View report page

62
POULTRY ACT, 1911.
This is a Government measure, and enacts that the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894,
as amended by any subsequent enactment, shall have effect as if, among the purposes
for which Orders may be made under Section 22 of that Act, there were included the
following:—
(1) For prohibiting live poultry from unnecessary suffering while being
conveyed by land or water and in connection with their exposure for sale
and their disposal after sale.
(2) For requiring the cleaning or disinfection of receptacles or vehicles
used for the conveyance of live poultry.
Orders under this Act, which received the Royal assent on the 18th August, 1911,
will be made in due course by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries.
THE CITY OF LONDON (VARIOUS POWERS) ACT, 1911.
The only section of the above mentioned Act affecting public health is 39, which
extends the provision of Section 47 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891.
"39.—(1). Where any animal or article has been seized within the City
uof London under Section 47 of the Public Health (London) Act 1891 and
"has been condemned as diseased or unsound or unwholesome or unfit for the
"food of man any person who sent consigned or delivered or caused to be sent
"consigned or delivered such animal or article for sale or for deposit for the
"purpose of sale or of preparation for sale shall be liable on summary conviction
"to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or at the discretion of the Court without
"the infliction of a fine to imprisonment for a term of not more than six
"months with or without hard labour unless he proves that at the time of the
"commision of such act he did not know and had no reason to believe that such
"animal or article was in such condition.
"(2). Where any offence under this section appears to have been wholly
"or partially committed or has taken place outside the City of London the
"Corporation or their Officers may take or cause to be taken against any person
"in respect of such offence any proceedings in relation to such offence with the
"same incidence and consequences as if such offence were committed or took
"place wholly within the City."
Hitherto considerable difficulty has been experienced in fixing the responsibility
for sending unsound meat to the Central Markets, as the person to Avhom the animal
or article belongs or did belong at the time of sale or deposit for the purpose of sale
was the only person against whom proceedings could be taken, and it is obvious that
the words "belongs or did belong" raise at once the question of ownership, thus
leaving a loophole for any person not being the actual owner to send diseased meat
into the Market without fear of legal consequences.
The following is one case of many that have made it abundantly clear that the
law requires strengthening on this point.
A farmer owned a sheep that died in a field. A labourer who found it sent for
the bailiff, who cut its throat and then handed it over to a local butcher, who