CO129-234 - Acting Governor Cameron Governor Des Voeus - 1887 [9-12] — Page 39

mere matters of detail, which result from the Ordinance. Such is the Ordinance, and I ask for it on the part of members of this Council careful investigation, as I am sure they will give it the most impartial consideration. View. ing the importance of the matter, I am sure they will approach the study of it without any preconceived ideas. I do not pretend that it is perfect. It would be simply impossible to produce an Ordinance dealing with this important subject, an Ordinance of this length, without some defects in it. But it has received very careful attention from my hon. friend the Surveyor General, it has passed the scrutiny of the Sani- tary Beard, and I believe it occupied several of their sittings. It was considered in the Exe- cutive Council, where some of its provisions were modified; and I think now that it contains the minimum of restrictions and the maximum of concessions. Viewed in comparison with the legislation in England, it is far less restrictive, but if after farther examination, and hearing the arguments for and against it, it is found there are modifications which can be made with- out impairing the efficiency of the Bill, I am sur the Government will not refuse to listen to the.. I beg to apologise to the Council for the great time I have taken up in explaining this measure. I have two reasons which I hope will excuse me. The first is that it is only within the last forty-eight hours that I could seriously take up the consideration of the subject and I had no time to condeuse these extracts. In the se cond place, I have had a very sad and long ex- perience of the evil effects of unsanitary condi- tions; I have had the misfortune of seeing rela- tions of mimo aud friends of mine ent down in the prime of life, and I believe that if proper sa nitary measures had been taken they would be alive now. One word more, sir. The alchemist of old vainly sought for the philosopher's stone. which was to turn the baser metals into gold and from which he could compound an elixir of life, which would prolong human existence and restore to age the elasticity of youth. Needless to say all his attempts were in vain, and nothing but bitter disappointment awaited him after all his labours and energies at the end of many years of wasted devotion, But we, sir, living in bap- pier and more enlightened times have, I trust. found the philosopher's stone. What the alchemist vainly attempted to discover, modern science will, I believe, give ua, if we humbly stoop to listen to her teaching. We can pro- long life, and keep sickness and disease from our doors. It has been shown that sanitary works. have saved thousands of human lives, and have greatly diminished sickness; while the utilisation of waste products, which were considered as more filth and dirt, have given and will give golden harvests. The work is difficult and the task arduous, but let us approach it with confi dence-confidence that if we wanfully persevere to the end success will wait upon us and our roward will be a great one. It will neither be a mercenary one nor a selfish one. It will consist in distributing the blessings of health to those nearest and dearest to us, and when epidemics rage around us in other countries, we will dwell secure in our fortross of cleanliness. Troubles and sacrifices may await us, but nothing should daunt us. No sacrifice is too dear, for nothing is so costly, nothing so mars 'our pleasures, nothing frastratos our plans and at last blasts our brightest hopes, as dirt and disease. (Ap planse.)

The SURVEYOR-GWNERAL-I risa, sir, to se- ! cond the motion for the first reading of this | Bill. My hon. and learned friend has gone into the subject so exhaustively, and has touched on so many details, including the cost of funerals, that I must confess he has left his seconder hat little to add. Notwithstanding, I would be to be allowed to make a few explanatory re- mark on one or two of the subjects dealt with in the Bill. I shall do so very briefly indoor. I presume, sir, it will be no violation of any off- cial secret if I mention that the authorship of the measure before us is mainly attributable to the Sanitary Board, body to which I have the honour to belong. I mention the circumstance because I desire to avail myself of the first public opportunity I have of saying that every member of that Board addressed himself to the considera- tion of this measure with the fullest sense of his responsibility to the public and to vested in. terests. I do not think it is any more a violation of official secrets to add that the Executive Government, yourself, sir, notably, have been disposed to approve generally the policy and attitude of the Sanitary Board in this matter. and that the Government has abstained from making the provisions of this Bill more strin- !

