View report page

5
The meat and cattle trade section urges that " the abolition of private slaughterhouses would
result in the whole British cattle, sheep, &c., trade of London passing into the hands of a limited
number of wholesale firms, who would be able to control the trade to the detriment alike of the British
producer and the consumer." In reply I would beg to point out that the provision of public slaughterhouses
in which every butcher will be able to slaughter is a sufficient safeguard. If the London
butcher finds he can buy live cattle and kill them in the public slaughterhouses at less cost to him than
by buying carcases from the wholesale firms, he will undoubtedly do so. He may, as stated by some,
be unwilling to take the trouble to adopt this course while he can buy meat equally cheap from
a wholesale firm, but these firms would not have a monopoly of the slaughterhouses, which would
serve as an effectual control.
One deputation, through its spokesman (Mr. Coggan) urged that, if the subject be dealt with
at all, it must be done by the Government, and must be a scheme for the entire kingdom. The
Committee at the present time is not asking for special legislation for London, but is advising the Council
to inform the Local Government Board that the Council will be prepared to accept in London the
responsibility of the administration which the Royal Commission on Tuberculosis recommends.
When the Government introduces a bill to give effect to these recommendations, which, in the
interest of the public health is urgently needed throughout the country, it may be hoped that the
necessary powers may be conferred upon the Council for safeguarding the London population against
risks from unwholesome milk and meat. The effect of such action would no doubt be to ensure the
slaughter in public slaughterhouses, and the inspection at the time of slaughter in all parts of the
country, of the great majority of the cattle which now go to the butcher.
Since these deputations have been received, deputations of butchers have waited on the London
sanitary authorities and memorials have been addressed by the butchers' trade with the result that in
addition to the deputations from the trade associations which the Public Health Committee has received,
the Council has received communications objecting to the committees proposals from the Vestries
of Paddington, Lewisham, St. George the Martyr, Kensington, St. Pancras, Clerkenwell, St. Luke,
Lambeth, Westminster, Stoke Newington and Rotherhithe; the District Boards of Holborn, Poplar,
Wandsworth, St. Olave, Lee, and Whitechapel; and from the Agricultural Societies of Leicestershire,
Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, and Worcestershire, Norfolk, the Royal Counties,
Wiltshire ; the Bedfordshire, Norfolk, East Suffolk and Gloucester Chambers of Agriculture; the
National and the Hampshire Down Sheep Breeders' Associations; the Farmers, Fareham and Hants
Farmers', and the Smithfield Clubs, the Butchers Company, and the Meat and Cattle Trade Section of
the Chamber of Commerce.
The sanitary authorities do not in every case state the grounds of their objections. Some of
them, however, give reasons, and to these reference may be made, thus—
The Clerkenwell Vestry refer to the "enormous cost" of public slaughterhouse provision. I
have already dealt with this question. The vestry urge that there will be increase in the price of meat. It
is obvious that a change which would cause less than a tenth of the butchers in London to slaughter in
public instead of private slaughterhouses, cannot possibly affect the price of meat. The vestry further
state that it will be impossible for English meat to be distinguished from foreign, whereas the system
proposed is the only one which will enable such distinction to be made; that " only a very small
proportion of the meat consumed will be brought under the inspection of the Council's officers,"
whereas the system proposed will bring under inspection the whole of the meat which is now not
subject to the inspection of the officers of the City Corporation; that property in the neighbourhood
of the proposed public slaughterhouses will be depreciated, concerning which it may be stated
that apart from the fact that this question has been carefully studied in selecting the sites I have
proposed, the following extract from the architect's report on public slaughterhouses in Germany
may be cited, " although care has been taken to keep these great establishments away from private
buildings, there is, so far as I can see, no objection on the part of private persons to build and live
near the markets and abattoirs, for new streets are laid out, and new groups of factories, shops,
offices, and residences are erected, and, in fact, new suburbs are springing up close to the entrance
gates. This results no doubt partly from the business which springs up in connection with such
establishments, but it is largely due to the attention which has been devoted to their appearance, and to
their freedom from any cause of offence."
The Vestry of Kensington base their objections on the grounds (a) that public slaughterhouses
are decreasing in number, and that a minimum of slaughtering is carried on in some; and (b) that the
vestry are " impressed with the futility of any efforts h iving for their object the suppression of tuberculosis
by the inspection of meat, whilst no arrangements are in operation for the supervision of milk and
of the cows from which it is taken." To (a) it may be replied that in 1892 there were 537 private
slaughterhouses; in 1898, 425. If private slaughterhouses continued to decrease at this rate, in 23 years
no private slaughterhouses would remain. But in 1874 there were some 1,500 private slaughterhouses,
and in 1892 there were 537, i.e., the average decrease was more than 51 a year. Since 1892, however,
the average decrease has been less than 19 a year. The rate of decrease is therefore largely diminishing,
and will continue largely to diminish, and in all probability private slaughterhouses will continue to
exist until the representative body of London by some definite act brings their existence to an end. To
(b) it may be replied that the Committee's proposals deal with milk as well as meat.
The District Board of Poplar are of opinion that a proper system of inspection and marking of
the meat would be sufficient, but apparently do not appreciate the impossibility of this being done,
unless there is inspection at the time of slaughter, and that such inspection is impossible unless theanimals
are killed in a public slaughterhouse.
The District Board of St. Olave, and the Vestries of Rotherhithe and Stoke Newington refer to
the "enormous cost" with which I have already dealt. The St. Olave District Board refers also to the
danger of seriously affecting the interests of British farmers and agriculturalists, which, if affected at