London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Islington 1937

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Islington Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

1937 62

UNSOUND FOOD DESTROYED.

The food destroyed or otherwise disposed of so as to prevent its use for human consumption was as follows:—

Tons.Cwts.Qtrs.Lbs.
Diseased Meat, including organs from slaughterhouses (surrendered)4222
Meat and Tinned Food from shops and stalls (surrendered)233
„ ,, (seized)3115
Fish from shops, fishmongers and fryers (surrendered)31
Fruit and Vegetables (surrendered)19
Provisions (seized)14
„ (surrendered)26
Total11334

Food Inspection.—The number of visits made to shops, etc., were as follows :—

Butchers, Provision Dealers, etc., shops2,129
Meat, etc., Preparation Factories65
Fish Shops481
Fruit Shops1,485
Markets249
Stalls654
Offensive Trades123
Total5,186

Merchandise Marks Act, 1926.—The marking of imported food with an
indication of origin is regulated by various orders made under this Act. Three
years have now elapsed since imported meat was brought within the scope of this
Act requiring, in the majority of cases, the use of a large number of tickets and a
corresponding amount of time to comply with the Order. Islington butchers
generally are to be congratulated on the manner in which they have observed the
requirements of this legislation. During the year six traders were warned for
failing to mark imported meat, five for tomatoes and four for apples.
Prosecutions taken under Merchandise Marks (Imported Goods)
Orders.-Five prosecutions were taken, which were successful, against four traders
who failed to comply with these Orders. Two were due to omitting to mark imported
meat with the name of the country of origin, one for marking Chilian lamb with the
word "Empire" and two for failing to mark imported tomatoes. One of these
last named cases concerned a stall on which was exhibited a quantity of Jersey
tomatoes that were not marked in accordance with the appropriate Order. The
vendor was heard by the Inspector to describe them as " English he refused to give
his name and address when asked. His name and place of abode were afterwards
ascertained, but as he was seen at the same market some weeks later the summons was
served while he was carrying on business there. He was ultimately fined £3. The
aggregate of penalties in the above cases was—Fines, £6 12s. ; Costs, £3 2s.