Sessional_Paper_1898 — Page 474

( 20 )

with the owners of the adjoining property in order to increase the width of the lanes, whereas so long as the lane remains a private lane this has to be done by the owners on rebuilding.

Then with regard to the blocking up of these lanes, Dr. CLARK drew attention to the fact that the lanes are very often blocked up at present-

Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD-More particularly at the entrance.

The CHAIRMAN-He said "There is nothing to prevent the exit being blocked up, except as a thoroughfare, and leave just room enough for one person to pass through."

WITNESS That matter was dealt with a short time ago by the Sanitary Board in connection with the proposed amendment of the bye-laws under Ordinance 15 of 1894. The Sanitary Board reported on that subject. We want to get the same power over private lanes as we have over public streets; that is, that nobody shall do anything that shall obstruct the light or ventilation of the houses abutting thereon without the consent of the Sanitary Board. I think the matter has been referred to the Attorney General as to whether it can be done under Ordinance 15 of 1894.

Do you recommend that legislation be introduced ?---Undoubtedly, otherwise you get lanes which are very narrow now still further obstructed. I consider that the powers included in Resolution No. 4 of the Sanitary Board dated 27th August, 1896, are required. The resolution, which was passed at the meeting I have referred to, reads- "That no street on which buildings abut shall be permitted to be obstructed either temporarily or permanently in such manner as to interfere with the efficient lighting and ventilation of such buildings." There is one matter which Dr. CLARK has not referred to in his evidence. That is the question of public latrines. I think that subject comes within the scope of the Commission, as the insanitary condition of premises is to a considerable extent aggravated by the want of a sufficient latrine accommodation.

Do you think the present latrine accommodation is insufficient?

Mr. JACKSON-The improvised private latrines were the worst we saw. WITNESS-Insanitary properties are divided into two classes, namely, structurally insanitary and those rendered insanitary by the improper use of them. This ques- tion of latrines is a very important one in regard to the improper use of properties.

Mr. EDE-What we saw were both.

WITNESS-On the 29th August, 1895, I addressed a report to the Colonial Secretary on the subject of public latrines, and I would like that put in my evidence. Mr. RAM made a report to the Sanitary Board, the Government referred that report to me and I pointed out that the population of the City, as far as we knew then, was 160,000, and there exist at present twelve Government latrines, which have a total number of sixty- seven scats, and nineteen private latrines making a total of 746 seats, or at the rate of 215 persons to one seat. Take the whole of Chinatown, consider practically one half of the population are, or ought to be, under existing circumstances dependent on the accommodation of public latrines, and you find there are over one hundred persons to one seat, whereas there ought to be one seat to every thirty of the population, that is, say one seat per house.

You recommend that the accommodation be increased threefold ?--Yes, it is all in this report and I sent a plan in with it. I may mention that I have now under con- sideration a plan for the resumed area in Taipingshan, showing how the latrines ought to be located, and I expect to be able to send it to the Government in the course of next week. I shall recommend that it be referred to the Sanitary Board for their consideration.

What, roughly, would be the estimated cost of providing this extra latrine accommo- dation ?-As near as I can tell $450,000.

Appendix No. 3.