 13 |1 8 9¹⁄₄
Road | | | | | | |
--------+---------+--------+-------+------+------+------+------------
He adds that the full benefit of the impervious pavements as regards the
cost of scavenging has not yet been felt, for almost all the lines of
streets so paved are intersected at short distances by streets of
ordinary jointed granite setts or macadam, whence a quantity of mud and
refuse is dragged by the traffic on to the asphalted jointed roadways,
which are consequently debited with the cost of removal of some effete
material not intrinsically belonging to them.
Mr. Till, the Borough Surveyor of Birmingham, from investigations he has
made on this subject, says that for granite pavement 2 cart loads of mud
have to be removed from every 1000 square yards of surface, one third of
a load for wood pavement[167] and 4 loads three times a day (a total of
12 loads) for macadamised roadways.
The ultimate disposal of the material removed from the surfaces of
roadways especially when they are macadamised is a difficult matter, as,
being chiefly composed of silicate, it is valueless as a manure.
In small towns, except during abnormally muddy weather, it may be mixed
with the house refuse and sold to farmers, or the road scrapings
themselves may be used as an excellent sand, if thoroughly washed, to
mix with lime or cement to form mortar for public works; excessive
accumulations of mud, however, must be got rid of in the most economical
and speedy manner possible, and this is effected either by filling up
old disused quarries with it, or depositing it upon waste lands, or
forming embankments for new roads, but in no case should it be used, as
I have before stated, upon building sites; it is difficult and expensive
to destroy it or partially convert it into other matters by fire, so
that if these methods which I have enumerated are impracticable, the
only other method left for the disposal of the sweepings or scrapings
from the streets is to take them out to sea in hopper barges and sink
them in deep water.
The last question that arises on the subject of scavenging before we
consider the disposal of snow, is whether the onus of cleansing private
courts and alleys which are not repairable by the urban authority should
be borne by them or not.
The great difficulty attached to this duty arises from the fact that
these private courts and alleys are generally very badly paved, if paved
at all, full of pits, where pools of stagnant mud and water collect, and
even in the best cases, the interstices between the pebbles, or other
paving, are filled with filth arising in great measure from the dirty
habits of the people, and this filth it is found exceedingly difficult
to dislodge. The remedy for this is to compel the owners of the abutting
properties to have the courts and alleys properly paved with asphalte,
or other equally impervious material, after which it would be easy for
the urban authority to cause them to be swept at least once a day, and
flushed with water in the hot weather once a week, but in order to
compel the owners to execute this very desirable work it would be
necessary to put the complicated machinery of section 150 of the Public
Health Act 1875 in force, and the expense to the landlords would be in
many cases very disproportionate to the value of their property.
Out of the ninety towns to which reference has before been made, the
authorities of only nineteen of them cleanse the private courts and
alleys in their jurisdiction, although for the sake of sanitation it is
very desirable that such work should be so undertaken by them.
In most towns it is necessary to cleanse its principal streets at least
once a day, and this appears to be the practice of nearly all the ninety
towns I have referred to; only seven of them, however, appear to have
this operation repeated more frequently; in several towns, the horse
droppings, &c., are removed at once, under what is called the “orderly”
system, and this is especially necessary in streets that are paved with
such materials as wood paving, asphalte, or granite setts. The suburban
streets of a town need only be cleansed once or twice a week, except in
special cases of extremes of mud or snow, and I will now proceed to
discuss the questions involved by a heavy fall of the latter.
Experiments have shown that a cubic yard of fresh fallen snow may weigh
as much as 814 pounds or as little as 71 pounds. Assuming that a cubic
foot will weigh 16·38 pounds, I estimate that for a fall of 3 inches of
snow upon a street 36 feet in width, 20 tons, representing a bulk of
about 100 cubic yards, would have to be removed for every 100 yards of
length of street if it was thought necessary to clear it away.
