View report page

176
business was not such as the legislature intended to be dealt
with under that Act. The High Court of Justice (Queen's
Bench Division), however, in an appeal case* subsequently
came to a different conclusion, and declared the business of a
rag-and-bone dealer to be ejusdem generis with the businesses
scheduled in section 3 of the Act.
In November, 1887, a communication was received from
the Special Purposes and Sanitary Committee of the Metropolitan
Board, on
CONVEYANCE OF OFFENSIVE SUBSTANCES
THROUGH STREETS.
The Committee intimated that they had become convinced
that "serious nuisance does arise in the collection,
and conveyance through streets, of offensive substances, such
as fish-offal, blood, kitchen stuff, &c." They admitted, also,
that the provisions of the Nuisances Removal Acts, and the
Metropolis Management Act, did not enable the Local
Sanitary Authorities to deal effectively with the nuisance,
and that additional legislative powers were necessary. But,
before recommending the Board to take any steps for
obtaining an amendment of the law, the Committee thought
it well to ascertain the views of the several Vestries, &c.
In compliance with the request of your Vestry, I reported
fully on the subject ;t my principal contention being, that
the nuisance can be dealt with effectually, only by regulation
of the trades by "bye-laws entailing an adequate and a fixed
penalty for offences; bye-laws made by the Board, but the
carrying out of which should be entrusted to the Local
Sanitary Authorities." Such bye-laws, I said, "with respect
* Passey (Appellant) v. Oxford Local Board (Respondents). The subject
was dealt with in my Annual Report for 1883 (page, 94 97, inclusive), in which the
(original) views of the Metropolitan Board, and my own views, are fully set out,
† Vide Annual Report for 1887, pages 176-89 inclusive,