Page
July 4, 1903.]
Board. The reason fur that WAS
that the ceilings, stair-linings and similar structures undoubtedly harboured rats, and their removal would prevent the forcation of rat-runs in the houses. If the Cuinese thoroughly understood this it would be to the r advantage to remove those ocilings and stair-linings and such structures, for if they did-provided the Government approved jut this suggestion-the rest of the house with the exception of the floor on which the pague patient is would not be cleansed by the Boar's officers tut might be cleansed by the inmates. He wished to show clearly to the Chinese that it would be to their advantage t remove thes ceilings, stair linings and other structures general'y ia their houses all over the Colony.
Colonel WEBB moved the adopti u of the committee's recommendations. Captain LYONS &icorded.
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
His reason, he said, wss that the report con contained some valuable information upou the plague statistics and upon the health o: the Colony generally,
Mr. HEWETT seconded, and the motion was agreed to.
дн
Mr. POLLOCK moved That a cry of the President's report and of the R-ports and Tables
annexel thereto. which contained in Government Notification `No 393 of 1933, be sent to every member of the Sanitary Board.". He made this motion for the same reason 8s given above,
Mr. FUNG WA CHUN secou led, and the motion was agreed to.
M.O.H.B MEMORANDUM ON THE BUILDINGS
BILL
4
❘
|
•
Mr. Po.LOCK also moved: "Tast the mem›r audum of the Acting Medical Officer of Health on the cous raction of certain prov si us of the Mr. RumJahn was of opinion that the com- Pablo Health and Buildings Ordiuance, 1943, mittes's recommendations did not give a suffi.w.ich was read at the receût meting Pro-landing at the top of the stairs ant which could cient inducement to le Chinese to cease from perty owners, be haud d dumping bodies. Wladtbey most strongly object-publication."
to the Press for He aiderstood that an intim ed to was the cleansing by the Board's coolies. tion had been only that day received from Why should they not allow the tensuts to the Government to cleause their own flors and flats under the did not propose as
the effect that they a Government mitter to supervision of the Board's officers? If the Boud's coolies did the work effective.y, why by the Government.
have ti raport of the Acting M.0.1. printed should the tenants or their servants not do tuo all agree with him that such a valuable mm» H thought they would sime or batter? Tre was another meat
randum should not be lost, but that it should serious objection and that was the police become public property; an l as the Government detentios of the inmates of the floor on which a had declined to hava il document priatel ́as C 88 occurrad. He did not see that suy bonefit au act of Governm nt, the only feasible way he was derived from such a step. The incubation
sw of getting it mada kuowu to the public was period of plague rauged from a few hours to through the columns of the Press. about 16 days.
The PRESIDENT-The a ualiacubation period is from two to sureb days.
Mr. KUMJAHN-Dr. Thomson, the medical officer under the Bombay Government says, iu his treatise on plague 16 days.
The PRESIDENT Sixteen days is quite ex- ceptional.
Mr. RUMJAHNeut on to Buy that here they had 10 regular system of segregation of contacts. If these unfortunate people were coufined compulsorily in an insauit- ary floor with a plague patient or a plague corps for over 24 hours it was a disgrace to the Colony and a very great disgrace to the Board, Iustead of having three large blocks of ob.ervation houses they should have four or five houses in each health district into which contacts could go until their premises had been disiu- facted. They should also allow plague corpses to be coffiued properly in the houses in which the deaths occurred, under the supervision of the Board, and to be haried either locally or in the native place of the deceased. If his sugges tions were adopted be dared say the dumping of cases of plague would be a thing of the past or at least would be greatly minimised and a saring of thousands upon thousands of dollars would be effected annually. Why should the Board con- tinue to enforce measures opposed by the popn. lace, detrimental to our welfare and prosperity, and proved to be fruitless by all our past experience?
|
There were no other remarks ani the motion was agreed to.
PROSECUTING INSPECTOR.
The PRESIDENT pursuant to notice moved: -(a) That the Board, under the provi- sions of Section 30 of the Public Health and Buildings Ordinance, 1903, depute Inspector Frederick Fisher to institute summ ry proceed inga before a Magistrate against any person contravening any of the Bye-laws duly made under Section 16 of the Public Health and Buildings Ordinance, 1903, when so directed in writing by the Acting Medical Officer of Health. (b). That the Board, under the provisions of Section 2:6 of the Public Health and Buildings Ordinance, 1903, depute Inspector Frederick Fisher to institute summary proceedings before a Magistrate for the recovery of any penalty imposed by Part II of the said Ordinauce or any Bye-laws made thereunder, when so directed in writing by the Acting Medical Officer of Health. Colonel WEBB seconded and the motion was agreed to. A
HEALTH REPJETS
Mr. HEWETT seon led, and the motion was agreed to.
