International Marxist Group Archive

Magazines, bulletins and booklets of the IMG and its forerunners, 1961–1984

The Week Number 24 Page 7 Special Reports

The Week Vol. 1, No. 24, 11 June 1964 · p. 9 of the scan · 354 words

The scan: The Week v1 no24.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Tesseract OCR) from a scan of a stencilled typescript and has not been corrected. Expect misread words; titles in particular are often garbled where the issue printed no contents list. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: capitals heading; heuristic; title from the OCR of the heading.

TYPHOID: WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY by Alec Bagley (Aberdeen)

One was at first inclined to criticise Aberdeen's M.0.H. for slowness in alerting the public to the dangers and to the origin of the current typhoid epidemic, However, since he has committed himself to naming the corned beef as the source, Dr. MacQueen has clearly been subject to considerable pressure to qualify his statement, but he has held his ground, putting public interest before private in a wholly admirable way.

The Scottish Secretary of State, Noble, has tried to pour cold water (decidedly unchlorinated) on Dr. MacQueen's statements. Undeterred, MacQueen has gone ahead and named the two firms involved ~ Fray Bentos (Liebig's) and Armour = a statement which only The Times published next day.* He has also given the press a copy of a letter put out by the Scottish Home and Health Dept., in which various South American processing stations are named as the source of infection, The tins which were in use at what is universally believed to be Low's supermarket on Union Street (A Forres firm with other branches st Elgin, Inverurie and Keith) originated in one station of which the letter says: “It is now knom that between Jan i, 1963 and March 9, 1964, (it) used raw river water for cooling because the chlorinating plant broke down,

The interesting but unanswered questions ares hen did the Home and Health Dept. have this informetion? If it was before the outbreak, why was the beef not withdraw? And if since the outbreak, why was this fact not know before? Perhaps the official inquiry might throw light on this. But both the composition of the Committee and its terms of reference are in Government handSeeec.

Even the local press - praised by The Observer for "sterling reporting" - is pleying dow the question of responsibility. On June 4th, The Press and Journal carried a leader which blatantly suggested that Dr. MacQueen should be pushed into the background. Judging from his statements, however, I don't think this will happen, * our correspondent has since informed us that the Guardian mentioned these two firms as well.

← East Midlands Region Cnd to Leaflet Wilson Meeting in DerbyMalnutrition in England →

Something wrong on this page?