ORIGINAL PAPERS. THE INFLUENCE OF LEASEHOLD TENURE ON SANITARY QUESTIONS. By J. VESEY FITZGERALD, Barrister-at-Law. THE reports recently issued by the Foreign Office on the systems of tenure of dwelling-houses existing in the various countries of Europe contain much that is interesting and instructive. English law, as we know, differs in origin and in many essential particulars from the laws of other civilised countries; and though, as a whole, English lawyers consider it to be superior to any of the systems established elsewhere, no one denies that we might with advantage borrow some provisions from the laws of other countries. The reports in question have been procured at the instance of those who consider that our system of building-leases ought to be abolished, and freehold tenure, at any rate for dwelling-houses, substituted for leasehold. They show that the English system is unique, inasmuch as leasehold tenure is unknown in some countries, and uncommon even where it is permitted by law; but they also show that there is no such agreement among the laws of other countries as should lead men to think that the system established anywhere else must necessarily be the right one, and that systems which differ from it must necessarily be wrong. We do not propose here to attempt to analyse the merits and demerits of the different Continental systems of tenure, except so far as those systems provide restraints against the creation of nuisances, or the erection of buildings which may be detrimental to the neighbourhood. In this respect, as in others, the laws of different countries vary greatly; and, if our law as to household tenure is to be altered, we should observe the merits and demerits of the various systems, so as to profit if possible by the example of our neighbours. found in or in the neighbourhood of towns, which elsewhere are devoted to unpleasant trades or manufactures, districts occupied solely by private residences. Every tenant on such an estate may have an interest entitling him to enforce the covenants against his co-tenants, and consequently during the currency of the leases, the character of the neighbourhood is preserved, if the houses are all leasehold. The owner of a freehold plot, however, cannot be restrained from using his ground as he likes, so long as he avoids erecting a nuisance, and erects a building in conformity with the by-laws of the local authority. He may turn his house into a shop or manufactory, and so change the character of the neighbourhood and lower the value of the houses for residential purposes, without his neighbours having any right of objecting. The system of buildingleases in use in this country, thus. among other things, tends to impose restrictions on changing the character of a neighbourhood, and to prevent the spread of industries which are detrimental to enjoyment. The reports now published to some extent enable us to see how far restrictions on the building of houses, and on the uses to which they may be put are possible in other countries. In several instances the reports have evidently been furnished by persons who were not specially conversant with the law either of England or of the country to which they referred, and their value is consequently diminished. But, making allowances for their generality, it seems that in all the more important and more civilised countries of Europe restrictions of some sort are imposed by law, in the interests of the community, on the erection of houses in towns. These restrictions of course vary, but the right of the State or of the municipality to impose them is universally recognised. In many States also, though apparently not in all, a neighbour who is injured by the erection of a new building, or by the use to which it is put, has a right to invoke the interference of the courts of law, sometimes with the object of obtaining a decree in the nature of what we call an injunction, and sometimes merely for the purpose of obtaining damages. The right of the original owner of the soil, or of those who derive their title from him, to object to the erection of any ticular trade, is much less universally recognised. In England at present the erection of buildings in towns is subject to certain restrictions imposed by the general law. New buildings must have the approval of the local authority and be constructed in accordance with their by-laws; certain regula-particular house or to the establishment of any partions as to ventilation and drainage and similar matters must be complied with; and the site and size of the house must be such as not to interfere unduly with already existing buildings. Not only is the local authority of each town charged with the duty of seeing that these provisions are carried out, but any neighbour whose light and air is interfered with, or the value of whose property is diminished by the erection of a new building, may be able to prevent the threatened injury or to recover damages for it through the medium of the law courts. Besides these provisions which affect all houses of whatever tenure, a practice has grown up of inserting covenants in leases which bind the tenant to conform strictly to the requirements of his landlord. For instance-if a landlord wishes to lay out his land as a residential estate, he binds his tenants to erect houses of a certain minimum value, and sometimes according to plans to be approved of by himself, and he also binds them not to use their houses for any trade or business which will interfere with the character of the neighbourhood. Such covenants are strictly interpreted and enforced in our courts, and as a consequence there are to be Leases, such as we are used to in England, are comparatively rare, and in