MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXVIII, Issue 124, 20 May 1932, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Sitting In Waipukurau

A SLAUGHTERING CASE

PIG YARD CLEANLINESS ISSUE

At the Waipukurau’ Magistrate’s Court this morning, before Air. J. Millar, S.M-., a charge was brought forward against the Waipukurau Meat Co., arising from a portion of its slaughtering premises being deemed as not kept clean.

H. E. Allan, slaughterhouse inspector, said that the case was brought under section 42 of the Slaughtering Act. He inspected the premises on Alarch 22 and found the pig yards in a very dirty state. The trough where the pigs had been feeding had been cracked for some considerable period and the offal had leaked through and lodged in a boghole in the paddock. In addition the drains were in a bad state. Witness warned the manager of the defendant company and asked him to clear up the yard. Defendant said that he would do the best he could. Witness inspected the yard again on April 12 and found that nothing had been done. The defendant said that he would do nothing without orders from the Health Department. Since then, however, he had effected the desired improvements. Counsel for defendant: Except for the pig yards do you consider that there was any cause for a prosecution? —No.

The Alagistrate: The manager of the defendant company has fixed up the pig-yard now? —Yes, he’s made a good job of it. Counsel for the defendant company submitted that there was no such offence as that charged; it was an offence to fail to keep a slaughtering “place” clean. The pig yards in question were 50 yards from the slaughtering place. The pig-yard about which the complaint was made was situated on the company’s farm and not in the slaughtering premises. J. AlcCarthy, manager of the defendant company, said that the company carried on a small farm and also a butchering business. The pigs were kept on the farm 6 0 yards from the slaughtering place. The slaughtering place. The size of the paddock was a-quarter of an acre or more. Concrete troughs, used for drinking water only, were cracked in the earthquake. The food for the pigs was never put in these troughs. The .pigs were fed on the concrete and nowhere else. The pig-yards were cleaned out every day. Nothing other than pure drinking water Was ever allowed to escape into the paddock. There was no decayed matter lying about. A. F. Cook, farmer, AVaipukurau, said that his farm adjoined the slaughtering premises, which, he considered were very well kept, under the prevailing conditions. The Alagistrate: AVhat do you mean by prevailing conditions.

AVitness: There is no public regularly inspected abattoir. The Alagistrate: You mean that a private slaughter house might be allowed a little more lattitude? That is not so. Continuing witness said that he saw nothing at the slaughter-house or the piggery to which he took exception. L. Clarke, retired butcher and farmer, said that he was well acquainted with the slaughtering premises and the piggery which were well kept. G. E. Granger, motor carrier, said that he had occasion to visit several slaughterhouses in the district including that of the defendant company, which he considered was kept perfectly clean.

The Alagistrate said that there appeared to be no complaint in regard to the condition of the slaugh-ter-house itself. The piggery was not connected with the main building. However the utmost care must be exercised in regard to food for human consumption. The penalty was usually heavy, but he did not regard the present offence as a very serious one. A fine of £3 with costs would be imposed.