Assuming that there are 30 miles of street in a town from which the snow
must be removed; 21,144 loads must be carted somewhere, at a cost of at
least 1,500_l._, assuming that each cart could make ten trips a day, and
even then it would take 352 carts a whole week to effect it.
It may be contended that I have taken an extreme case, and that, of
course, the snow does not lie for very long upon the ground in the
condition in which it fell, and that hourly it is reducing in bulk and
weight by being ground up by the traffic, and finding its way in the
form of water into the sewers. This may be so, but at the same time it
must not be forgotten that the bulk is also being constantly increased
by that which is shovelled off the house tops[168] and brought out from
private premises adjoining the streets.
Upon this point Mr. Hayward, the Engineer to the Commissioners of Sewers
of the City of London, says[169]:--
“Snow readily compresses under the traffic, and when removed in carts
and shot down elsewhere it may be assumed that on an average four cubic
yards of snow measured as it has fallen is equal to one cubic yard when
placed on the apparatus.” This computation, however, does not make any
allowance for the snow thrown from off the roofs, &c., and it of course
greatly consolidates whilst travelling in the cart.
Fortunately for a town surveyor in this country, exceptionally heavy
falls of snow are not very frequent, but when they do happen great
pressure is put upon his department to cope with it, and one of the
greatest difficulties he has to contend against is the disposal of the
snow after it has been placed in the cart.
If there is a river close by, it can be taken there and tipped, but this
is objectionable if it is a navigable river where dredging has to be
done, as it is surprising what a quantity of road scrapings and other
matters are always removed with the snow, and these materials naturally
sink to the bottom, and add considerably to the cost of dredging.
If there are public parks the snow may be heaped in them, provided no
damage is done to the grass or paths, but the snow thus heaped takes a
considerable time to melt, the first effect of a thaw being to
consolidate it: a better plan is to deposit it upon waste spots, if
these are not too far from the streets which have to be cleared.
Tipping the snow down the manholes into the sewers has been tried in
London and other cities, but has failed through the snow consolidating,
and although lighted gas jets have been turned on to the snow, it has
still melted too slowly to be of any practical utility.
Speaking of Clarke’s apparatus for melting snow, Mr. Haywood, in the
same report from which I have already quoted, says:
“It is seldom that a fall of snow occurs sufficiently large to cause
serious interruption to the traffic; heavy snowstorms in fact occur only
once in six or seven years; for some years therefore these apparatuses
if fixed might not be required. They would either have to be taken out,
stored and refixed yearly or maintained in their places and kept in
order there, in either case at an annual expense.”
In perusing Mr. Hayward’s report it also appears that the cost of this
apparatus fixed is about 120_l._, and the cost of melting the snow 9_d._
per cubic yard.
In order to grapple with this question of the removal of snow, I am of
opinion that it is useless to attempt to cart it away while falling, but
try to make clear crossings for the foot passengers and to keep the
traffic open. If there should be a high wind at the time, and the snow
drifts in consequence, cut through the drifts so as to allow the
vehicular traffic to continue. Directly the snow ceases to fall put on
all available hands to clear the channel gutters and street gratings, in
preparation for a sudden thaw, when, if these precautions were not
taken, serious flooding and great damage to property might ensue; for
the same reason cart away all the snow you can at the bottom of
gradients and in the valleys, and also from very narrow streets and
passages, &c. In the wider streets use the snow plough, or with gangs of
men (in the snow season there is generally plenty of labour obtainable),
shovel the snow into a long narrow heap on each side of the street,
taking care to leave the channel gutters and gratings quite clear, and a
sufficient space between the heaps for at least two lines of traffic.
Passages must also be cut at frequent intervals through the heaps, in
order to allow foot passengers to cross the street, and also to let the
water reach the channel gutters as soon as the snow begins to melt.[170]
The next point to be considered in this chapter is that of “The proper
watering of streets for the whole or any part of their district.”