That

gent, although it was discovered soon after its submission to the Executive that those pro visious fell far short of the requirements of the Sanitary law of England. Both the Sabi tary Board and the Government have in fact heen animated by a desire to hurt, as little as possible, vested interests. But the application of re- medies to great evils must always ruffle some- body, and I understand we may expect opposi. tion in this case from the landlord interest in Hongkong. If that is so, all I will say is, that any landlord who will master the details of the Bill, will find that, from beginning to end, dne rogard has been paid to private interests; that concession has been stretched to the utroost lint consistent with the oxigences and require- me ts of sanitation. I will now go straight- way to those provisions which may be said to press peculiarly on private interests. Imprimis, the Bill requires that every builder of a new tene- ment to be hereafter erected and every owner of an existing tonement shall put his house-drain in proper order. I am told this will be an ua due exaction on the poorer landlords. may or may not be so. But I have worked out an estimate of the cost of constructing, trapping, and ventilating the house drains of an ordinary Chinese tenement and I find that the amount will average about $70. I would ask, is it too Imuch to ask a property owner to spend $70 in rendering his house healthy to himself, his fami- ly, or to bis tenants ? Ishould think not. I should hardly think suck a sacrifice would be called an undue one, more especially if it is considered that the $70 I have named is the average and that in respect of smaller tenements owned by landlords of lesser means the outlay would no doubt be inach less, and might bo $30, $4, or $50 only. Therefore, I can scarcely think that as regards the drainage clauses in this measure, there can be any reasonable opposition. And while on this subject of drains, I would desire once more to remind this Connoil of the main drainage works on which the Government has been en gaged for the last five years. The Department over which I have the honour to preside has been carrying out from year to year extensive works, in the construction, extension, and im- provement of the public sewers of the town. An important instalment of most useful work bas already been accomplished in this connexion, but the task it must be confessed is one of some magnitude. The town is large and there uu- questionably remains yet a good deal to be done. But the whole of the

money that has been expended in the amelioration of ur public sewers, and the whole of the money which may be expended in the future on work of this nature, will be entirely thrown away if the private landlord is not corupelled on his part to do his allotted share of the work and construct or reconstruct the house draius on his own pre- mises, so that the house sewage may not elog and ferment, or the gases which fermenting sewage throws off enter his house. It will be obvious that unless the landlord is om- pelled to do his share of the work, the most perfect system of public sewers will be of no avail in the attainment of a complete and efficient system of drainage. The next point on which I desire to touch, sir, is the leaving of open spaces around buildings, in order to secure | adequate light and ventilation. This Bill re- quires that an open yard of 10 feet shall be left at the back of every new building, and that the future private lanes along the front of bouses shall be, at least, 15 feet wide. In a letter which I bold in my hand and which was addressed by the | Sanitary Board to the Government some months ago the following passages occur with reference to this matter:--

The Bye-Laws of the Local Government Board prescribe that every tonement shall have a buck-yard ten feet wide in order to secure the light and ventila tion necessary to the health of the inmates, and it is further provided that if the tonement be fifteen foot high the back-yard sh 1l be fifteen feet wide, that if the tenement be twenty-five foot high the back-rarl ghall be twenty feet wide, and that if the tenement bo thirty-five feet high the back yard shall be at least twenty-five feet wide.

In Hongkong, native tenements are generally three storied and would therefore in accordance with western hygienic rules require back-yards at least twenty-five feet wide. The Board, however, has not been able to recommend, for the reason previously given, any back-yard wider than ten feet even for three storied houses intended to be reconstructed. This width is less than one-half that laid down by Finglish municipalities, notwithstanding that the tro- pical climate of Hongkong would seem to exact a more generons provision of air space.

It will be seen from the extract which I bave read that with respect to these open yards at the back of human dwellings dosigned to afford light and ventilation to the inmates, the provisions of the Bill before us do not come up by one half

36