some countries are impossible. In France and in Belgium leases similar to those in England are sometimes granted, and the observance of covenants in them can be enforced by law. Besides this, restrictions may be imposed on land, which are binding on a purchaser as well as on a tenant. Such restrictions are called in Belgium 'servitudes,' while the French report gives them no specific name; in both countries not only the vendor but purchasers of other lots from him can, for their own benefit, enforce these restrictions against a purchaser who infringes them. Similar restrictions on the use of plots of ground which have been purchased are recognised in Germany, and may be enforced by the vendor or his successor in title to whom the right has been conveyed, but only when the restriction and the title of the person who claims to enforce it have been duly registered in the State grund buch.' Purchasers of neighbouring plots have no right of action, unless the vendor has expressly granted it to them. In certain suburban districts in Denmark it is customary to sell plots for SS building burdened with conditions or provisoes called "servitut." This word, though a very comprehensive term, applies usually to the obstruction of a view, to the erection of unsightly or unsafe buildings, and to their being applied to noxious or offensive trades.' 'It is a nice question of law as to the qualification necessary for making application to the courts in cases of breach of servitut;' and the report, while stating that it is usually the business of the municipality, at the instance of the landlord, 'to see that a clear and adequate decision be arrived at,' omits to say whether the purchaser of an adjoining plot has a right of action, or what is to happen if any one considers the decision of the courts to be obscure or inadequate. In Norway restrictions exist similar in character to the Danish 'servitut.' These restrictions are for an unlimited time. The sellers as well as neighbours, in so far as the restrictions affect the latter, can enforce the restrictions with the assistance of a tribunal. The above are the principal countries in which restrictions at all similar to the covenants in English building-leases seem to be generally recognised. It is worthy of remark that such restrictions are generally applied not to leasehold but to freehold land; and consequently that easements which an English lawyer would consider as repugnant to the idea of freehold tenure are found to be not incompatible with freehold tenure in other countries. In several other countries in Europe, such as Baden, Bavaria, the Netherlands, Italy, and Wurtemburg, the sale of land for building is treated as a question simply of private contract. If the parties to the contract insert any special conditions in it, | those conditions may be enforced. Such conditions are, however, said to be very unusual; and, where they are inserted, only the parties interested can enforce them. There seems to be no means by which neighbours or purchasers of adjoining plots can enforce the observance of conditions which would be beneficial to themselves. In certain other countries, according to the reports, private restrictions on the uses of land purchased are not only never inserted in the contracts, but are actually prohibited by law. In Russia and Poland it is said, As to restrictions upon purchasers of houses, it appears that none are legally allowed.' And the Swiss report says:-'Land may be sold in large or small plots, but in all cases unconditionally; no restrictions, accordingly, can be imposed saving obedience to ordinary municipal regulations in or near towns.' This language would seem to imply that contracts as to the user of land by the purchaser are forbidden. Whether that be so or not, it seems certain that they are practically unknown; and that, in effect, a purchaser of land or of a house is free to do what he likes with it, subject only to municipal laws, but without paying any regard to the wishes of he previous owner or of his neighbours. In England we have become accustomed to restrictions on the uses to which leasehold property may be put, and we recognise that such restrictions may often actually enhance the value of the property to which they apply; but we should find it difficult to enforce such restrictions against a freeholder. If compulsory powers of enfranchising leases are to be given by law to the tenants, it certainly seems desirable to provide that restrictions on the use of the plot enfranchised, which are in the nature of easements for the benefit of the neighbourhood, should be retained. The German plan of registering such easements, and of only allowing those registered to be binding, affords security against doubt as to what the easements in a particular case may be. In case of newlyenfranchised leaseholds, the title would be a new one, and the difficulties which stand in the way of requiring compulsory registration of existing titles, would not exist. We think, therefore, that whenever the proposed alteration in the English law takes place, security against the character of a neighbourhood being spoilt, by the conduct of one or two occupiers, may be given by turning existing covenants into easements and requiring their registration, and that a right of action should be given to any person who could show that he was aggrieved by any interference with such easement. If this is done, | the security to others against the misconduct of a tenant which is now given by leasehold tenure will be preserved, and the change will do no harm from a sanitary point of view, nor need it interfere with the enjoyment of comfortable dwellings. Leasehold tenure in England has been attacked, among other