View report page

70
PET ANIMALS ACT, 1951
This Act, which came into operation on 1st April, 1952, regulates the sale of pet
animals and empowers a local authority (in London a Metropolitan Borough) to grant
licences to keep a pet shop on payment of a fee not exceeding ten shillings.
During 1957, eleven licences were renewed and two new licences issued, appropriate
conditions being applied to each.
No contraventions of the Act were found during 55 routine inspections.
RAG FLOCK AND OTHER FILLING MATERIALS ACT, 1951
Under this Act it is unlawful in the course of business to use filling materials
to which the Act applies in any form of upholstery, the stuffing or lining of toys,
baby carriages or of articles of such other kinds as may be prescribed except on
premises registered by a local authority (in London a Metropolitan Borough Council).
Eight premises are registered in Fulham.
During 1957 the following samples of filling materials were purchased fay the
Sampling Officer and submitted to the Prescribed Analyst for the purpose of the
Act:-
Feathers 2
Horse Hair 3
Rag Flock 6
Coir fibre 4
Kapok 5
Kapok Mixture 1
Hair and Fibre mixture 1
Algerian Fibre 2
24
Two samples of filling materials submitted for examination were reported to be
unsatisfactory. Reports on these samples are as follows:-
One Sample of Kapok (No. 14) failed to satisfy the requirements of the Act, the trash
content being 3.2 per cent., whereas the permitted maximum is 3.0 per cent.
On the recommendation of the Public Health Committee the result of the analysis
was communicated to the manufacturers.
Sample No. 18 consisted of a bolster, the contents of which were described by the
retailer as horse hair. The analyst, however, reported that the filling consisted of
coir fibre which satisfied the legal requirements, although the contents had of course
been misdescribed. On enquiry it. was ascertained that the bolster was one of a
consignment of ex-Government stock which, according to the retailer, were described as
horse hair filled and many of the bolsters examined in the shop did, in fact, contain
hair. The retailer agreed to exercise greater care in future when applying a
description to such articles.