View report page

35
did not insist on the provision of lairage or poundage for the
cattle, nor on a separate entrance to the slaughter-house independent
of the shop or dwelling-house; and with one exception
they did not oppose the renewal of the licenses. In twenty-four
cases, however, your Vestry had served notice of opposition, with
a view to obtain certain alterations and improvements, including
the provision of adequate lairage effectually separated from
the slaughtering place, and the magistrates refused to renew the
licenses until your Vestry's requirements had been complied with.
With reference to the six slaughter-houses, the entrances to which
were through a shop or house, the Justices were requested to view
the premises before coming to a decision, and they did so, the result
being that they refused to renew five of the licenses on the
ground of the general unfitness of the premises. In the remaining
case they renewed the license, being favourably impressed by the
clean condition of the premises, and by the statement of the proprietor
as to the small use made of his slaughter house. Sheep
only are killed, but they have to pass through the shop; up a
flight of six steps, along a passage, and down twelve steps into the
garden, at the rear of which the slaughter-house is situated.*
Mr. Stimpson, of Church Street, appealed against the decision
of the magistrates, having unsuccessfully renewed his application
for a license at an adjourned sessions held on the 2nd November.
The appeal was heard on the 22nd Jauuary, 1876, your Yestry
being represented by counsel, in conformity with the resolution
adopted at the meeting held on the 5th January. The decision of
the Magistrates was reversed, your Vestry's solicitors having, at
the last moment, advised a withdrawal from the opposition to the
granting of the license (on Mr. Stimpson agreeing to pay the costs
incurred), under an apprehension that it would not be successful,
Mr. Stimpson having improved the slaughter-house, and two
officials from the Metropolitan Board of Works having been subpoenaed
to testify to the excellence of the re-constructed premises.
This, however, was not the question at issue, and it may be at once
conceded that there would be no objection to the slaughter-house
if in a suitable locality. Your Vestry's opposition to the renewal
of the license, deliberately entered upon after view of the premises
and report by the Works and Sanitary Committee, was based on
the fact that the only entrance to the slaughter-house is through
the shop. The Magistrates, moreover, who also viewed the
premises, gave as an additional reason for refusing the license, " in
justice to the sanitary interest of the neighbourhood," that the
" premises * * * * are surrounded on every side by dwelling
houses closely packed."† None of these facts were placed
before the Court, which, in granting the license, pointedly alluded
* This license will not be applied for again. (August, 1876.)
The Magistrates who viewed the premises reported on them in the following
terms:—"The entrance to this slaughter-house is through Mr. Stimpson'e shop and
dwelling-house. The slaughtering here is carried on to a rery large extent,
amounting to some 13 or 14 cattle per week, and occasionally 120 sheep per week.
The premises were well kept, but they are most close and confined, and surrounded