:
( 17 )
The CHAIRMAN-Are you in favour of tackling one district at a time?-Undoubt- edly; it is the only way to do it.
Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD-One district at a time?-In small portions. The thing is to first lay down definite general lines applicable throughout the Colony. I have the plans with me and I will go through them presently and explain. If further powers are required to enforce what is considered necessary, then I must say that the passing of an Ordinance ought to be strongly recommended. The enforcing of the provisions of such an Ordinance would no doubt be delegated to the Sanitary Board and they would have to consider how it could best be done in detail. It might be best to take a whole street or one house only at a time; it would depend upon the nature of the alterations required.
Mr. JACKSON-The people in Bombay are engaged upon a very similar work to what we are going to do here and in connection with the remuneration they were going to give I notice that Lord SANDHURST, the Governor, in a recent speech, alluded to the scandalous state of things that existed and to the very insanitary condition of the build- ings, and in regard to the question of remuneration he said they would consider the number of rafters and not the amount of the rent.
Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD-I think Mr. COOPER has read the speech of Lord SAND- HURST, I was speaking to him about it just before our meeting commenced.
WITNESS-I have read extracts from it. I certainly do not think that property from which illegal rents are derived and property maintained in an insanitary condition should have the same value in the market as property in a sanitary condition. I think there can be no question about that. It is a principle which has been recognised for some years in England.
The dwellings which the Commission visited some weeks ago appeared-some of them at any rate-to be not fit for human habitation. In regard to such premises would it not be well for the Government to have power by a legislative act to compel the owners to have the properties put in a sanitary condition at the owners' expense ?— That power already exists to a certain extent, and it is practically the same that exists in England. Section 23 of the Public Health Ordinance 24 of 1887, says:
"Where the nuisance proved to exist is such as to render a house or building, in the judgment of the Magistrate, unfit for human habitation, the Magistrate may prohibit the using thereof for that purpose until in his judgment, the house or building is rendered fit for that purpose; and, on the Magistrate being satisfied that it has been rendered fit for that purpose, he may deterinine his previous order by another, declaring the house or building habitable, and, from the date thereof, such house or building may be let or inhabited." That is practically the same as exists in England. If the Sanitary Authority is of opinion that property is unfit for human habitation they have to apply to the Magis- trate for an order before they can compel these premises to be closed or made fit for habitation. I think it is reasonable that that should be so. I am sorry to say that this section has not been tried at present in this Colony as far as I am aware. I was in hopes a short time ago it would be tried in one or two cases, but the owners concurred in the recommendations of the Sanitary Board and we did not get any information as to the difficulties that might be encountered in obtaining orders of this nature from the Magistrate.
The CHAIRMAN-In 1894 houses were closed as being unfit for human habitation? -Yes, a list of those houses is contained in the Schedule of Ordinance 15 of 1894 --houses in which cases of plague had occurred, and they were not allowed to be re-occupied without the permission of the Permanent Committee. Then there were certain houses closed in which the floors were not concreted, and similar powers of that description were acquired. These were kept in force until the alterations had been made. Ordinance 15 of 1894 precluded the owners of such property from making any