View report page

68
the swine. It was therefore found necessary to take legal proceedings
against the offender for disobedience of the order.
The defendant was fined, and in default was removed to prison
but afterwards paid the fine and complied with the order.
Last year 12 fresh prosecutions were instituted by your Board,
with the view of clearing off the remaining piggeries in the same
locality, notwithstanding- the fact that all defendants had been
obliged to comply the previous year, a most vigorous resistance
was offered, and most eminent counsel retained for the defence.
The result, notwithstanding, in 11 out of the 12 cases, was that
orders were obtained for the prohibition of swine keeping. One
defendant gave notice of appeal to a superior court. The
appeal was to be heard at the Sessions at Westminster, but
after it had been once called and adjourned, the defendant came
to terms, consented to an order, paid a nominal penalty and
his own costs. It is greatly to be regretted that some legal
provision is not made to enable your Board to compensate these
unfortunate people for the great loss they sustain by the interference
with their trade, Still however, the course adopted by
your Board, is one that is absolutely necessary in order to
preserve the health of the inhabitants in that thickly populated
locality. It is certainly very hard on the pig keepers individually,
but it is in accordance with the recognised law of civilization
that the interests of the few must be sacrificed to the welfare of
the many.
licensed cow-houses.
Some improvement has taken place in many of the licensed cowhouses
during the past year. An order in Council was made in July,
in accordance with a provision in the "Contagious Disease, Animals
Act, 1879." By this order the Metropolitan Board of Works (the
Local Authority for the purpose of the Act) were empowered to
make regulations for the effectual lighting, ventilating, including
air space, cleansing, drainage and water supply of dairies and cowsheds.
Some confusion was experienced at the October meeting
of the Middlesex Bench. As it was supposed that the Metropolitan
Board would be in possession of full evidence as to the
condition of the licensed cow-sheds, it was thought prudent not to
have notices served on the cow-keepers, and therefore your Board
offered no evidence. The Metropolitan Board was in only a few
instances prepared with evidence, but asked for an adjournment of
all the applications. This the Bench refused, and the result was
that several of the cow-keepers obtained licenses, while their
premises were far from being in a satisfactory condition. Some
improvement has since taken place, but I am of opinion that it will
be advisable for your Board to take independent action at the next
licensing meeting of the Bench.