View report page

166
Particulars of the work carried out during the year in connection with the
suppression of smoke nuisance are as follow:—
(1) Railway locomotives:—Nuisances reported—11. Prosecutions—11. Convictions—11.
Total of fines imposed—£20 3s. Total of costs imposed—£11 10s.
(2) Road locomotives:—Nuisances reported—20. Prosecutions—3. Convictions—2.
Total of fines imposed—£1.
(3) Premises:—Reports made as to alleged nuisances—146. Cases in which
legal proceedings were taken by metropolitan borough councils as the result of such
reports—nil.
In consequence of the coal strike, the railway companies, manufacturers and
other persons experienced great difficulty in obtaining supplies of steam coal. A
certain latitude was accordingly allowed during the year as regards emissions of
smoke. The number of prosecutions in consequence less than in the preceding year.
Diseases of
Animals.
The Disease of Animals Acts, 1894 to 1925, the object of which is the suppression
of contagious diseases in animals, naturally do not affect London so much as the
country. In London, apart from swine fever, attention is now principally directed
to glanders, anthrax, rabies, parasitic mange and foot and mouth disease, diseases
which are communicable to man. The Acts are supplemented by Orders issued by
the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. During 1926 the incidence of the principal
animal diseases so far as London is concerned was as follows Glanders, including
farcy, nil; swine fever, 1 outbreak in which 24 animals were involved; anthrax,
1 outbreak involving 1 horse; parasitic mange, 57 outbreaks involving 91 animals;
foot and mouth disease, nil.
During the year there appeared to be some danger of the reintroduction of
glanders into Great Britain through the importation of horses, ponies, etc. This trade
had recently shown signs of revival, and there was reason to believe that, although
imported horses were alleged to undergo veterinary inspection before being shipped
from foreign parts, in some cases they were not subjected to the mallein test for
the detection of glanders. Horses may be affected with the disease for some time
without showing any external signs, but may nevertheless be capable of spreading
infection. In the past many serious outbreaks of glanders have been caused by
such animals and the Council has been put to heavy expenditure in respect of compensation
of animals slaughtered. The last outbreak of the disease in London was
in 1922. The matter is at present regulated by the Importation of Horses, Asses
and Mules (Great Britain) Order of 1921, which empowers the Minister of Agriculture
and Fisheries to require any horse brought to this country to be subjected to the
mallein test on arrival. In order to perform the duty satisfactorily, considerable
expenditure by the Government in connection with the provision and equipment
of quarantine stations would be involved. It was understood that the Minister
had under consideration the question of seeking parliamentary powers to permit
of a charge for the testing and quarantine services being levied upon the importers
of horses. It was felt to be a matter of paramount importance that there should
be no recrudescence of the disease, and the Council, on 4th May, 1926, expressed
the opinion that effective steps should be taken to secure that all horses, ponies,
asses and mules imported into Great Britain should be subjected to the mallein
test for glanders before being admitted into the country. A copy of the Council's
resolution was forwarded to the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, who replied
that he was fully alive to the necessity for guarding against the risk of the introduction
of glanders by means of imported horses, and that he had under consideration
the question of seeking new powers to require the detention of imported horses at
the port of landing in this country with a view to the application of the mallein test
before they were allowed to come into contact with home animals. It was added
that a Bill embodying this proposal would come before Parliament in the session
of 1926. It was, however, apparently not found possible to introduce such a Bill.