§ Mr. FELLasked if the whole of the cargo of Chinese pork, which was landed at the London docks in July last, had now been inspected; and, if so, how many carcases were condemned by the inspectors; and how many had been passed for consumption?
§ Mr. BURNSI understand that the whole of the cargo in question has been inspected, and that the total number of carcases landed and inspected was 4,643. Of these 391, or 8.4 per cent., were condemned by the inspectors, and the remaining 4,252 were passed as fit for consumption.
§ Mr. FELLasked the right hon. Gentleman if he had received notice of the arrival in the Thames of any further shipments of Chinese pork; if they had been inspected; and, if so, with what result?
§ Mr. BURNSI have received a copy of a report made to the Port of London Sanitary Authority by their medical officer of health stating that two cargoes of pigs from China had arrived in the port in January last. On preliminary inspection it was found that the pork did not comply with the requirements of the Public Health (Foreign Meat) Regulations, and a notice was therefore served under the Regulations by the medical officer of health forbidding removal of the meat for any purpose other than exportation.
§ Mr. FELLHas the right hon. Gentleman any information as to what has become of these carcases not allowed to be landed?
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESWhat is the matter with those carcases?
§ Mr. BURNSThe 4,252 carcases which were passed as fit for consumption were severely tested. The 8.4 per cent. rejected were rejected because there were signs of some disease which in the opinion of the medical officer of health did not warrant their being put into circulation.
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONWill the right hon. Gentleman ascertain what has become of the pork that was condemned as diseased—whether it has been re-exported?
§ Mr. MEYSEY-THOMPSONWill the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry?
§ Mr. FELLasked the right hon. Gentleman if he has had notice of the arrival at Liverpool of a cargo of Chinese pork; if the same will be inspected under his supervision; and if he has any jurisdiction over similar shipments at whatever port they may be landed?
§ Mr. BURNSI have not received any formal notice of the arrival of Chinese pork in the Port of Liverpool. In the event of such an occurrence the matter would be dealt with at the Port of Liverpool by the Customs officers and medical officer of health, whose action in regard to such a consignment would be governed by the requirements of the foreign meat regulations. These regulations apply to all ports in England and Wales.
§ Mr. BURNSOh, yes; the foreign meat regulations apply to all the seaports in England and Wales. The Irish and Scotch Local Government Boards have a similar jurisdiction under the same Act of Parliament in all the ports of Ireland and Scotland.
§ Mr. FELLCould not the inspector in London, who has now some experience in the matter, inspect the carcases in Liverpool?
§ Mr. BURNSThat probably might be necessary when the cargo is landed, or an-attempt is made to land it, but until such-an attempt is made I ought not to be asked to send a medical official to Liverpool when there is no need.
§ Mr. KILBRIDECan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the 8 per cent. condemned carcases were what in China are known as "scavenger pigs"?
§ Mr. BURNSNo; that matter was dealt with some months ago. These carcases are not the carcases of scavenger pigs. The pigs were brought from the Yangtse Valley, and were in the main fed on rice.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEWhat particular form of disease was found in those carcases?
§ Mr. BURNSPigs generally suffer from trichinosis and tuberculosis, and in several cases they had each of these diseases.