433
K
lative Council in May or that year the date of their coming
into operation was at the instance of the Board, deferred
to the following year. It is alleged that representations
on behalf of the Chinese in opposition to the provisions
of the Public Health Ordinance against overcrowding and the
possible interference with trade which would be caused by
more active interference on their part mainly influenced
both the Board and the Government in this postponement of
the operation of the bye-laws in question. Nor on the ex-
piration of the stipulated period of suspension was the
Board found less averse to the assumption of the responsi-
bility or delaying the enforcement of its own regulations
against overcrowding, for at its request the date of the ope
ration of these bye-laws was again deferred by the Legis-
lative Council with what result this policy has been attena
dea Your Excellency is, unhappily, only too well acquaint-
ea. The responsibility of this failure to carry out one of
the most essential requirements of the Public Health Ordi-
nance seems to be divided between the Sanitary Board and
the Government.
The legislative steps would seem to have been
wisely taken, but they were allowed to fall into abeyance
by a lack of prompt administrative and subordinate action.
It has generally been understood, and there is ge
good reason for believing the statement, that the Sanitary
Board has been well served by its inspectors, who have not`.
failed to report upon the insanitary condition of the City,
and therefore the Committee do not wish it to be supposed
that they imply any censure of these Inspectors. Indeed it
has been frequently statea- and the Committee pray Your
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.