London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972
View report page
Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Finsbury 1903
Report on the public health of 1903
This page requires JavaScript
Continued from previous page...
| Date of Trial. | Name and Address. | Article. | Where seized and Name of Inspector. | Penalty and Costs inflicted. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 8 | William A. and Henry Hale, II, Exmouth Street, Finsbury | Seven tins of peas—unsound These peas were very soft, pulpy, of a light yellow brown colour, and emitted a sour offensive smell. The liquor in which these peas were preserved was viscous and turbid, and the surface was more or less completely covered by a scum of bubbles. | 11, Exmouth Street. Finsbury(Inspector Billing) | Dismissed without costs. In giving his judgment, the learned Magistrate said, that although he had seen and condemned the seven tins of peas, he was now, after hearing the evidence of the defendants, placed in a difficulty. The peas had been preserved by a "new" process, which had the tendency of allowing them to get into such a condition as to render it very difficult to detect whether they were sound or not. For himself, he did not like the appearance or smell of the peas produced in Court, and which were said to be not unsound. The prosecution had very rightly been taken and necessitated this enquiry, which would do good, and therefore, whilst dismissing the case as not proved, he would give no costs. The seven tins of peas seized were not seen by anyone (except the witnesses for the prosecution), after they were seized, although they were kept 24 hours for the purpose of being examined by anyone on the defendants' behalf (see page 79). |
| Sept. II | Ernest Robinson, 31, Albert Street, Islington | Two hundred and eightynine bananas—unsound | At a stall in Chapel Street, Finsbury(Chief Inspector Green) |
It has been my practice to advise prosecution only in cases about
the seriousness of which there could be no doubt whatever; that is
to say, we have only taken to Court cases where the meat siezed
was extremely unsound or in a state of advanced disease, or cases
where continued warnings had been of no avail. In other cases,