Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

13 articles on this Page

n-COLWYN BAY BUTCHERS AND…

News
Cite
Share

n COLWYN BAY BUTCHERS AND THE BYE-LAWS. nE NEED FOR A PUBLIC ABATTOIR. CRITICISM OF THE COUNCIL. Two cases under fch-e Colwyn Bay Council s "Jelaws re^ulattDK the slaughter of animals UcsaLt "with a.t considcia.bio length by the Bay justices on Saturday, and 111 tn<3 I "'O'ut\,e of the hoaring one of the advocates ^verely onticised the inaction of he Council J^ith r ■expect to provld'aig a public slaughter- house for trhe town.. y tho first ciise tiio defendants rrederick if'lwall and Evan Lewis, butchers, of Gorddmog **ouiie, Abe.rgeie-rwd, Ol-d (Jolwyn, oh&rgo them be i.n x failure to comply with tne Waw wiiich provides for the removal of offal fl'()m slau-hter-hau:es "within 24 hours of the TJletiQI; of the slaughtering of such ariimal. n Mr E. A. Crabbe, of Abergele and Colwyn Y. who appeared for the Council, read the pye-law oonoerrbecl, and after narrating at ^Sth the nature of the evidence to be called e.akod tha.t exemplary punishment be visited on defendants. „ Win. Henry Jones, sanitary inspector under «*c Colwyn Bay Urban District Council said about 12 noon on Friday, April 15th, he at. Old-Colwyn on business, a.t>d, seeing a dumber of women and children near Llawr Pen- tre in a very agitated state, he prooeeded to- Ward. them, and from a statement made to linn bY' the women be went at. onoe to the defend- ?ats' slaughter-house, which was situated close lie opened the door, and went in to in- t the premises. It was as much as he could do to enter the building, so "awfully lirdribi-e" the smeil, and he had to depart very Sickly. He saw in the slaughter-bouse a ma.n Owen Da vies collecting initrid and highly posed blood and offal. He went out to 8" for Mr Lewis, one of the defendants, and lletiurnoo in ooinpanv with Lewie and a witness. a remarked to Lewis, "These smelU are fwfui." Lewis replied, "Well, Morrw, the from Colwyn Bay, is slaughtering ^fnals here and it is not right that 1 should I &UIfN for the non-removal of offal caused by ^ftoth^r one." Owen Davies then &aid, "I shan't come here ascain. This is the last, time J,'hall remove the offal, i can't oairipiy with tl* oonditions of your letter." This remark re errod to a letter which witness, on the in- ductions of his Council, had a-eait all the butoh. of the district on the preV'IOIU-, day calling *JDon tl>ern to remove all offal from their ^'URhtcr-housej before 8 a.m., comolaints hay. been made of tbe offensive smell emanating trom carts when removing offal at later hours of th:e day. Lewis then said. "Well, Mr Jone:i., 1 Will st&k Mr Morris, of Ty Mawr. Llysfaen, to 2*1' for the offal when be removes that from ^berts the butcher's." The smell, proceeded witness, waa realiy the mast awful I ever 6Inelt in my life (laughter). Entrails only lutely could not give off that smell within hours. As a practical man, I say it is my "fffi belief that that stuff had been lying tiier* •or a very much longer time than that. Mr R. O. Davies, of Blaenau Feet UHOg who for the dcfence, cro^s-examined the ^tne^ at some length. Witness ack now lodged that he had nothing to prove that the offal had been removed within t.he 24 IKXIM except own opinion; he had not had the plaoe ••atohed. Thou-gh three or four people were J*lied to say there was no offal in tiie sla.ughter- J*»u$e on noon on Thursday he would be still of P>e saute opinion. He had never had occasion J? complain of nuisances at the cottages where Ivl the women to whom reference had been ade. It was a fact that a manure tip was ,uat<-d twarer the cottars tlutn the &lau £ £ hte,c- but it wao not true that anything ether ordinary reftise from the cottages was tPTd there; -110 offensive smell came from the «?■ Ile would have complained even though women had told him nothing as the smell "a. So horrible. The defendants had been Por-tod on a previous cccaakkn, when a fine of 2 and costs was imposed upon thfn). Mr Davies: I suggest tha-t you have some against the..e peopleV—Abjoh'tely none. On the last occasion when they were sum- JJan,ed did you tell them on the night before they need not come here, as it was only a wiling care you were bringing against tliem, that they need only semd a letter to the noh ?