One of the earliest methods for watering streets, but one which has, I
think, almost entirely died out, on account principally of the large
quantity of water used in the process, was that of allowing the water to
run down the channel gutters, ponding it back by means of canvas or
leather aprons placed across the gutter, and then spreading the water on
to the surface of the street by throwing it with wooden shovels. This
method, which at first sight may appear clumsy, is an exceedingly good
one upon sanitary grounds. It not only lays the dust, but it washes the
surface of the street, and it most effectually scours out the gutters
and at the same time flushes the sewers, which at the season that
watering is necessary is also of great importance to any town. By this
process a delightful freshness is given to the air, and the appearance
of the cool and limpid water rushing along on each side of the street
acts favourably upon the inhabitants. The great objections to this
system are (1) the enormous quantity of water that is used in the
process, and (2) the difficulty of doing the work after the traffic of
the day has commenced.
Somewhat of a modification of this process is what is known as “Brown’s
System of Street Watering,” which may be described as follows:--A lead
pipe is laid in the footpath at the back of the kerb on each side of the
street to be watered, small gratings or shields being fixed in the pipe
at intervals of twelve inches, and the remaining space filled with
asphalte; small holes are then bored in the pipe through the openings in
the shields. The pipe is connected with the water main in the street,
and is provided with the necessary stopcocks, &c. On the water being
turned on, fine jets are thrown in different directions upon the surface
of the street. The width of roadway that can be watered by this process
depends upon the pressure of the water, but it may be fairly assumed
that in most towns streets of fifty feet width could be effectually
watered in a few minutes by a pipe on each side of the street.
This process has not gained much favour hitherto, principally on account
of the large first cost involved, which would amount to upwards of
800_l._ per mile of street, but the expense afterwards should not much
exceed the wages of one man at about 3_s._ 6_d._ per day to manipulate
the necessary work, and the interest on the outlay and depreciation of
the pipes, &c.
The other objections to this system are:--
(1.) The liability of the pipes and perforations to get out of order,
especially when allowed to lie idle for so many months in each year.
(2.) The unpleasantness to pedestrians which must be caused whilst the
watering is proceeding.
(3.) The inconvenience to the traffic during the process.
(4.) The effect upon the water by high winds, when in all probability it
would be blown back across the foot pavement.
(5.) In very broad streets it would be inoperative.
In Paris and other continental cities, and also in several towns in this
country, the watering is effected by hose and reels, or by portable iron
tubes.
Mr. Parry, C.E., the Borough Surveyor of Reading, has given the
following particulars of the system of hand watering adopted in that
borough, in which he gives the cost, and describes the utility of that
method as compared with the use of water carts:
A water cart (he states) will water twice a day a superficial area of
23,849 yards, and for a length watered one width that means 5,962 lineal
yards, or for a double width 2,981 yards, the cost per day of laying on
being as follows:--Horse, cart, and man, 8_s._ cost of maintenance of
cart, harness, shoeing, &c., 1_s._ 5_d._, making 9_s._ 5_d._ per day.
With respect to the hand machines he states that he has one of Headley’s
drum machines, and three of special make, somewhat similar to those used
in Paris. They are equal in point of work; and one machine will water
23,740 square yards twice a day, which, it will be observed, is very
close to the amount of work performed by a cart.
“Headley’s machine cost us (he continues), five years ago when new,
31_l._ 7_s._ 3_d._, and the repairs and maintenance since that date have
been 22_l._, or an average of 4_l._ 8_s._ per annum, and is just now
almost past repair. The other description of hand machine cost each when
new 20_l._, and the repairs and maintenance have amounted to an average
of 3_l._ 18_s._ each year. They were in use some time before Headley’s
was obtained, and they will be of use for a long time yet. The cost of
labour per day by the hand machines is for two men at 2_s._ 10_d._
each--5_s._ 8_d._--as it requires two men to work the machine properly,
one to distribute the water, and the other to move the machine and to
attach and detach the apparatus to and from the hydrants; add to this
7_d._ per day for maintenance and repairs, will make 6_s._ 3_d._ per
day. The quantity of water delivered by the water carts is 0·51 gallons
per square yard, and by the hand machine 1·30 gallons.”