|
|
their size and price per month are determined that these cubicles are in reality f...mily houses and by the earnings of the husband or chief wage- varner of the family. If, as is not unreasonable, we allow in the nine persons who could occupy this floor under the scheme shown above three husbauds, three wives and six small (under 10) children, we shall see that the burden of payment will rest on a small number of increases the glased area of the front windows individuals. Now if the owner of this hous
to the full extent, vix, 28 it. each, we see that then much larg roabloles could be built, nimely two of 285 sq ft, each of which would accommodate 8 people or one large cubicle of 570 sq. ft., which would accommodats 17 people. We should then have practically the whole foor subdivided into a large front cubicle for 17 persons, a small cubicle in rear with window into the yard for the persons and a window. less remainder which would do for a lobby or not be legally inhabitel. It this lobby bà allowed by amending the definition of room, which I refer to later on, this arrangement would however onable the floor to be occupied legally by 20 persons As the oubio contents of the floor is 9,127 cubis fs, under the old law 22.persous could ccodpy it, and thus we see that provided the yard b counted as external air there would only be a displacement of two persons through the enforcing of the new law. provided that the landlord increased the glazed area of the front windows to the maximam extent possible. This conclusion is quits in accordance with the remarks of Dr. Clark in his minute of 27/2/03, C.S.O. 1473/190), but there still remains au importiut point to be con- sidered, which has apparently been overlooked. Given one large and legal sublivision in the front of the flour, who is to occupy it?. It will hold 17 men or adul:. A glance at the plan of this floor will show that no one wants and no one can pay for a cubicle or room big enough to hold 7 men nor even 8 (in case we have 2 bs:f- sized cubicles ins.ead of our one large one). Three or four people at most live in one of the obvious that privacy is necessary for e:ch smali present cubicles in (bis floor, and it is quite
family. With our large cubicles therefore we are as far off as ever from providing suitable remains to be seen what will happen when the now accommodation for the poor man's family. It
law is put in fores. Will the poor man sacrificɔ, privacy, and will 3 to 5 families live in ons sake, or will one man be satisfied to pay a com. common room with no subdivisions for decency's paratively large rent for more roomhan be wants, while thos, displaced seek to do the same thing in other parts of the City? There is yet The following is Dr. Pearse's memorandam:- In order to get some ilea as to the effect the erecting of cubicles as suggested by Dr. Clark another point to be considered in reference to the new law regulating overcrowding will have, I in his minate of 27/2/03 in C. S. O. 1473/1903 have had a floor iu Aberdeen Street No. 5 referted to above. It is there stated that a District) measured, viz., tie first floor of No. 26, large cubicle could be built around the window Aberdeen Street. Te area of this flor is 73 looking from a room into the yard at the rear, sq. ft. and its cubic contents 9.127 cubic feet Now some hons 8 have such a window where th Its height is therefore about 124 feat. At this yard is situated between the main room and the present time there are in this for only two kitchen, and also in windows into the external air, namely the original kitchen has been cut away to form a cases where hálf the
two looking from the front of the for into the yard. Other houses have a lane or open space street. Each of these windows has a glaz dia rear, but the kitchen comes between the area of only 10 sq. ft. To keep within the terms of the new law therefore anyone desirous of subdividing this floor could apparently do so by building a cubicle or room around oach of these tw windows. Each cubicle could only be of 105 sq ft. and would hold therefore 3 persons. The total number of persons then allowed to inhabit the floor would be six, as the remainder of the floor having no window into the external air would not be habitable. If it be decided under the provisó to Zec iou 151 that the yard to this house count as exterual sir, then it will be apparently permissible to build another cubicle of 12) sq. ft. around this window which will also hold 3 persons, bringing the total num. ber of lawful occupants of the flour up to 9 persons, A glance at the plan of this house will show that the rent, 824 per mensem, is made up by the small paym nts of several in dependent families. If the cubicle are done away with, and only three rooms as mentioned above are allowed on this floor, the rent of the whole floor will still have to be paid, but the burden will be divided between 9 people instead of the 14 people who could occupy the floor under the old Ordinance. It will further be noticed
The PRESIDENT said that the fol owing reply had been received that day from the Colonial Rocretary :—— ' In rpy to your let er of the 24th ult. I am die cted to acqnist you for the information of the Sanitary Board that the Government declinse to pablis Dr. Pearse a memorandum which involves assumptions as to the effat f the law that may on may not be correct but which can only be tested by a case decided in the Low ourts. This decision can readily be obtained in the usual manner. I am to add that the memor ndam referred to has already been brought before the Board and further consideration if desired." As was stated cau be again brought before the Board for
at the meeting of the Sanitary Bard on the 21st May last the Prees was at liberty to print the report. It was luid on the table, but as a confidential meeting was held afterwards they did not take it that they could take the report away. As they had asked for, Dr. Parse's reprt would now be given to the Press.
Mr POLLOCK pursuant to notice moved: -"That a copy of the President's repo:t on the Health and Sanitary Condition of the Colony of Hongkong for the year 1902 be sent to every member of the Sanitary Board."
living room and the open space in rear. Cbviously in such houses as these no cubicle could be erected at the rear end of the living room, and if the window area into the street in front is one-tenth of the floor area and a cubicle were built to enclose this window area the renai der of the room would be windowless and therefore not only uninhabitable but quite illegal, as Section 154 of Ordinance No. 1 of 19.3 says that no room can be erected or maintained in any story of a domestic building unless such room have a window equal to one. tenth the floor-aren opening into the external air Again a room is defined by definition 51 as any subdivision of any story of a domestic bulding oth r than a drying room, store-room or pantry. If this definition were amended 80 es to except also any passage, lobby or landing the difficulty mentioned above would be got over. But if this amendment be not made it is obvious that no partition whatever can be erected in any floor unless the subdivi- sions which are created by such a partition are. each lit by a window or windows to the extent of one-tenth of the floor area of such subdivision. If we take as an example again
F
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.