§ SIR SYDNEY WATERLOWasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether that Board has, after communication with the local authorities, conceded the principle of erecting back-to-back houses; and, whether he would object to lay upon the Table of the House, a Report upon the subject prepared by Mr. Netten Radcliffe, of the Medical Department of the Board, and Mr. P. Gordon Smith, the Board's Architect, after local inquiry in the district where the concession of the principle was granted?
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHSir, it would not be correct to say that the principle of erecting back-to-back houses has been conceded by the Local Government Board; but it is true that in the case of Idle, in the North Brierly Union, the Board have stated that, owing to the exceptional circumstances of the locality, they considered that this form of construction might be recognized, provided certain conditions could be complied with, and the regulation brought within the operation of bye-laws under the Public Health Act. But no bye-laws have as yet been submitted by the local authority, so that none have as yet been sanctioned by the Board. I should mention that one of the peculiar circumstances is that Parliament has sanctioned back-to-back houses in the neighbouring towns of Leeds and Bradford. There is no objection to lay upon the Table of the House the Report of Mr. Netten Radcliffe and Mr. Gordon Smith on this case.