THE HEALTH ACT.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 March 1922, Page 2

THE HEALTH ACT.

NEW PLYMOUTH PROSECUTION. PREMISES IN OFFENSIVE STATE. WARNING BY MAGISTRATE. What were stated at the hearing to be the first cases in Taranaki under the Public Health Act, 1920, were dealt with in the New Plymouth Magistrate’s Court yesterday by Mr. A. M. Mowlem, S.M. The charges, which were brought against T. E. Mack, were that he allowed his premises, used for the business of tallow melting, to become in such a state as to be offensive, whereby a nuisance was caused; that he carried on the business of tallow-melting at Queen’s Road, Taranaki County, in a manner as to be unriecessarilyA offensive; and that his premises were in such a state as likely to harbor rats. At the previous sitting of the Court, Mack had pleaded guilty to the charges, and the penalty was held over. He was represented by Mr. C. H. Croker. Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for the informant, the health inspector (Mr. F. Swindells). Mr. Quilliam recalled that the cases had been actually heard on January 26, when an adjournment ws granted to enable the defendant to apply for registration of his premises before the penalty was fixed. Subsequently a further adjournment was made to enable Mack to comply with certain requisitions which had been made by the Health Department. Dr. Monk, the district health officer, and the inspector of health, Mr. F. Swindells, who were in court, had since visited Mack’s place, and found that, although defendant was carrying on the requisitions, he had not progressed with them as fast as had been expected. In order to reach finality, however, it was counsel’s intention to suggest that His Worship should make an order for the work to be completed within a certain time, and if this was not done other steps would have to be taken. Mr. Quilliam emphasised that the Health Department had a serious problem to contend with at this time of the year, and he hoped the Court would not put the case in a light that would lead to the inference that it was one of the charges that should not have been brought. ■ Giving decision, His Worship remarked that such a business as Mack was carrying on was not of a cleanly nature, and this fact alone demanded on the part of the proprietor a greater amount of care than otherwise would be necessary. If that care and watchfulness was not exercised there was a considerable amount of risk to the public. On the evidence Mack had been found guilty of failinc- in the duty under which he labored. Under section 30 of the Public Health Act Mack would be required to complete the work, a memo of which had already been served on him, and acting on the suggestion of the health authorities His Worship fixed further time to be allowed to defendant at three weeks. Tn connection with the three charges on which Mack had been convicted, His Worship fixed the following penalties: On the charge of allowing a nuisance to be caused. £5, costs and witnesses expenses £1 Bs, solicitor’s fee £1 Is; on each of the other two charges £2, together with solicitors’ fee £1 la and court costs. His Worship said it was evident from the Act that Parliament eonsidered the health of the people very important. Although defendant in this case had been fined a nominal sum it was not to be taken as a precedent that any other person who was guilty of a breach of the Act would !be dealt with in the same way. These matters were serious, and people who had control of such businesses would find it to their benefit to carefully attend to the provisions of the Public Health Act.