grounds, as being responsible for the existence of the worst slums in our large towns. It is said that the most insanitary dwellings are generally houses held under leases which have nearly expired, and where, consequently, it is not worth while to lay out money for repairs or improvements. These assertions are no doubt sometimes well founded. It would, from our point of view, have been well if the reports furnished to the Foreign Office had given us some information which would enable us to compare other countries in this respect with our own. But the reports are unfortunately silent on this subject. They merely tell us that leases are uncommon on the Continent, and in some countries are unknown. Yet from other sources we know that overcrowded and insanitary dwellings, occupied by the poorer classes of the population, exist in the towns of other countries besides England. It would seem, therefore, that the system of building-leases is not responsible for all the sanitary failures which are sometimes ascribed to it; and is instrumental in preserving districts and buildings from being treated in a manner which is certainly unpleasant even where it is not absolutely injurious to health. Whenever the threatened legislation to alter the system is brought forward, we hope that care will be taken to preserve the useful provisions which have been matured by experience under the existing system, and that alterations will not be made for the sake of change by persons who have not, at any rate, tried to realise what their effect may be. The reports which have been issued show to some extent what is the state of the law in other countries, and we have some idea of how far the condition of the inhabitants of those countries is preferable to or inferior to our own. They are well worthy of perusal, and may serve to show not only what changes in our law may be desirable, but where it is well to leave existing institutions undisturbed. SCARLET FEVEr at NewcastLE.-Scarlet fever formed 77 out of a total of 91 cases of infectious disease, notified to the medical officer of health for Newcastle for the fort night ending Jan. 31, 1885. MORTUARIES.-At the last meeting of the Hebburn Local Board it was resolved that a mortuary should be provided for the district. The chairman warmly repu diated the scandals that had arisen from the unofficial use of an old stable for the purpose. COTTAGE BUILDING. By G. H. BLAGROVE, A.R.I.B.A. THE moral as well as the sanitary benefits conferred upon the labouring classes by sufficiently commodious dwellings cannot be overrated, and the means whereby those advantages can be obtained, with a due regard to economy, form part of a question which has for years past been recognised as one of national importance. Time was when the agricultural labourer was scarcely so well housed as the horses and cattle of his employer; but we are happy to think that, except in a few isolated cases, such treatment has become obsolete. The average amount of accommodation requisite for a labouring man with a wife and family comprises not less than five rooms-viz., a living room and washhouse or scullery upon the ground-floor, and three bedrooms above. This allows separate rooms for boys and girls-a highly important consideration. The three-roomed arrangement, consisting of a living room, washhouse, and one bedroom, only provides for accommodating one or two very young children, and does not afford the most economical type of cottage residence. The living room, of which the size may vary between 120 and 150 feet superficial, should have a boarded floor, raised at least one step above the ground level, in order that it may be properly ventilated and kept dry. Wood blocks laid upon concrete are much in use now for floors, but it is to be doubted whether they will continue popular, from their liability to retain moisture. The entrance doorway to the living room should be protected from the weather by an enclosed porch; and when several cottages are built contiguously in rows, one porch may be made to serve for every two, the doors of the two living rooms being placed upon the skew, cutting off the corner of each room, so as to reduce the width of the porch to a less dimension than would be required for the full width of two doorways, and thereby to leave more frontage space available for windows. In semi-detached cottages, where economy is best served by bringing the fireplaces into the centre of each block, so that one chimney stack may avail for both tenements, it will be desirable to keep the entrances apart, because it is a disadvantage to have a doorway upon the same side of the living room as the fireplace. Under these circumstances we may either build an external porch at each end, or form an internal lobby by cutting a square portion out of the room. It is not necessary to provide a lobby in addition to a porch, unless the lobby can be made to contain a staircase, by which an ascent can be gained without passing through the living room. It should be remembered that the occupants of small tenements prefer doing all their cooking operations in the living room during the winter, to obviate the necessity of having an extra fire for warming purposes, and that the living room should therefore be provided with a cooking range. In the summer, however, a fire in the living room would be unduly oppressive; and for summer cooking there should be a small range or stove in the washhouse besides the copper, which may occasionally be employed for culinary purposes, but whose main use will be for washing. A height of not less than eight feet from floor to ceiling should be arranged for the living room, which would thus contain from 900 to 1,200 cubic feet of air. The