| 
| 
| 
| 
1 Nov., 1901.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. 497 
Animal Pathology. 
MEAT AND MEAT INSPECTION. 
At the annual meeting of the National Veterinary Association in Edinburgh 
last August, a most valuable paper on “ Meat Inspection” was read by Mr. 
James McPhail, M.R.C.V.S., Edinburgh, which, taken in connection with what 
is being said, done, and written in the same direction in this State of Queens- 
land, cannot fail to prove of exceptional interest to all who are engaged either 
in pastoral pursuits or. in dairying. The following abridged notice of the paper 
appeared in the last August ixsue of the Scottish Harmer :— 
Mr. McPhail said there was one point in connection with this piece of 
legislation which was of interest—namely, that to Scotland belonged the honour 
of being the first country in Great Britain to recognise the veterinarian as an 
expert in matters appertaining to meat inspection, and they could only hope 
that the same energy with which the Scottish veterinary surgeons emphasised 
their claims and obtained their recognition might be shown by their brethren 
in the profession when a revision of the Public Health Acts in England and 
Ireland occurred. It was mainly with the carcasses coming daily under the 
notice of the inspecting veterinary surgeon that he intended to deal. He 
purposely refrained from entering on a pathological treatise on their condition, 
and confined himself to a general description of those conditions which rendered 
them, in the words of the Act, “diseased or unsound, or unfit for the food of 
man.” Perhaps the first point of importance claiming their attention at this 
stage was the difficulty in laying down a standard capable of general application. 
No this end, the words he had just quoted should present less ambiguity to the 
mind of the veterinarian than they had hith-rto done. 
To illustrate the latitude which existed among those entrusted with the 
administration of the Public Health Act he need only instance the fact that 
many carcasses were condemned in one city on account of emaciation which, 
in another city, would pass as good lean meat. To make his position clear, 
they would take it that the inspecting veterinary surgeon’s duty was to intercept 
all meat caleulated to prejudice the consumer without at the same time 
imposing undue hardships on the seller, and, further, he must take into 
consideration not only the condition of the meat when he examined it, but the 
condition it might assume before it reached the consumer. Some carcasses 
which were on the border line, if he might so express it, would not improve by 
being conveyed from place to place, and might in a couple of days become 
unfit for food. This was a rather serious consideration, as it cast a reflection 
on the value of any certificate which might have been granted. Before pro- 
ceeding with a description of meat, as he proposed dealing with it, perhaps i 
might be well to divide it into two general classes :— 
1. The flesh of animals intended for the market and fed for sucha 
trade, and which had been slaughtered in the regular course of 
business ; and 
2. The flesh of animals which had been slaughtered while in some stage 
of disease or suffering from some minor ailment, and which he 
would refer to as “ accidental beef.” 
J.—Fresn Iyrenpep ror Foop. 
The first-named class embraced home-bred, foreign-bred, refrigerated beef, 
and frozen beef. Home-bred and killed included bull, ox, heifer, cow, sheep, 
pig, calf, and goat. Foreign-bred (American and Canadian), but killed in this 
country, consisted almost entirely of ox and bull beef. It was well fed and of 
good quality. The Americans were now reaping their reward for their previous 