-That is absolutely untrue. Sarah Edwards, a married woman of Cla.n- ^afan.terracM'. Old Colwyn, s.oke. to discussing etnells from the elaugliter-housc with some *Hher women, and to giving information to the Unitary inspector. The smell was very bad. na. Itihard Owen, an employee of the Colwyn Council, said he was called to the slaughter- house by Mr W. Henry Jones as a witness. IIo ^as on his way home for dinner at. tlve time, &nd the smell was. 5U very bad that he failed to sta nd it. "i?f>e Cha:irman (Mr Kneeshavv): IIow did you to stand it?''—If made mo sick. I could k e:*t my dinner after it (laughter). ^Alr Lumley (another mag>>tra.te): Had this been there for some time i>n your opinion? Indeed, it smelt very badly, and it must been there for some tune. 1 could not for how long. l«e Chairman: Had it been there for more a day —Oh, yes. possibly two days?—Possibly. » "ossiblv three or four day«?—May have bee-n; t say. Jv addressing tbe Bench for the defence, Mr 5*- 0- Davies said he felt that, tbe (sanitary in- would have been better advised to pro- agai.nst the defendant for permitting a /Jiisarice on tlio premises, for there was not. a T^P of evidence to justify the charge of fading r* ^niply with that partioular bye-law. If he satisfy the Bench that the offal had in been removed within 24 hours ru> caae j^'d bo made out aga'nist the defendant, even smell wad enough to knock down the hole ]>opulation of Colwyn Bay (laughter). be Wen Lewis, one of the aefendant firm, said had killed in the slaughter-house on the ■hurray afternoon preceding the Friday in Jfl^stiofn; so had Morris, the other butoher. had bee.n no killing on Wednesday, as the t, were closed on that day. The offal was re«suit of the slaughtering on Thursday after- o°n and Friday morning. He had received ,°o»nplaints abcut the smell, exoept from the 0 "itary inspector. When previouiiv fined the had not been moved because Owen Davies. 1**° had the job of clearing it away, had failed » turn up in consequence of an injury to his j)0r^e. Davies neglecting to report his inability aj. c"> so. He spoke to the inspector about it thp ^*ac' summons, and explained to him Q, ciroumstanoes. Witness also told him ha not appear in court, aa it was a bmy ^furday. rlhe inspector replied that it would On n!a^er' 86 the case would not be a very bad and that witnees need only send a letter wiQ Bench. On the inspector's advice witness jj the Bencli a letter explaining his abscnoe. denied that there was any decomposed jjj iter in the on the Friday now clg ai the plaoe had been thoroughly aned after the previous slaughtering. The fi' was not wonee bhaji usual. "gil Roberts, employed by H. Morrn, th er. Colwyn Bay said he carefully clearwd lùCi (fat bins, and left the slaughteir-house quite ,'ifter using it on Thursday. He h;id not. at all on Wednesday, itiid when lie saw bias on Thursday they were quite clean. sa:dWCn Davies. of Brynffvnojn, Llangerniew, kZ( ho removed the offal from tJje slaughter- wi the Wednesday aud again on the Ft'i- ^ere could have beetn no offal on Friday nintr after the previews V\edneeday. .rosfk-examined; The smell on Friday was •t the same aa usual." He confirmed the made bv the witneis Lewis with re- •^Ciuir0 failure to remove the offal on the "D IT ?U tt>e previoito sumrrtona. %H¥ ,chard Morris, butolier, said he did not kill *»ftidavImal at sl*uffhter-hous« on the Wed- *i>'i^It?r T3, ^>r'e^ deliberation the justices dis- t' the oase. IS ^LAUGHTER^-G IN A CELLAR. Hay ac. "■Per, butcher, of Conway-road. Col wvn *kre»iii"1<: £ ruilt-v. to slaughtering alieep on Mr ^U' ROt for tluit t>urpo&e. iZ: Jones, the sanitary iasi^ector, <wfendant oarrted on businewa a* a :£80 t. r 11) Conway-roa.d. his preini^ being of l»ou.1^rQr>8 va]ue and £ 64 net valuo. Tlie >ere Pari &hop on one «ide> of hi. premises I thJ 4. Errc^ v«lue ami £ 64 nett, while tho«j fc'l °|' wore £ 150 and £ 104 ree-pective. premises boing u.W for busineas *lth, a <^nt,al p^Toeea. 0,'j Wednesday, May by the medical oflkw of r lUin. vL's'tl tlw defendant's &hop and told n c tiiev w*»te<i to inqiect hU pw». tua efenda.tit replied: "Very well. But I son. L le" -v<'u t^uat I have been aiaughter- sheep. I had to do it because they I ^ld r-^f Wl'd to bo driven along the road to *^leeP from a farm, Jreitr'0" ianc' my ffreat diffioulty **il<j_'> along- bocadue they were so J611* and l>r- VenaWei Willi aim U[ 10 the cellar whore they found evi- aa- ofl'-i reoe."t «l*ughtering. There were I fL lour -dimse*] fc'Ueop haii^ing to vy<>nt °t l,GO' Fn^> oeilar Klr^^ u whore they found four S*3 aj^lfi p hajnKUiS- «»a^n«r eight .