INSPECTION OF DAIRIES.

Evening Post, Volume LXVI, Issue 20, 23 July 1903, Page 6

INSPECTION OF DAIRIES.

TO THE EDITOR. , Sir — By your issue of Friday I notice that the City Council has at last framed a by-law dealing with the dailies in the district under' its jurisdiction. I would like to point out the unfairness of this by-law to small dairymen. First, it requires dustbins to be twenty feet clear from the premises. How many have that much clear? Very few ; and if the Council carries out its part of the contract, and clears refuse from the premises, it is not required. We are supposed to have a perfect system of drainage and sanitation, so there does not appear to my mind any need for twenty feet space. Secondly, the Council .requires a plentiful supply of pure water to be kept on the premises. Is it required to adulterate the milk with, or for what purpose is the by-law? The Council charges for every drop of water supplied to dairies, even for household use, while other people get off scot free. This is not fair, and if dairymen are to keep a supply for the good of the public health it should be supplied free. Thirdly, they • must not keep anything but milk and cream in their shops. How about aerated waters? If a person wants soda and milk he cannot get it, because, forsooth, the dairyman cannot keep it. The whole by-law, is absurd ; it is only in the interest of large companies, and is evidently intended to crush the small man. I would like to know how many 'shares are held by Councillors in a certain dairy concern in the city ; it would be interesting to get it, then the public would see the move. Another important thing in these by-laws is the prohibition of animals being kept on the premises. Does it refer to horses or what? If to horses, how is a man to carry on his business? If it refers to cats, are the premises to be allowed to be overrun with rats? While agreeing with bona-fide inspection and a fair by-law, I think the Council should pause before attempting to ruin a number of hardworking men, some of whom have carried on business for over forty years to my knowledge, and there have been practically no cases of infectious diseases traced to milk. It is casting a slur on a body of respectable men to think it necessary to pass by-laws to regulate them. Why not pass one to (regulate the making of • butter, also one, to regulate butchers, grocers, etc. — all matters affecting the public health. In conclusion, I would like to point out that the dairymen agree with a licensefee being charged and bona-fide inspection by the Government, but object to dual inspection. All they ask is fair play, and proper inspection of milk samples taken from farmers.* — I am, etc., DAIRYMAN. July 21, 1903.