It will thus be seen that in the case of the cart 24,324 gallons of
water are used per diem, and 61,724 gallons by the hand machines, the
surface watered being very nearly the same in both cases. Assuming that
the water has a commercial value of 6_d._ per 1000 gallons, and adding
this to the cost per diem in each case, the total cost stands thus:
Hand machines £1 10_s._ 10_d._
Carts £1 1_s._ 7_d._
the advantage in point of cost being in favour of the carts; but the
hand machine may water better, especially in broad streets, although in
narrow streets or where there is much traffic, this method would be
impracticable.
In Paris both hose and carts are used for watering the thoroughfares,
the former for the boulevards, the avenues, and a certain number of
first-class streets.
The most commonly known method in this country for watering the streets
and roads of our towns is that of carrying the water in wheeled barrels,
carts, or vans, and distributing it therefrom through a perforated pipe
upon the surface of the road as the vehicle is drawn along by a horse
attached to the shafts.[171]
The old barrel upon wheels gave place to a cart, and now we have
“Bayley’s Patent Hydrostatic Van,” which is too well known to almost all
town surveyors to need much description. It holds about 450 gallons of
water and takes about 9 minutes to fill (this time of course varying
with the size of main and pressure of water), and ten minutes to spread
the water upon the surface of the road.
With regard to the work that one of these vans will accomplish in
comparison to that effected by an ordinary cart, the following table,
compiled from experiments on the question, will be useful:
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
| |No. of| | | |
| | Loads| Total | | |
|Contents| to |quantity| | | Gain
| in | cover| of | | | per
Cart or Van. |Gallons.| beat.| Water. | Time. |Difference.| Cent.
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
| | | |Hrs. Mnts.| Hrs. Mnts.|
Bayley’s van | 450 | 5¹⁄₂| 2475 | 1 23 | .. | ..
Ordinary cart| 225 | 11 | 2475 | 1 50 | 0 27 |24¹⁄₂
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
Bayley’s van | 450 | 5¹⁄₂| 2475 | 1 38 | .. | ..
Ordinary cart| 237 | 11 | 2607 | 2 10 | 0 32 |25
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
Bayley’s van | 450 | 6 | 2700 | 1 45 | .. | ..
Ordinary cart| 290 | 11 | 3190 | 2 10 | 0 25 |19¹⁄₄
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
Bayley’s van | 450 | 8 | 3600 | 2 15 | .. | ..
Ordinary cart| 260 | 17 | 4420 | 3 30 | 1 15 |36
-------------+--------+------+--------+----------+-----------+------
This shows a mean gain of 26 per cent. in favour of the van, and the
following tables, made by an inspector in 1873, showing the actual
occupation of the ordinary carts and Bayley’s vans during a day’s work,
are extremely interesting, as showing that while the van is engaged in
spreading the water the time of the cart is wasted in travelling to and
from the stand posts, and when it is borne in mind also that the van
spreads water more widely than the cart, there can be no doubt that a
saving of at least 30 per cent. can be effected by the substitution of
these vans for the old-fashioned cart.
CARTS.
-------------+--------+----------+----------+------------+----------
| |Travelling|Travelling| |
|Filling.| Full. | Empty. |Waiting, &c.|Spreading.
-------------+--------+----------+----------+------------+----------
| H. M. | H. M. | H. M. | H. M. | H. M.