washhouse floor may be of cement, and some persons prefer making it one step lower than the living room floor, to preserve the latter from becoming wetted. However this may be, we should advocate placing the stairs between these two rooms, as most accessible from each, and as affording space beneath for a cupboard. If the total width be 12 feet or 13 feet, the stairs can easily rise by the aid of winders, so as to bring the top landing into a central position, with 8-inch treads and 8-inch risers-a sufficiently comfortable ascent. The superficial area of the washhouse may be from 60 feet to 100 feet, and it should have a small pantry attached. The water-closet or privy may be erected at a short distance from the dwelling, as at the end of the back garden, or in any other convenient situation, or it may be placed within the walls; but it should, in any case, be entered from the outside, and have no communication with the interior. The same observations apply of course to the dustbin. For this we recommend the galvanisediron portable bin, now in vogue. It has a hinged flap at the top, but has no bottom, so that when full it has only to be lifted up, and the refuse can be removed with a shovel. The principal (or parents') bedroom should not be of a less area than 100 feet superficial, and may be more with advantage. It should contain a fireplace, and ought to be 8 feet high in the clear from floor to ceiling. The two other bedrooms may be from 60 feet to 90 feet each in superficial area, and a fireplace in at least one of them is desirable. In calculating the requisite space for the accommodation of the inhabitants, it may be useful to remember that from 450 to 500 cubic feet of air is held to be sufficient for a healthy man during twelve hours. The ventilation also should be such as to allow of a constant renewal of the air, and this is the chief reason for providing fireplaces in bedrooms where possible. We must not forget, however, that a large amount of vitiated air will, when heated, ascend to a height above the chimney opening, and that perfect ventilation cannot be obtained without openings high up in the room, either in the ceiling or in the upper parts of the windows. The latter formed with top-lights hinged to transomes, so as to open inwards, and provided with side gusset-pieces, either of wood or zinc glazed, will admit fresh air without danger of draught. Below these there should be ordinary sashes or casements, or lights hung on central pivots, by which the rooms can be thoroughly purified when not in occupation. Openings formed at the opposite sides of the rooms will afford the most effectual means of doing this; and sometimes ventilation holes can be made to communicate with pipes, which may be carried above the roof and bent down. For the external walls to cottages, brick or stone is of course to be preferred. Should flint or rubble be adopted, it will be more than usually a matter of importance to employ the best mortar. In concrete walling, either in blocks or pisé in moulds, especial care must be taken that the foundations are dry, and that the tops of the walls are sufficiently protected by overhanging eaves. We need scarcely insist upon the importance of a proper damp-proof course above the ground and below the floor in all walls. It may be of slates or tiles, a double course breaking-joint in cement, or of asphalte, or other suitable material, of which there are many now to be obtained. But whatever material be used for walling, it is generally desirable to build hollow walls, to effectually exclude such damp as may accrue from driving rains. The thinner portion of a hollow wall should be built upon the outside, so that it may protect the greater thickness from the damp. The two thicknesses should be bonded together with the ordinary galvanised-iron cramps, formed with drips, to prevent any moisture from being conducted along them to the inner part of the wall. As the hollow space is liable to become a receptacle for accumulated moisture, it should be weathered outwards in cement at the bottom, and openings should be left here and there to allow the water to run out. When, as in building with rubble or flint, it is found impracticable to execute hollow walls with a proper economy of space and material, the exterior may be protected against the weather with hanging tiles or slates, on those sides of the dwelling at least which are most exposed to damp winds namely, the south and west. It is often customary to make up the level of the ground around cottages, paving it with a slope to fall away on every side. This is always desirable, especially in low-lying districts, where it serves to prevent accumulations of damp at the base of the walls. It will often be necessary in the country to provide some kind of receptacle for storing rain-water. The well-known water-butt is in common use, but an oval tank has been recommended to be placed between each pair of cottages, such tank to be about 7 feet by 4 feet and 3 feet 6 inches deep, divided into two compartments, with an oval flap to cover each side. The water from the down-pipes can be led into it through 4-inch earthenware pipes. For cottage roofs tiles are generally admitted to be warmer than slates, and, as they involve less lead-work, they are perhaps cheaper on the whole. Probably the most economical form of roof will be found to consist in carrying a ridge parallel to the front, and from side to side of each dwelling. It will be safer to carry the party walls up to form raking parapets above the roof as a precaution against fire. In the interior, wall papers are not always as healthy as could be wished. They cannot be washed, they are prone to harbour vermin, and they constantly absorb foul air. Whitewash, or colour in distemper, frequently renewed, is much to be preferred. Simple as the internal aspect must be from considerations of economy, we should never lose sight of the fact that everything tending to promote cheerfulness is conducive to health. SPREADING SMALL-POX IN HULL.