54
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
The COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a third time, passed, and | byelaws. became law.
HIS EXCELLENCY-Council stands adjourned until Friday at 2.45 p.m.
FINANCE COMMITTEE.
A meeting of the Finance Committee was then held the COLONIAL SECRETARY pre- siding. The following votes were passed :
SANITARY AND OTHER VOTES.
The Officer Administering the Government recommended the Council to revote a sum of one thousand one hundred and forty-five Dollars ($1,145) in aid of the vote, Sanitary Department, Other Charges, Typhoon Expenses.
¡OLICE AND PRISON DEPARTMENTS.
The Officer Administering the Government recommended the Council to vote a sum of one thousand dollars ($1,100) in aid of the vote, Police and Prison Departments, A.-Police, Other Charges, for the foollowing items:
Secret Service... Subsistence of Prisoners...
ད*
700 300
$1,000
HONGKONG SANITARY BOARD.
A meeting of the Sanitary Board was held on July 23rd at the Board Room. The Hon. Dr. J. M. Atkinson (President) presided, and there were also present Hon. Mr. W. Chatham (Vice-President), Dr. F. Clark (Medical Officer of Health), Hon. Mr. A. W. Brewin, (Registrar-General), Mr. A. Shelton Hooper, Mr. Lau Cha-pak, Mr. Fung Wa Chun, and Mr. G. A. Woodcock (secretary),
CEMETERY BYELAWS.
The report of the committee on Cemetery Byelaws was submitted. It recommended that the present byelaws be withdrawn, and that fresh ones be substituted. The proposed bye- laws provided that cemeteries other than Chinese shall be open to inspection by any member of the Board, or by any officer of the Sanitary Department who may be directed to make such inspection. They also provided that the graves be numbered, that a register be kept, and that each grave be dug to a depth of at least six feet with the exception of the graves of children under ten years of age. Except as regards the corpses of children under ten years of age only one corpse shall be placed in one grave. The new byelaws also contained provisions that the inter-space between any two graves shall be at least eighteen inches, that graves shall be properly covered, and that no graves may bo re-opened without the written permission of the Medical Officer of Health. The fees proposed were: for esch grave of twelve superficial feet, ground fee, $10; grave digging, $1; exhumation, $5. The exceptions are: children under ten years of age, ground fee, $5; grave digzing, $1; second burial in the same grave, $3; pauper interment free. Monuments over graves or inclosures of surface not occupying more than 24 superficial feet, free. Byelaws regarding Chinese cemeteries were also given.
|
Mr. HOOPER minuted-The register men- tioned in paragraph 3 of the proposed byelaws should be open to inspection by the public.
The REGISTRAR-GENERAL-These byelaws make no provision for a cemetery of the nature proposed to be opened at Aplichau, nor of the cemetery Mr. Ng Li-hing wished to present to the Fakinese community in New Kowloon,
[July 27, 1907.
with
concerned the byelaws. The Board formed the, to one of a different sort. A letter was received
by me on the 13th of this month regard to an application made by the owner of No. 253, Des Voeux Road Central, ¿which also showed that an officer of the Board recommend- ed that a latrine be allowed to remain. I may Jake it that that latrine is sanitary, otherwise the officer who recommended the sanction of it would not be doing his daty. Then, if it is sanitary, why should the owner be called apon to make a plan of that latrine, which cost $25 P
In considering the byelaws ser atim it was | decided that the cemeteries be open to the inspection of the public, but after a discussion on the initiative of Mr. Hooper, no amendment | was made on the recommended depth of grave, With reference to Chinese graves, the Vion PRESIDENT asked why in the non-Chinese cemeteries a fee of $10 should be paid for a grave of 12 superficial feet and in the Chinese cemeteries a fee of $2 only should be paid for 24 feet.
Mr. HOOPER thought the reason was that Chinese or flas occupied a greater space.
The question of fees was referred back to the committe'.
CHANGEABLE REGULATIONS,
Correspondence was submitted relative to latrines in back yards.
Mr. HOOPER minated-I am in favour of latrines being allowed in back yards, provided they are kept clean and in a sanitary condition. Professor Simpson was very strong on this point in his recommendation to the Secretary of State, and I consider this resent crusade against latrines is most unjustifiable.
Mr. LAU CHU-PK-Where there is a yard latrines should be allowed. In places of business some sort of latrines must be provided.
The PRESIDENT It is necessary for the Board to come to a decision in this matter as to whether they are going to allow latrines in back yards or not.
