Sanitary Inspection.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 12818, 28 March 1905, Page 3

Sanitary Inspection.

« SUPERVISION OF SEPTIC TANKS. In his report to tlie Borough Council on Monday night, Mr Kendall, Borough Inspector, took exception to cer-1 tain statements that septic tanks, etc., were put down in the borough in a very lax "manner, very little official supervision apparently being ex-, ercised. The direct opposite, he said, was the case. iHe affirmed there was no branch of Sanitary work that he had more at heart, and none Which he wished to see eventually carried out more than the perfect and efficient drainage of every house or other property in the borough. He would be supported by those with whom he came in contact when he said he had taken every possible interest with that md in .view on every property, for the reason that he looked to efficient Irainage as a matter inseparable from >üblic health. As showing the silent sanitary betterment which has been, foing on in the borough, the Inspector drew attention to the fact that

a during the past IS months -some 54 [ new drains had been laid under his , close supervision, some five proper , acptic tanks had been constructed, and .jcrniits had been given for over 50 iew convenienctfj The Mayor advised the Inspector to disregard the criticisms of correspondents, as he personally always md. What he (the Mayor) was con-t ocmed about was as to whether a man Jid his duty, and the Inspector had certainly done that. There was a uiarked improvement in the conditions of the borough. - When a jxtan was ■arryiug out Iris duty he was bound to create a disturbance. Ho had to .ojnpljjtnent the Inspector on his iwork; chad proved a wonderful success. Cr. (Wood thought the Inspector was referring to a report of the Works Cojnxnittec, when it was decided that the Engineer should supervise the con<lruction of the septic tanks.

The report was adopted. When the report of the iWiprks Committee was brought forward for adoption, this point wai raised. It was pointed put that under present conditions a\ conflict of duties and responsibility m\ight arise through the Engineer having to pass the engineering portion of the septic tanks and the inspector to attend to the sanitary considerations. Several Councillors contended that the Inspector held high qualifications, and Was fully competent to look after the construe-; tion of septic tanks, and it came within his duties to do that work. It was also argued that the 'Engineer had olenty of work to. attend- to without having the additional responsibility thrust upon him, and even if it was, the Inspector Would practically have to do the work. Other Councillors contended that the construction of septic tanks was directly within the) province of the Engineer's department, and he should be given supervision. Tlio latter Councillors, how- 1 ovor, were in the minority by one, and tho Council decided to delete from the

Worts Colmlmittee the clause giving the "Engrnoor supervision over the conof septic tanks.