View report page

21
???gs against the persons exposing them for sale, but were
???et by the difficulty that the Act (26 and 27 Vic., cap. 117)
???efines the articles which may be seized as follows :—" Any
???imal, carcase, meat, poultry, game, flesh, fish, fruit,
???getables, corn, bread, or flour." None of these terms
???uld be held to embrace eggs, and the Vestry were, there???re,
reluctantly compelled to abandon the proceedings.
he Vestry, however, addressed a communication to the
Government, calling attention to the case with the view to
a amendment of the law, so as to include bad eggs in the
???efinition of unwholesome food. They also invited the
co-operation of the other local authorities in the matter,
???me of whom, in consequence, took similar action.
Wilmington and Northampton Squares.—On the 25th
March, 1886, a letter was received and laid before the
estry from Mr. C. C. Walker, of Lilleshall Old Hall,
ear Newport, Salop, an old inhabitant of Clerkeuwell,
the subject of these Squares. This public spirited and
enerous gentleman had borne the expense of laying out
the enclosures of Wilmington and Northampton Squares
??? the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association at a cost
over £l,000, and he now offered to place the result of
???is expenditure at the disposal of the Vestry for the use
nd enjoyment of the parishioners of Clerkenwell. The
???estry conveyed its thanks to Mr. Walker for his kindness
???nd generosity, and also entered into negociation with the
???arquess Northampton, as to transferring the spaces in
???uestion to the Vestry. In July, a letter was received from
???he Marquess's Solicitor stating that his Lordship, feeling
???he great importance of public gardens and recreation
rounds being provided in London on a far larger scale
???an heretofore, would convey as a free gift the gardens to
???e Vestry to be maintained by them as public gardens.
???t the same time a letter was received from the Public