Paddington | 1 45 | 2 9 | 1 58 | 0 20 | 1 30
St. Saviour’s| 1 29 | 2 16 | 2 4 | 0 26 | 1 29
Strand | 1 11 | 2 30 | 2 18 | 0 17 | 1 3
Kensington | 4 40 | 2 2 | 1 57 | 0 0 | 1 54
Chelsea | 2 44 | 1 15 | 2 14 | 0 35 | 1 6
-------------+--------+----------+----------+------------+----------
VANS.
-------------+--------+----------+----------+------------+----------
Paddington | 3 33 | 1 9 | 1 3 | 0 0 | 3 0
St. Saviour’s| 2 20 | 1 4 | 1 21 | 0 23 | 2 58
Strand | 2 30 | 1 25 | 1 14 | 0 20 | 2 23
-------------+--------+----------+----------+------------+----------
In the year 1856, Mr. Scott, C.E., the Chief Surveyor of the parish of
St. Pancras, kept an account of the daily round of an ordinary water
cart, when he found that through an average working day of 10¹⁄₄ hours,
exclusive of the breakfast and dinner hours, the cart took one hour and
twenty minutes filling, fifty minutes only in distributing the water on
the roads, and eight hours and seven minutes in travelling to spread the
water and back to the stand posts. It was obvious that these were placed
too far apart, and by the subsequent introduction of additional
standposts Mr. Scott found, in the year 1867, that the filling occupied
two hours, the distribution one hour and thirty minutes, and the
travelling to and fro six hours and thirty minutes; so that it may be
assumed, with an ordinary two-wheeled water cart, that two-thirds of the
day is spent in travelling, one fifth in filling, and about one-seventh
in the actual spreading. But a watch should be kept upon the man who is
engaged in this work, otherwise he will idle away his time and the
streets remain unwatered. A good check upon this is Mr. Bayley’s
Tell-Tale, which registers automatically on a dial at the side of the
van the number of rounds a man goes each day.
Watering the streets with sea water should be adopted whenever it is
feasible, as it not only gives a delightful freshness to the air and
dispels iodine, but it also causes the surface of the street to maintain
its humidity for a longer period than when fresh water is used, as it
impregnates the soil with hygrometric matter. This has been often
attempted artificially, by adding common salt to the water used for
watering, but it is rather too expensive for the benefit derived.[172]
Watering the roads with a largely diluted disinfectant such as
“Sanitas” in the liquid form, is frequently of great benefit, and where
it can be afforded, it should be occasionally done, especially in the
narrower streets and more crowded districts of a city or town, or when
an epidemic has broken out.
With reference to the very important question as to the cost of
scavenging, street-cleansing and watering. It is, of course, not
possible to lay down any hard and fast lines, as it must necessarily
vary considerably according to circumstances; much depends upon whether
the district is an urban one, consisting of houses closely packed
together, or whether it is suburban, with scattered villas and mansions
standing in their own grounds; the question, also, of the distance of
the depôts to which the material has to be carted, considerably affects
the result of any estimate, as also does the cost of horse hire, the
rate of wages, and whether the district is of a hilly or flat nature,
and, as I have before shown, the manner in which the streets are formed
and paved, the habits of the people, the requirements as to cleansing
streets and watering, and last, but not least, the manner of the
eventual disposal of the rubbish after removal; all these points must
bear with great weight upon any question of cost, and make the results
widely different.
On referring to the returns to which I have more than once alluded, it
is found that the cost of removing the house refuse and cleansing and
sweeping the streets combined, varies considerably in different
localities. In one case the sum amounts only to the rate of one
half-penny per annum per head of the population of the town, whereas in
another case the amount is at the rate of three shillings and sixpence
per head. On calculating the average cost per head of population per
annum of the ninety towns from which I received replies on this point, I
find that it amounts to about tenpence half-penny, after giving credit
for any sum of money realised by the sale of the refuse to farmers and
others; so that if this work is costing the ratepayers of a town or
city anything under a shilling per head of the whole population every
year, they have no cause to grumble.
Before closing this chapter I will make a few observations upon the
subject of contracts for work of this description.