View report page

17b
" Local Authority." In practice, however, it was found impossible
to deal effectually with nuisances arising in the conduct
of those businesses under the general Act, and so a Special Act
was passed. There is diffiulty in dealing with recurring trade
nuisances under the Nuisances Removal Act; but experience
has proved it comparatively easy to prevent nuisance when
" offensive businesses " are conducted subject to bye-laws with
penalties for offences.
One point has been made clear since the correspondence
above referred to—viz., that the business of a bone and rag
merchant is ejusdem generis with the businesses named in the
Slaughter-houses Act, and those scheduled by the Board since
the passing of that Act. The point was settled in Passey
(Apellant) v. Oxford Local Board (Respondents), Lord Chief
Justice Cockburn and Mr. Justice Lopes having ruled that the
business of " bone and rag merchant " is an " offensive trade,"
of the same nature with those specified in Section 112 of the
Public Health Act, 1875, which is framed upon the lines of
the 3rd Section of the Slaughter-houses (Metropolis) Act,
1874.
CONVEYANCE OF OFFENSIVE SUBSTANCES
THROUGH STREETS.
That the representations made to the Metropolitan Board of
Works, referred to in the preceding observations, have not been
without effect is testified by the subjoined circular letter received
by your Vestry in November :—
" Dear Sir,
The Special Purposes and Sanitary Committee of the Board have under
consideration the question of the nuisance caused in the collection, and conveyance
through the streets of the Metropolis, of offensive substances, such as
fish offal, blood, kitohen stuff, and other refuse. It has been represented to the
Board that the existing provisions in the Nuisances Removal Acts, and in the
Local Management Acts, bearing upon the matter, do not enable the Looal
Sanitary Authorities to deal authoritatively aud effectively with the nuisance,