View report page

45
ADMINISTRATION.
Dairies, Cowsheds, and Milkshops.
During 1894 the Council's inspectors made 9,329 inspections of dairies and milkshops. In 8
instances legal proceedings under the Dairies, Cowsheds and Milkshops Order were instituted, and in
these, penalties amounting in the aggregate to £10 10s. were imposed. 172 cases of infectious
diseases occurring in milkshop premises were dealt with during the year; these included 91 cases
of scarlet fever, 50 cases of diphtheria and membranous croup, 21 cases of enteric fever, 2 cases of
small-pox, 4 cases of erysipelas, 1 case of puerperal fever, 2 cases of continued fever, and 1 case of
measles. In all cases measures were adopted to prevent contamination of the milk.
In the endeavour to ensure that the conditions under which milk was sold in London were such
as would prevent its exposure to risk of contamination, difficulty was experienced in dealing with
itinerant milk vendors. These persons purchase milk from dealers having premises which are
registered. They sell the milk in the streets which they perambulate, and at the conclusion of their
day's work return to their homes, often consisting of single rooms, in which they live under
conditions which do not conduce to the maintenance of cleanliness. In these rooms there is no proper
opportunity for cleansing the milk cans, and any milk which remains at the end of a day's round and
which is distributed the following day is exposed in the meantime to the atmosphere of a room
occupied by day and by night. These persons avoid registration, they are migratory in their habits,
and their dwelling places are only found with difficulty.
Other difficulty was experienced in dealing with the numerous " general shops " in which the
sale of milk constitutes but a small item in the business, and in which no proper provision is made
for the ensurance of cleanliness necessary in the conduct of the business of a milk vendor. Such
premises abundantly exist in London, and especially in the eastern districts where the sale of milk is
not infrequently undertaken by foreigners whose standard of cleanliness falls far short of that which
is necessary.
With a view to securing a better control over these circumstances the Council during the
year 1894 authorised the appointment of an additional inspector.
The number of applications for renewal of existing licenses to cowsheds, dealt with during the
year, was 459, of these 441 were granted.
Offensive Trades.
During 1894 the Council's inspectors made 4,083 inspections of premises upon which offensive
trades (including that of a "slaughterer of cattle") were carried on. In 5 instances legal proceedings
were instituted, and in 4 of these, penalties amounting in the aggregate to £25 15s. were inflicted.
The number of applications during the year for renewal of existing licenses to slaughterhouse
premises was 522, of which 502 were granted. In the case of knackers' yards, seven existing
licenses were renewed.
The Council sanctioned during the year the establishment anew of the business of a "slaughterer
of cattle" in four instances, and that of a soap-boiler as defined in section 19 (2) of the Public Health
(London) Act, 1891, viz., a business in which tallow or any animal fat or oil other than olein is not
used by admixture with alkali for the production of soap.
During the year four offensive businesses which had been discontinued for a period of nine
months or upwards were struck off the Council's register. These businesses included a soap-boiler,
tallow-melter, bone-boiler, and gut-scraper.
Trade Nuisances.
Nuisances due to trade operations are referred to in the annual reports of medical officers of
health of the following districts—
Kensington.—The conduct of the business of a fat extractor at Tobin-street in the Potteries,
Notting-dale, "gives rise at all times to more or less local effluvium nuisance, despite improved
arrangements, care on the part of the proprietor, and supervision by your vestry's inspector, as well as
by the inspector of the London County Council."
The business of a marine store dealer often gives rise to offensive smells. Dr. Dudfield urges
that as it has been held by the Court of Appeal to be ejusdem generis with the businesses scheduled
in the Public Health (London) Act, it is to be desired that the County Council should add it to the
list "as many years ago your vestry, at my instance, requested the late Metropolitan Board of Works
to do, but without success."
The subject of brick-burning at Wood-lane, Hammersmith, is also discussed by the medical
officer of health of Kensington. In 1889 the Kensington Vestry requested the London County Council
to add the business of a brick-maker to the scheduled list of offensive trades. The Council drafted
by-laws under section 23 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1888, but these by-laws were not
confirmed by the Local Government Board, the Board being of opinion that the nuisance could be dealt
with under section 21 of the Public Health (London) Act. Dr. Dudfield states that the nuisance was a
serious one, causing great annoyance over a very large area. Proceedings under section 21 of the Public
Health (London) Act were instituted by the Kensington Vestry against three brick-makers in Woodlane,
and a conviction obtained in all cases and penalties inflicted. Two of the defendants having
formally agreed not to burn bricks at Wood-lane in future, the fine was reduced. The third defendent
appealed to a superior court with a view to quashing the proceedings on a technical point, but the
appeal was dismissed with costs, and the full penalty inflicted.
Nuisance was experienced by residents at North Kensington on account of objectionable smells