View report page

5^
It seemed to me that the facts brought out in the course of the
enquiry would hare justified a verdict of manslaughter. The actual
verdict returned, however, was in the following terms:—
" We, the jury, find that Emily Susan Hulbert was found dying and
did die in St. Mary's Hospital from the mortal effects of glanders
contracted at No. 16, Colville Mews, Kensington (her sister
having previously died from the same disease). The jury are
further of opinion that the provisions of the Contagious Diseases
(Animals) Act, 1878, with reference to the outbreak of glanders
and to the treatment and disposal of the carcases of horses
suffering from such disease, have not been duly carried out.
" It further appears that the provisions of the Slaughter Houses
(Metropolis) Act, 1874, have been violated by carrying on
trade by unlicensed knackers.
'• The jury further desire that the facts given in evidence may be
brought before the Privy Council, and that steps be taken to
avoid if possible, the occurrence of such accidents in future."
Proceedings were subsequently instituted by the Local Authority
against the proprietor of the glandered horses, for not giving notice
of the disease to the Police, as required by the Act; and he was fined
in the full penalty of .£20 (with costs) in each of two cases.
It appeared to have been felt that he had been sufficiently punished
for his offence by the loss of property and by the penalties inflicted
(which, however, it has been stated, were paid by a subscription
among his horse-owning friends), and this feeling perhaps explains
why no steps were taken to bring him to account for the other offences
of which he had presumably been guilty. Your Yestry, however—
sharing my conviction that some notice should have been taken of
the doings of the horse dealer, for it was evident that if he had
not interposed between the owner of the horses and the licensed
"knacker," the existence of glanders must have become known much
sooner, and the fatal results of the outbreak might have been avoided—
requested the Local Authority to take proceedings against him under
section 3 of the Slaughter Houses (Metropolis) Act, 1874, for " establishing
anew'' the business of a knacker.
The Board in their reply having expressed their opinion that
Mr. Tedder, the person in question, is not a knacker, and had not