-Thomas Barrat, master of a small sailing vessel, was summoned before the magistrates at the Hull Police-court on the 2nd inst. for unlawfully and wilfully exposing his son, when suffering from small-pox, without proper precautions against spreading the disease, in a public place-viz., the Tigress Inn, High Street. The town clerk stated that the defendant's son contracted small-pox about the end of October, but defendant took no steps whatever to isolate him, but pursued his usual avocation, and proceeded from place to place, taking no precautions whatever to prevent the spread of the disease. The result was most disastrous, for no less than twelve cases of small-pox were directly traceable to the neglect of the defendant. Dr. Mason, medical officer of health, and other witnesses gave evidence in support of the charge. Mr. Twiss, the stipendiary magistrate, said it was terrible to think of the grievous results following this reckless conduct of the defendant. He was fined 40s, and costs. The THE municipal and parliamentary borough of Walsall, though not strictly speaking within what is correctly known as the Black Country district, adjoins the parishes of West Bromwich and Wednesbury, which are, and it occupies a very important place in the consideration of the sewerage question as affecting the district. The borough comprises the towns of Walsall and Bloxwich, and contains a population of some 59,000, occupying 10,700 houses, and covering 8,080 acres. The river Tame, the pollution of which with sewage has been the chief factor in bringing about the revolution in the drainage system of the district which has been going on since the passing of the Rivers Pollution Prevention Act, touches the southern boundary of Walsall, and also forms the boundary between the parishes of West Bromwich and Wednesbury, whence it flows through Great Barr, Perry Barr, Hamstead, and Aston, into Birmingham. practice of sending raw sewage into the Tame had existed for very many years, becoming intensified as the population of the district increased. The Walsall Corporation were one of the first public bodies to move in the direction of remedying this evil, for as early as Sept. 18, 1876, the month after the passing of the Act, a resolution was brought before the Town Council bearing upon the subject, declaring that the time had arrived when it was imperative to take effectual measures to prevent either solid or liquid sewage being discharged into the river, or the brooks connected therewith, and directing the Sanitary Committee to carefully inquire into the whole matter. It being subsequently found that the committee could not give the necessary time to it, a special Sewerage Committee was formed, the members of which visited a number of towns in search of information and experience to guide them in dealing with the subject. Mr. Angell, C.E., was the first expert called to the assistance of the Corporation, and he was succeeded in 1877 by Mr. Hawksley, who inspected the various outfalls into the Tame, and reported to the Council on the subject at considerable length at their meeting in November of that year. He stated that the borough contained at that time a population of 55,000, and that the dry weather discharge of sewage into the river averaged twenty-five gallons per head daily, that being increased at times of ordinary rainfall to forty gallons per head. So that the quantity of sewage to be dealt with at that time was about one and a half million gallons per day in dry weather, and 2,400,000 in wet. There were two courses of treatment open to them-irrigation and precipitation. With regard to the former, although there were two or three sites which might be made available, they were either unsuitable, inconvenient, or would necessitate the outlay of an enormous sum. With regard to the precipitation system, the only difficulty was in utilising or otherwise getting rid of the deposited matter which did not possess manurial value. Seeing, however, that the water of the river Tame likely to be used for domestic purposes, he considered the defæcation of the sewage waters, so as to render them fit to be admitted into the was never stream without becoming a nuisance injurious to health, could be effected by a primary precipitation with caustic lime, succeeded, when necessary, by a secondary precipitation by crude sulphate of ammonia. For this treatment from twenty to thirty acres of land would be sufficient, and the works, he estimated, would cost about 40,000l., with about 1,500l. per annum for working expenses and cost of material. Upon this the Sewerage Committee reported that, by the sheer force of circumstances, they were driven to the method recommended by Mr. Hawksley, of purification by precipitation. And, considering that the probationary period allowed by the Act had expired, that it must sooner or later be obeyed, and that they were even then liable to have a flood of litigation opened upon them by aggrieved parties, they advised the committee to decide in favour of Mr. Hawksley's scheme. The Town Council by a large majority, adopted that course, and in the early part of 1878 a Local Government Board inquiry was held respecting the matter. The troubles of the Walsall Corporation, however, had only then really commenced. The Local Government Board, while not absolutely refusing sanction to Mr. Hawksley's scheme, expressed doubt whether it would afford an effluent