2. That all the by-laws are not within the scope of Clauses 16 and 39. For instance, can it be said that by-laws regulating the sort of top to be put to a soil-pipe extended as a vent-pipe, or the precise height to which such pipe should be carried, are by-laws with respect to "the proper accessories" of water-closets, &c. ?

3. A lawyer's point only: Do these by-laws comply with Section 114 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891?

4. Are the by-laws all "reasonable"? If not, I take it that the same grounds under which other by-laws are held "bad" would render these inoperative.

As to how far they will be enforced. It is clear that up to the present moment they have not been generally enforced by the Sanitary Authorities. I had recently occasion to obtain the regulations of three different London Sanitary Authorities with regard to drainage, &c. In only one case did I see any reference whatever made to the L.C.C. Bylaws, nor did I gather that active interference was to be looked for if the work was generally satisfactory to the Vestry.

The London County Council can take action if the Vestry does not, and it is probable that they will bring pressure to bear upon the Sanitary Authorities, who at present, one is inclined to think, resent the interference of the Central Authority, to make them "obey orders." It is hardly likely, however, that the London County Council, with all the work before them, will concern themselves with individual cases of technical departure from the by-laws in question.

The high standard of the by-laws places a yet greater burden upon those who, as owners, fall under the liability imposed by the Act itself, especially in cases where they have no voice in, or control over, the work done, but are only called upon, when all is finished, to pay the cost.

It is quite time very serious consideration was given to

these questions arising under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, with a view to some practicable amendment whereby a more equitable arrangement should be made for the apportionment of expenses among those interested therein and affected thereby.

C. HERBERT BEDELLS, Fellow.

SECTION II.

COMMUNICATIONS REFERRING TO PAPERS IN THE TRANSACTIONS," &c.

On Mr. Tom Bright's Paper on "Underwoods their Growth and Utilisation.”

("Transactions," Vol. XXV., pp. 347-368.)

In connection with this most important subject, a few notes of my own practical experience as to underwoods in Kent, may be of some interest.

The following figures show the amounts realised per acre during the past two seasons for underwood and timber, growing upon the same land, upon an estate under my management. The underwood, of 10 to 12 years' growth, was sold, standing, by auction in the month of November; and such oak trees and tellars as it was considered, for various reasons, proper and desirable to fell, were marked and sold, standing, with the lop, top, and bark, in the following spring. The sums given are net, less only sale expenses and the cost of repairing the wood and roads, and remaking the hedges.

The woods generally are of the description classified by Mr. BRIGHT under his third heading :-" Where a number "of trees (generally oak) are grown among the underwood, equal attention being bestowed on both."

Woods 1 and 2 are representative of a large proportion of the woodlands upon the Wealden clay-natural woods improved to some extent by planting up at each fall, and having a large quantity of oak tellars springing up spontaneously, but never attaining large dimensions. No. 15 is

a large ash plantation, having only a very few trees, and these principally at the outsides and on the borders of the rides. The remainder are a good class of mixed improved underwoods, Nos. 7 and 14 producing especially good and clean-growing oak timber. The oaks cut did not generally

exceed more than about one-third of those growing upon the ground, and in no case more than one half.

The value of underwoods in Kent is almost entirely dependent upon the state of the hop-growing industry, and the consequent price of hop-poles. I have before me records of the annual underwood sales upon one estate since 1860. The prices were worst in the three years 1887 to 1889, the lowest point being touched in the latter year; the best averages were for the years 1873 and 1874 (£17 6s. 8d. per acre). The highest price realised during the 33 years for an individual lot was £50 5s. per acre, in 1873. Since 1889, the prices have gradually risen, and last year there was a very considerable improvement.

So far as my experience goes, the ash, Spanish chestnut, and birch are most in request for hop-poles, other varieties being less suitable. Unlike Mr. BRIGHT, I have not found the red willow or alder much used for this purpose. Alder is usually allowed to attain a larger size, when it is cut in the spring, the bark stripped, and the poles cut into lengths to burn into charcoal for gunpowder.

In the course of the discussion, Mr. WATNEY alluded favourably to the birch for underwood, and I am glad to find that his authority bears out my own opinion. Birch thrives on a variety of soils, and is useful for many purposes, and it has two most valuable points-it is not usually attacked by ground game, and it is self-propagating by its seeds, a number of spring seedlings generally springing up around a birch tellar.

I have seen very successful results from layering both ash and chestnut. The danger is that the young shoots from the layers are liable to be smothered by the surrounding stronger growths, but this may be prevented by keeping a clear space trimmed round them.

It appears to me that, under suitable conditions, more