Click here to return to the main site entry page
Click here to return to the previous page
The Wellingborough News, 6th June 1902, transcribed by Gill Hollis
Rushden Urban District Council

The ordinary meeting of the Rushden Urban Council was held in the Vestry Hall on Wednesday evening. Mr. Geo. Denton, C.C., was in the chair, and there were also present:- Messrs. J. S. Clipson (vice-chairman, F. Knight, J.P., W. H. Wilkins, J.P., John Claridge, C.C., J. Spencer, J. Hornsby, F. Ballard, T. Swindall, W. Bazeley, C. Bates, G. S. Mason (clerk), W. B. Madin (surveyor), J. B. Martin (nuisance inspector).

Health and Sanitary Reports

The Medical Officer reported that one case of infectious disease had been notified during the last four weeks, viz., a case of erysipelas in Queen-street. – The Sanitary Inspector informed the Sanitary Committee that he had taken a sample of water from the well supplying Mrs. Henry’s cottage in Factory-yard, and had submitted the same to the medical officer, who pronounced it unfit for domestic use. He had placed the usual label on the pump to that effect, and requested the owner to have the town water laid on. The Inspector further reported that he had visited a number of factories, workshops, cowsheds, and dairies, and found them satisfactory.

Estimates

In moving the adoption of the estimates submitted by the Finance Committee, Mr. J. S. Clipson remarked that there was a slight reduction on former rates. The committee had gone carefully through the details, and even keeping in mind the heavy outlay for water that was anticipated, they had felt fully justified in reducing the amount. The estimates submitted showed estimated receipts to the amount of £4,424 13s 9d. (as against £4,209 11s 8d estimated receipts last year, and actual receipts £4, 318 18s 7d), to which had to be added balance in hand and accounts in course of collection £3,277 13s 6d (as against £2, 826 0s 10d last year). The estimated receipts included: From County Council, £1,502 1s 5d; water works, £1,775 15s Water Board, £260; cemetery, £108; sanitary and sewerage, £125; private improvements, £638 6s 4d. The estimated expenditure for the past year was £10,478 0s 11d (against £10,483 19s 5d estimated and £9,545 14s 8d actually spent last year), this including: Main roads, £940; footpaths and improvements (main roads), £400; district roads, £1,780; waterworks, £1,310; contribution to current expenses of Water Board, £100; cemetery, £160; sewage disposal works, £300; public lighting, £430; fire brigade, £18 15s; private street improvements, £1,233 18s 9d; in respect of loans, £2,158 5s 4d. The committee recommended that a general district rate of 3s 9d in the £ (which would produce a sum of £5,411 14s 8d) be raised during the year, and that the Council instruct the collector to prepare a rate at 1s 9d in the £ on account thereof for sealing on July 2nd. – Mr. Wilkins suggested that, for the convenience of the collector, the rate should be 3s 8d instead of 3s 9d. – After a short discussion, Mr. Clipson withdrew the proposal for 1s 9d and 2s and proposed 1s 8d and 2s. – This was seconded by Mr. Claridge, and carried unanimously.

Mr. Channing And The Education Bill

A letter was read from Mr. F. A. Channing, M.P., expressing pleasure at receiving the Council’s protest against the Education Bill, and the recommendation of the School Board as the best educational authority. The letter also stated that Mr. Channing had put down an amendment to the Bill, seeking to lower the number of inhabitants, which would give the urban authorities the power of appointing education committees from 20,000 to 70,000. Rushden would thus be included. – The Chairman remarked that perhaps the Council would not agree with the last part, and suggested that the matter should be discussed in committee of the Council. – Mr. Wilkins said that the question would also arise of the incidence of taxation. The Bill proposed exceptional provisions for the raising of the education rate, which in the urban districts would be the district rate in place of the poor rate. – The question was referred to the Council in committee.

Shop Awnings

Mr. H. S. Simpson, of London, wrote to the Council drawing attention to the danger caused by the lowness of some of the outside blinds in the town. His head had come in contact with one of these, which was not more than six feet from the pavement, and when he suggested to the proprietor that it should be raised he only received impertinence. If it was in power of the Council he suggested that instructions should be given to have them raised, so as to prevent accidents. – Mr. Bazeley and other members held that there were other places in the town as bad as the one referred to. – The Chairman said that the law required the height above the pavement to be eight feet. He suggested that the inspector should be instructed to give attention to the matter, and where blinds were so low as to be a nuisance he should require them to be raised eight feet. – Mr. Wilkins said that the practice had been not to interfere with the blinds so long as they were not lower than seven feet. It had also been decided that they should be taken down on Sundays. – The Inspector said that he had spoken to several, but they took no notice of his representations. – The officer was instructed to report upon all such cases.



Click here to return to the main index of features
Click here to return to the History index
Click here to e-mail us