^Shtc.rpH VU s,' vo,n ot which IUKI (>een he w^nf1"! wllar medical officer the^ „ ? to 1,50 cM,at amf l>Gnrll ay aJong to the back yard in m?r they metr0p J >n* °l*"ed th* baCk V#n «kii« identified «« those of sheep ho had scan aliv« in the yard c-airlior in the -day. Mr Roper, in the presence of the medical officer and P.S. Thomas, admitted slaughtering the shoe^t far the reason already quoted. Mr Cra.bbe (for the Council): I believe you have warned the defondamt many times about slaughu*rin,g ? Witness: I have cautioned him. and I wrote him in August, 1909. And the medicaJ officer of health M, cautioned him? Yes. The premises are not -registered for slaughtering purposes. Mr E. E. Bone (Messrs Bono and Lupas, Colwyn Bay and Llandudno), who appeared for the defence., asked witness whether the Colwyn Bay Council provided a pubhc slaughter-house and made proper provision for the collection of off a.l ? Witness: No. sir. You are aware that tho defendant had en- de-avourod to obtain premises for this purpose and to obtain a licence to slaughter? — I am aware that he has not obtained a licence. He ha3 made offers to get oth-er premises, and he has tried to hire premise for slaughter- ing?—Yres, I believe. You will believe him when he says lie has not kil!od anything there but sheep and lambs, -He has not. killed beef. He has his beef from Burslem, where his brother is carrying on business?—I believe he does. We say he killed the animals in the yard, and that what, you saw in the cellar were the dressed carcases?—There was no appearance or evi- dence in the yard of slaughtering, but there was blood and offal in the cellar. These premises were CLEAN AND WHOLESOME ?- -Thev always are. Mr Lumley: If this man had a lice.noe to slaughter in his va-rd, he would only be on ex- aotly the same footing as other butchers in Col- wyn Bay?—Quite so. Mr Bone, addressing the Bench for the de- fence,, said it waa suggested that the premises in question were not suitable for a buteller's purposes, but his client was carrying on a re- spectable trade in a respectable manner. He had iiiat-i-c efforts to get suitable premises. He had had to do his slaughtering as far away an Penrhynside, and he h;d had to pay for the privilege of slaughtering on the premises of Messrs Lilwall and Lewis to which reference had been made in the previous case. He had endeavoured to slaughter wherever he could get a slaughter-house ne-wr to the plaoe where the animals were purchased, but there were cites, suoh as that one, where the aninsals were wild, and it wa.3 found impossible to take them elsewhere, but sheep and lambs only had been slaughtered on the premises in Conway-road. No nuisance had arisen in consequence. It might be added that he had even taicen animal to be slaughtered at the public abattoir at Llan- dudno. He suggested that it hardly lay with a public authority whioh had obviously neglected its own duties m failing to provide a public slaughwr-houso Mr Lumley interposed with an observation that did not reach the reporters, and The Chairman added that Mr Bone could say tha.t the public authority had not provided an abattoir, but he oould not criticise them. Mr Bone replied that he wanted to explain something in extenuation of his client's offence. He remindc the Bench thu-t Colwyn Bay was the largest urban district between Chester and Pwllheli, and it was the only one of any popu- lation whera a public sla;ught.er-hou:e was not provided. The Colwm Jiiy Council did not even make provision for the collection of offal, and he suggested that having regard for those facts the Council did not Demo into couirt with clean tends to press a case, in which (lie Bench could impove a severe penalty. His client was guilty, but he urged that that was a C'a.;e for a purely nominal pomaltv. In answer to tlie Chairman, M.r Iiont, said liw client did not want to slaughter regulariv on his premises, but what lie said was that there should be a public s 1 au g h t er-house. The Chairman We catn't go into that. Mr Bone: There are placets in CoJwyn Bay, that we don't want to say anythrng about them, and we do not want to follow their ex- ample. A line of 10s and costs was imposed.

Advertising

COLWYN BAY PETTY - SESSIONS.

Advertising

LLANRWST1. URBAN DISTRICT…

NORTH WALES COUNTIES ASYLUM.…

[No title]

EXPLORATION OF PENYCORDDYN…

[No title]

SHEEP WORRYING IN THE CONWAY…

Advertising

I----C--=----------COLWYN…

[No title]