View report page

13
whether at all, slaughtering should be permitted in crowded localities. By many
persons, Slaughter-Houses are regarded as unmitigated nuisances. It is, however,
necessary, especially for those Avho are entrusted with the regulation of SlaughterHouses,
to consider the question in a practical point of view, and in all its bearings.
There are three considerations which demand attention—First, the wants of the
community, and the means of supplying them. The suppression, total or partial, of
Slaughter-Houses in Shoreditch would, in a degree proportionate to the extent of the
suppression, make a population of 125,000 persons dependent for fresh meat upon the
railways and upon such supplies as could be brought in carts and at a considerable
loss of time from the public abattoirs in the Metropolitan Market. There are some
weeks at least in every year during which it would be extremely difficult to bring from
a distance a sufficient supply of meat in a fresh and wholesome condition. Unless a
certain proportion be allowed to be killed on the spot, we run the risk of having
tainted meat, and of increasing the price. Secondly—How far is a Slaughter-House
necessarily a nuisance or injurious to health? There is no doubt it may become
both in a high degree if not properly constructed and controlled. But I entertain
no doubt that if a Slaughter-House be properly adapted for its purpose, and the
business be carried on with proper care, it need not prove injurious to health. It
will be borne in mind that fresh meat being necessarily concerned, the emanations
are, or ought to be, null. Putrescence can only result from retaining too long on
the premises offal, blood, and refuse, and from want of cleanliness and ventilation.
Against these evils we have this security: the butchers want all available space; it
is their interest to allow no accumulation of matter that can be promptly got rid of;
and the retention of putrifiable substances, or any neglect of cleanliness is sure to
entail a heavy penalty upon them by injury to their stock. The liability to inspection
will operate as a further security where self-interest is not sufficient. As regards the
question of nuisance, it is not so feasible to remove every cause of inconvenience.
But when the most serious annoyances attendant upon slaughtering have been
removed, or as much as possible diminished, it may be found that those remaining are
inconsiderable when compared with the amount of general public convenience gained.
Perhaps the most serious nuisance is the driving of animals, especially horned cattle,
through the streets, and acrosss the foot-pavements into the butchers' shops. It is
imperative to lessen this nuisance as much as possible. Where a butcher kills many
beasts, there ought to be a back entrance to the slaughter-house. No place should
be licensed to kill beasts where the animals have to be driven down a long narrow
passage, to the danger of the inhabitants. In Shoreditch this evil will be greatly