Report on the public health of Finsbury 1909 including annual report on factories and workshops page 90

Finsbury 1909

Report on the public health of Finsbury 1909 including annual report on factories and workshops

This page requires JavaScript

Table: MEAT PROSECUTIONS —1909.

Download table as:

MEAT PROSECUTIONS —1909.

Date of Trial.	Name and Address.	Article.	Where seized and Name of Inspector.	Penalty and Costs Inflicted.
1909. August 3rd.	Thomas Gent, 88. East India Dock Road, E.	Twenty-nine pieces of beef and mutton weighing 829 lbs. The whole of this meat was foreign. It was very soft, slimy, in parts green in colour, and mouldy, and the whole of it smelt very offensively.	69, Chapel Street, Finsbury. Inspector Billing.	£.50 and £5 5s. od. costs.
August 24th.	Ernest E. Robinson, 96, Central Street, Finsbury.	A piece of beef weighing 32 lbs., and a quantity of sausages and sausage meat weighing 40 lbs. The piece of beef was slimy, mouldy, maggoty, and in parts green in colour and smelling offensively. The sausages and sausage meat were very sour.	96, Central Street, Finsbury. Inspector Billing	£50 and £5 5s. od costs.
November 16th.	Arthur Cart, 40, Turner Road, Leicester.	Four sides of stirk veal weighing 526 lbs. This veal was diseased with gener-alized tuberculosis. The pleura and peritoneum had been partly stripped from each side and fat had been rubbed over the stripped parts, thus concealing to a large extent the evidence of stripping. There were many tubercles on the mar-ginal portions of pleura and peritoneum. The whole of the glands were enlarged and some were tuberculous. There was a large abscess, about the size of a cocoanut on one fore quarter.	Nos. 101 & 103, Charterhouse Street. Inspector Billing.	This case was adjourned from time to time to suit the convenience of the defendant, and on one occasion for want of time. It was eventually finished on February 17th, 1910, when the defendant was convicted, and fined £100 and £25 costs. The prosecution had considerable trouble in bringing the case home to the defendant. The meat was sent to London in the name of T. Jennings, but no such person could be traced. The defendant sought to prove that T. Jennings was really a man named Chas. Morris, who it was alleged could not be found.