The plaintiff is the owner of a tenement-house situated on the rear portion of the premises No. 55 James street, in this city, and in this action seeks to enjoin the health department from executing an order which it has made requiring the tenants to vacate the premises and prohibiting the further use of the same as a human habitation without a written permit from the board of health, which is the head of the department. The . order recites that the sanitary superintendent, one of the defendant’s officers, has certified to the board that the building in question is “ unfit, and not reasonably capable of being made fit, for human habitation, by reason of want of proper ventilation and by reason of want of repair and defects in the drainage and plumbing and because of 'the existence of a nuisance on the premises which is likely to cause sickness among its occupants, and that the' occupancy of said building is dangerous to life and detrimental to health.” This condition the board has determined to exist, and states it as the reason for issuing the order complained of. Much proof was taken upon the trial with respect to the sufficiency of these charges, and while perhaps it may not be necessary for me to go further than to find that there was some basis for an exercise of judgment upon the situation of the board, and that the conclusion arrived at was neither unreasonable nor unsupported by the facts, it is proper to add that I concur in the propriety of the action which was taken. The unsanitary condition of the building was obvious; the facts had been reported to the board by its officers who were charged with the duty of personal inspection, and. ¿t least two of the commissioners had themselves personally examined the property.