View report page

187
persons near." And he favoured me with a report on the
Collection and Conveyance of Fish Offal, made by the Sanitary
Inspector appointed by his Board to inspect Manufactories,
which emphasizes the necessity for regulation of the business
by bye-laws, and confirms my view that the offal should be
removed in the storage vessels.
But I subsequently learned that the "local authority "
particularly referred to in the Clerk's letter (page 176) was the
Greenwich Board, whose method, it is stated, has been "entirely
successful." That Board, it appears, "has a duplicate set of
closed metal receptacles. They leave daily at the various
premises a clean receptacle, and remove the full one to their
depot, which is in a suitable position. Here the smaller
receptacles are emptied into one large one, and are then
cleansed. A farmer removes daily the larger receptacles to his
land, cleanses them, and next day takes back the empty and
removes the full vessels, and so on.''
Now admitting for the sake of argument that this
method is successful, it must be obvious that the Greenwich
Board has no power to enforce its observance. Personally,
therefore, and so far as existing law is concerned, I am more
disposed to rely on the Metropolitan Board's powers to make
Bye-laws for " works of cleansing and of removing and disposing
of refuse" already adverted to, but I am of opinion that
it would be a simpler and better course for the Board to obtain
"additional legislative powers " should it still be of opinion
that the offensive businesses referred to cannot be regulated
under the provisions of the Slaughter Houses (Metropolis)
Act, 1874.
The Clerk's letter and my report having been duly considered
by your Vestry, the following reply was sent under
date, 12th December:—
n 2