Mr. HOOPER-In accordance with my minute I am in favour of latrines being allowed in back yards provided they are sanitary. Professor Simpson, as I stated last week, made a very strong point of that in his report to the Secretary of State, and said he would make it compulsory that in every house erected hereafter there should be a latrine in every backyard, or in every block of houses. He says. There is also the very important duty of preventing what is actually even now taking place, of insanitary areas springing up in the tow; and of blocks of buildings being erected to contain hundreds of inmates without the owner of the buildings being obliged to provide for each house a latrine in the back yard, and for every block a public latrine with a proportional number of seats to the number of inmates the block is likely to contain." Well, Sir, we are always having brought to our notice the petition to the Seore tary of State for experts to come ont. They came out, and the public wanted to sit on them, but in the present case the boot is on the other leg. Here the public are wishing to give effect to the recommendations of the expert while the Government departments apparently are not. I am sure we are all actuated by the same desire, that is, to do the best we can for the Colony taking all the circumstances into consideration. We had an application before us within the last two or three meetings for permission to reconstruct latrines in the back yards of Nos. 228 to 244 Des Voeux Road Notice had been served on the owner to remove the existing latrines. He wrote to the Board
|
and asked for permission to reconstruct them, but the Board refused. Now, Sir, these latrines were erected under the superintendence of an architect in the Colony, and on August 1st, 1901, so it is not ancient history, a permit was received from the Director of Public Works to construct the latrines in the houses in accordance with a plan deposited with the Public Works Department, and that is the plan and here are the latrines (produces plan), and to-day we call Mr. LAU CHU-PAK-Paragraph 13. Why
upon the owner to take them down in face should the Chinese register be deposited at or of Professor Simpson's recommendation. This near the cemeteries for two years? The Chinese application has been dealt with, but I allude to sextons or coolies cannot be relied upon in it to-day because I will certainly move that the keeping such register. I suggest that original motion be rescinded and that the Board allow copies should be deposited in the office of the the latrines to remaio. When the architect Board and the duplicate copies at the cemeteries. went to inspect the latrines he found them The following points are worthy of considera. too small so that they did not comply with tion:-(1) Standing orders be drawn up in the Ordinance of to-day, and it English and Chinese for the guidance of for permission to make them comply sad Chinese sextons or coolies; (2) A copy of the enlarge them that he wrote to the Board. byelaws in English and Chinese be posted up at His application has been refused and he the entrance to each cemetery for the information has been told to remove them b cause they of the public; (5) The various sections of the obstract the back yard, and to make them longer cemeteries to be clearly marked out with would further obstruct it. I would ask whether boundary stones,
that is a consistent policy? To ask the owner to pull these things down aɛd go some distance away is a very great hardship. I could refer to dozens of other cases, but I am going on
The PRESIDENT thought it would be ad- visable to deal with the byelaws one by one. The point raised by Mr. Lan Chu-pak scarcely
Mr. LAU CHU-PAK-More !
Mr. HOOPER-It was suggested by a member of the Government that a sketch would do. I would like to know who is to make a sketch. I must employ an architect and that would cost $25 for something which this Board say, is perfectly sanitary, and ask the Governor-in- Council to approve of. It is simply imposing a tax on property to as the owner to procure a plan of a latrine. The officer of this Board who examined it must surely have taken the dimensions of the latrine, and his word would be good enough for the length, breadth and height. In these circumstances I mɔve that all latrines be allowed if found to be a nitary and clean.
Mr. LAU CHU-PAK-I have much pleasure in seconding the resolution. I think in shops with yards of about eight fest latrines should be allowed to remain.
The REGIST BAR-GENERAL
་ Cannot the Medical Officer give us the history of this thing ? I don't understand why all these applications are coming up now.
The MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH –Many of them have been recently erected, the number having increased since yards have been provided. With regard to Mr. Hooper's remark about orusale, there has been none to my knowledge. Whenever a case comes before me I inspect the yard, and if it is large enough, recommend that latrine be allowed. The inspectors watch the reports of Board meetings very carefully to see what goes on, and they may have seen that permits are required for latrines. They may ask a tenant to produce his permit, and if he has not one they report in the usual coarse. I think it is going a little bit too far to 83.y that a yard less than twelve or fourteen feet in area should have a latrine. It would be more satisfactory to the Sanita y staff and myself if a general rale was laid down as to what yards can have a latrina and what can not. As far as new buildings are concerned, everyone is provided with a latrine. I never knew that Professor Simpson recommended them in existing houses, basase there is no room for them.
Mr. HOOPER-I think you misunderstood me, I was not alluding to the fact that Professor Simpson advocated that latrines should be put up in the yards of existing buildings bat I say that those put up prior to Professor Simpson's visit he never intended to be taken down.
The MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH-Û00s a plan has been sent in, and passed, no inter- forence with it is allowed. Most of these we are dealing with are latrinės put up without any notice, and only discovered in the ordinary house to house visitation by the inspectora.
Mr. Hoop&&-Quite so, but how is it they have just been discovered? You say latrin have been put up without any plans; surely the Building Author ty did not know it because it is an offence he has to take cognisance of. We have only got a small Bɔard to-day two officia! sad two anofficial members" pressut, therefor I would suggest thi̇st the matter stand over till the next meeting. The VICE-PRESIDENT—I think we are quite capable of dealing with it.
It was decided that no sotion be taken in regard t› latrines which had been erected in biok yürds having an area of 80 square feet, or in cases where permits a uld be produced or records of the Building Authority to show that authority was granted to erect the latrines.
THE CICY'S REFUSE.
The disposal of the refuse of the City dar- ing unfavourable weather was again brought under the notice of the Bird. "On July 2nd Messrs. Wilks and Jack wrote to the Secretary of the Sanitary Board :-
“We find this morning, owing to bad weather, the junks were unable to be towed to be dis-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.