View report page

45
examination, one died in the shed the week after examination, and the carcase was sent to the
knacker's, and three were sent for slaughter; of these, the carcase of one was passed as fit for food,
the carcase of another was condemned, and the remaining animal was sold alive in a public market.
The absence of any power to require the slaughter of a cow certified to be suffering from
tubercular disease of the udder determined the London County Council to apply to Parliament
for power to take possession of all such cows and to slaughter them. Further, the difficulty of
always diagnosing with certainty tubercular disease of the udder led the Council to include in the
powers they sought that of taking possession of a cow suspected to be so suffering, to slaughter it
and to compensate the owner if on post.mortem examination the udder was not found to be affected
with tubercular disease.
Inspection of milkshop premises.
The number of milkshop premises on the register of the several sanitary authorities and
the number of inspections of such premises are shown in the majority of the annual reports. From
these reports it would appear that there is great diversity of practice in the several boroughs with
regard to the frequency of inspection of milkshops. In some boroughs inspection of these premises
is only made about once a year, while in others inspections are made every few weeks. The subject
evidently demands careful inquiry by each metropolitan borough council as to the efficiency with
which this duty is being performed. The following table is compiled from statements in the
annual reports of the medical officers of health—
Metropolitan borough. No. on register No. of inspections, Metropoliian borough. No. on register, No. of inspections,
1903 1903. 1903. 1903.
Paddington 174 210 Shoreditch 300 2,803
Kensington 238 Frequently Bethnal Green 342 1,783
Hammersmith 269 Periodically Stepney Unstated 1,340
Fulham 272 Unstated Poplar 365 Periodically.
Chelsea 123 246 Southwark 413 597
Westminster, City of 303 313 Bermondsey 286 325
Hampstead 110 638 Battersea 225 Systematically
Islington 674 573 Wandsworth 286 523
Stoke Newington 51 51 Camberwell 574 2,019
Hackney 346 1,025 Deptford 189 315
Holborn 167 812 Greenwich 158 175
Finsbury 261 400 Lewisham 148 626
City of London 553 Unstated Woolwich 154 154
In a number of the annual reports statements are made which show recognition of
the need for the supply to London of milk which is unpolluted, and frequent reference is made to
efforts to secure the protection of milk against contamination in the milkshop by requiring
the milk vessels to be covered with muslin or other similar material. Many, however, would go
beyond this requirement and would insist upon the milk being stored apart from such articles
as are usually sold by the keeper of the " general shop " who, for the convenience of his customers,
receives daily a few quarts of milk which he usually retails to them in halfpenny.worths. Under
existing law every milk vendor is required to give notice to the sanitary authority that he is
engaged in the sale of milk, and it is then the duty of the authority to enforce the regulations.
Some medical officers of health view this method of administration with disfavour, and would claim
for their authorities a right to determine whether or no milk shall be sold on the premises; in
other words, they would desire to substitute for the system of registration a system of licence.
So far as structural conditions are concerned they can usually be controlled by regulation
which can precisely define those conditions which are deemed to be necessary. Beyond this,
however, is the question of protection of milk against infection or contamination. There is complete
agreement as to the need of preservation of the milk from conditions of dirt, and there is no doubt
that premises in which a variety of goods are sold and in which from the nature of the other business
or businesses carried on, the atmosphere must be frequently pervaded with dust, are unsuitable for
the storage of milk, a material which is an excellent medium for the cultivation of micro.organisms.
There is, therefore, much ground for insisting upon conditions of greater cleanliness in connection
with the storage of milk than of other articles of food.
Under the Dairies, Cowsheds, and Milkshops Order of 1885, it is illegal to occupy a dairy
in which the lighting and the ventilation, including air space, and the cleansing, drainage, and
water supply are not such as are necessary and proper, and this Order is administered by the
London County Council. Under the Public Health (London) Act, all milk premises are included
under the definition of "dairies," and hence the issue of a new Order under that Act would give
power to the London County Council to apply a higher standard of requirement to all milk
premises in London. There is no doubt that public opinion has, in respect of the conditions
required for milk, advanced considerably in recent years, and probably the Council could, under a
new Order, require conditions in advance of those which have, in past years, been enforced.
It is, however, not in the milkshop, nor on the railway, that the chief source of contamination
of milk occurs. The most frequent cause of contamination and that which the consumer has
a right to demand shall as far as practicable be excluded from the milk, is the excremental matter
of the cow which, through the befouled udder of the cow and the soiled hands of the milker, contaminates
the milk at the time of milking. Many dairy farmers do not yet recognise the necessity