sufficiently pure for discharge into the river; in which case, as was pointed out to them, some other system would have to be provided. The committee naturally shrank from the expenditure of forty or fifty thousand pounds upon an experiment which might have such a result, and a pause took place in the proceedings. They were not allowed to rest long, for on May 15 came a letter from the Town Clerk of Birmingham asking what steps the Walsall Corporation were taking in the matter. This aroused the committee to the necessity for further action, and they determined to throw the matter of preparing a suitable and efficient scheme open to public competition, offering premiums of one hundred guineas each for the best two schemes. Nine civil engineers responded, and sent in plans and schemes, upon which the borough surveyor, Mr. William J. Boys, reported. The result was the rejection of the lot, and the giving of an instruction to Mr. Boys to try his hand. Mr. Boys did so, and prepared a scheme in which he estimated the daily average quantity of sewage to be disposed of at forty gallons per head, reckoning the average rainfall at Walsall during the decade ending 1877 at 33'55 inches per annum, or 0.68 inch per week. In his scheme he proposed to divide the borough into two districts, viz., the towns of Walsall and Bloxwich, dealing with each separately by gravitation, without chemical treatment. The sewage of Walsall, he suggested, would fall by gravitation to Brockhurst Farm and land adjoining, where he proposed to deal with it in two ways. A portion of the sewage, which was largely diluted with subsoil and waste-tap water, and contained a quantity of trade refuse of various kinds from tan-yards, curriers, and other places where dyes were used, and which was of a particularly offensive nature, he proposed to discharge into subsidence tanks; but the sewage of a more domestic nature would be taken direct to the land, where the whole would be treated by a combination of subsidence and of intermittent downward filtration. The sewage from the Bloxwich district, being entirely of a domestic character, would be treated by the filtration system alone. For carrying out the scheme he recommended a series of tanks 200 feet long by 100 feet wide, all or any part of which could be worked at the same time, and the bottoms being so arranged that all the deposit accumulating therein, with the exception of road detritus, could be pumped out and deposited on the adjoining land. The clarified sewage from the tanks would be purified by intermittent filtration on about seventy acres of land, and the other sewage would be purified by absorption on land planted with osiers. The cost of the land and works for the Walsall district he estimated at 47,6867. 5s. 6d., and for Bloxwich 3,6937. 18s. 7d.; being a total of 51,380/. 4s. Id. There would be three outfall sewers, costing 14,657. 1s. 3d., and the branch sewers were estimated to cost 5,576. 11s. 5d.; making a total, with an allowance of 10 per cent. for contingencies, of 78,7754. 4s. 5d., of which 61,898l. 16s. 9d. (apart from contingency allowance) was apportioned to Walsall, and 9.7157. to Bloxwich. This outlay he considered would provide for a population of 80,000, while the working expenses would be more than repaid by the crops and other produce of the sewage farm. Into the merits of this scheme Captain Hildyard held an inquiry on behalf of the Local Government Board on April 14, 1881. Opposition was made to the scheme by the neighbouring town of Wednesbury, on the ground that they too were about considering a sewerage scheme, and that the Walsall Corporation were seeking to appropriate for the purposes of a sewage farm land which the Wednesbury Local Board might themselves require, and were really taking more than they required. Point was given to the opposition by the fact that most of the land required by Walsall to carry out Mr. Boys' scheme was in the parish of Wednesbury, and, as was advanced on behalf of the latter, was the only available land suitable for their own A proposition was then made that the Wednesbury Local Board should unite with the Walsall Corporation in a joint sewerage scheme. With this phase of the question, however, we must deal in another paper. use. VENTILATION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS.-Messrs. Robert Boyle & Son, 64 Holborn Viaduct and Glasgow, are at present applying and have applied their self-acting airpump ventilators and system of ventilation to New Residential Chambers, Park Lane, under the direction of Mr. Alfred Waterhouse, A. R. A.; Small-pox Ship Endymion, Long Reach, under the direction of the Metropolitan Asylums Board; New Shoe Factory, Starch Green, under the direction of T. Chatfeild Clarke & Son; London Salvage Corps Station, Commercial Road; New Conference Hall, Stratford, E.; Victoria Central Electric Light Station, S. W.; New Hospital, Llandudno; Sanitary Hospital, Bournemouth; New Bodega, Birmingham; Liberal Club, Colchester; Female Penitentiary, Stoke Newington; and to the residences of the following noblemen and gentlemen :-Duke of Westminster, Bishop of Bristol, Earl of Northbrook, Earl of Breadalbane, Earl of Kenmare, Earl of Shrewsbury, Earl of Coventry, Earl of Cawdor, Sir Thomas Brassey, Sir Philip Rose, Sir Henry Elliott, Sir Frederick Leighton, Sir William Foster, Sir William Humphry, Sir Richard Bulkly, Sir Jones Ramsden, Sir John St. Aubyn, Sir Charles Trevelyan, and Sir Charles Brooke. IN consequence of the strong representations of the medical officers, the governors of the Newcastle Infirmary have resolved to remove that institution to a new and more eligible site. It is at present surrounded by the cattle market and railways. |
