[Report 1913] / Medical Officer of Health, Somerset County Council.

  • Somerset (England). County Council.
Date:
1913
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Credit: [Report 1913] / Medical Officer of Health, Somerset County Council. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    39/122 (page 35)
    water (2%), (button (4%), Keyiisliain (2%), and r.ang})ort (7%). Fn tlie Axbridge and Langport districts only 15 and IS per cent. res})eetively of the houses have ])een ins})ected during three coin})leted years. In the Urban areas no inspections were cari’iefl out during U)L‘> in Mineliead and ^Vivel- iscoinl)e. In the latter small l^r})an district they had all been carried out in 11)11 while in Mineliead 31 per cent, had been inspected during the previous year. In ('hard Urban only 10 fresh houses were inspected (O.S'*4), and only 15 in Itadstock (2%). Jn Hadstock no inspections were carried out during 1011 and 1012, and it was only in November, 1013, that the Sanitary Fnspector was instructed to inspect 17 houses scheduled by the iMedical Officer of Health. In Weston-super-Mare only a small pro¬ portion of the houses have been inspected. Results obtained in 1013.—Idie inspections made and defects found are recorded in Tables XXI and XXII. The four tables, XXI to XXIare compiled from information obtained from the district Medical Officers of Health. They are as accurate as possible, but in some cases records and returns are not kept wdth sufficient care, and it is not always easy to classify the results properly. In a few instances there is still a regrettable ambiguity as to whether a house has been definitely reported as unfit for habitation, or merely reported with others as in a bad condition.