View report page

117
unsound food and examination of food
stuffs at wharves, etc.
The attention of the Public Health and Housing Committee
was called to the "Sanitary Record" of the 27th October, in which
the following article appeared:—
"Unsound Meat.
"We understand that the meat trades are seeking an amendment
of the law, to shift from the owner or trader the onus of
proving that meat seized as being unsound was not. intended for
human food, and to place the burden of proof that it was so
intended upon the Local Authorities or prosecuting Inspector.
We have not learned what steps have been taken v/ith this object,
but we have no hesitation in saying that it would be a most
unwise and retrograde change in the law. It would be detrimental
to the public health and public policy, and we cannot believe
that there is any probability of its being accepted by Parliament.
The Corporation of Glasgow are moving in the matter, with the
intention of opposing the suggested amendment of the law."
It was reported to the Committee that in the case, which was
decided at the Thames Police Court on the 28th of October,
Langley v. Carle, when the defendant was fined £10 10s. ard
£5 5s. costs, Mr. Dickinson, the magistrate, stated, when innict
ing the penalty, he hoped that this case would be a lesson ta
the trade to examine meat, either upon purchase at the market
or immediately upon it being delivered at the premises of a butcher,
as it was easy enough for a butcher to state, as in the case before
him when an article had been seized, thatf he (thel butcher)
would have found the article to be bad when he was about to use
it. The offence in the case of Langley v. Carle was aggravated
by the fact that the heart and liver which were attached to the
diseased lungs had been cut off for sale, and the lungs hung up
in the sausage and faggot factory, and not put on one side. The
lungs in question belonged to a pig, and were no doubt tuberculous
and one of the recommendations of the Royal Commission on