London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Marylebone 1910

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for St. Marylebone, Metropolitan Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

The situation of the premises is as follows:

Premises.No. of Cows.
58, Acacia Road (Sheds, Nos. 1, 2 and 3)44
56, Bell Street15
*42A, Clipstone Street10
26, John Street14
3, Malthouse Mews22
Total 105

*This licence is granted on the undertaking of the licensee not to keep more than 10 cows on the premises.
Application for renewal of these licences is made annually, and the Borough
Council having raised no objection the renewals were granted by the licensing
authority, the London County Council.

Although the above table shows the sheds to be licensed for 105 cows, at the time of the annual inspection only 45 were actually stabled, as follows:—

Premises.No. of Cows.
58, Acacia Road9
56, Bell Street9
42A, Clipstone Street10
26, John Street3
3, Malthouse Mews14
Total 45

The premises were regularly and frequently visited during the year. In one
case only was it found necessary to serve a notice with regard to drainage and
cleansing.
Milk Shops, &c.—The number of premises upon which milk is sold is 208.
The number of applications for registration received was 62 and of these 11 were
refused, as provided by the London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1908.
on the ground that the premises were unsuitable. Under this Act also, 72 names
were removed from the register on account of the unsuitability of the premises
and 24 others were taken off, the premises having been demolished or the sale of
milk discontinued.
The section of the London County County (General Powers) Act, 1908,
giving the Council power to remove a name from the register allows of appeal
being made to a magistrate against the decision of the Council. Only in one
case was advantage taken of this power, the suggestion that the defendant
should appeal coming from the magistrate who was asked to convict an
unregistered person for selling milk. The case is referred to below; it may
be mentioned, however, that the owner in addition to selling milk retailed beer
under an off-licence. The premises were dirty, badly ventilated and in other ways
unsuitable.