INSANITARY PREMISES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18513, 25 March 1922, Page 14

INSANITARY PREMISES

A BATCH OF CASES. PENALTIES INFLICTED. The Health and Labour Departments have been busy hunting out danger spots in the city and suburbs recently, and the result was a somewhat lengthy batch of cases before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., in the City Police Court yesterday morning and afternoon. J. B. Wooten, charged with failing to keep bis bakery in a cleanly slate, was represented bv Mr Callan, who entered a plea of guilty.—Mr L. D. Browott, inspector of factories, gave evidence that ho had found the premises in a very dirty state. It was a long time since they had been cleaned. A Tew days ago it was: again visited, and it was then being cleaned. Tlie intention of the department was thatall the list tires should be made moveable. ’Hie department bad made certain requisitions wliich Mr Callan undertook would bo carried out. —'the magistrate said he would inflict a nominal fine of4os and costs. Mrs Nora Wong I.ee. who did not appear, was charged with being the occupier of premises from which a nuisance arose. *lu her absence the case was adjourned til! March 28.

Thomas. Walter Ncwboll pleaded guilty In being the owner of promises in Cumberland street likely (o pause a nuisance by harbouring rats and vermin.—Defendant said he had found no evidence of rats being about the place, which was used as a storeroom. — Inspector King said that this was an empty six-roomed house every room of which was filled with rubbish. The yard was full of decaying timber and other rubbish.—The case was adjourned for three weeks to enable the place to be put in older to (he satisfaction of the inspector. William Hewitson Fraser, who was represented by Mr Tnvin, pleaded guilty to having premises in a condition likely to harbour rats and vermin.—lnspector King said defendant's yard had been full of noxious rubbish, and the shop was also in a bad state. Defendant had been twice previously warned.- Mr Irwin said his client Was giving up business, and was vacating the premises next clay. The place was being thoroughly cleaned tip. —In order to be quite sure that the place was cleaned up the magistrate adjourned the case for a week. J. W. Finch, for whom Mr Hanlon appeared, was charged with failing lo keep his bakehouse in Frederick street in a cleanly condition. —Mr Browett. for the department, said that Dr White. Mr Kinsman, and he himself bad visited the bakehouse on February £B. The roof was leaking, and the floor saturated. The walls, which had been recently limewashed, were the only cleanly part of the bakehouse. —Percy Henry Kinsman, inspector of factories, said he had found unsatisfactory conditions on January 24. On February 28, in company with medical officers of health, he visited the premises again. The floor, which was partly concrete and partly wood, was filthy. Swarms of flies were collected about eggshells lying in the coal. Underneath the benches and mixing- machine there was a groat deal of dirt. The machines were clogged with flour paste. Cobwebs were underneath the cake racks, about which there was an accumulation of dirt. The top of the oven was particularly untidy, A decided improvement had since been effected, and it was now in fair condition. To Mr Hanlon : He did not toll defendant on January 24 that the place was satisfactory. He made notes and decided lo revisit the place with the health officers later with a view to refusing re-registration, xle considered that mud in a bakehouse was filth. He lot the ulaco go on from January 24 to February 28 without taking action. He did not think the place could be put right without, great expense. There was a rain storm the day they visited the bakehouse. Dr A. White, medical officer of health, corroborated the statements of (ho previous witness. Mr Hanlon cross-examined with a. view to showing there was no “filth” about tile premises. During the luncheon adjournment Ids Worship inspected the premises. Subsequently William M'Donald Armour, inspector for the Public, Health Department, corroborated the evidence of Mr Kinsman and Dr While.—Mr Hanlon addressed the court, and submitted that the officers of the department were prone to exaggeration in cases of this kin^. The defendant. ••. W. Finch, giving evidence on bis own behalf, said that on in's first, visit Mr Kinsman told him everything was satisfactory. All the refuse about the place vas burned every morning. The men always cleaned up after they knocked off work. The concrete floor was scrubbed every day.—To Mr Browclt : He was prepared to swear the floor had been scrubbed the day Mr Browett. visited the place. Mr Bundle, in giving, judgment, said there was no question that the promises were dirty. Further than that, they wore

in parts insanitary. There was dirt—olio might almost term it filth--on certain parts of (he (loor mainly dim to the nut arc, of tlie fittings. which wont down to the flpor. The loft upstairs was in a dirty condition. The whole of the place was dirty. It was absurd to say that it had been thoroughly scrubbed down. The floor ilsclf. he was certain, was not kept clean. The “prover,” for a place used for keeping cakes, was in a filthy state. He noticed when he Went in the number of flies that wore about. He was quite satisfied that at the present time the place was dirty, and also that on February 28 the conditions mast have been much worse. Tn his opinion it was certainly a bad case of keeping it bakery, which shnnld be kept in an extremely clean condition, in a very bad slate. It was not a ease for a nominal penalty. Ho would be convicted and fined £5 and required to abate the nuisance. '1 ho fine was afterwards reduced to £3, with court costs (11s), if being made clear that defendant would be put to considerable expense in improving his premises. Defendant, the fnagistrate said, apparently did not quite realise his responsibility to keep the place clean.