MILK VENDORS PROSECUTED.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 116, 16 May 1906, Page 5

MILK VENDORS PROSECUTED.

SALE OF WATERED MILK

Before, Mr W. G. Riddell, .SJil., this morning, Richard Hewit'son,, a, dairyman of Karangahape-road, ,was .summoned at the instance of the Auckland City Council for unlawfully selling milk adulterated with water. Mr T. Cotter prosecuted, and .Mr Beale defended.

Thomas C. Turner, City Traffic Inspector, deposed that on March 30th lie took a number of milk samples, including one from Hewitson's shop in ,Ka-rangahape-road, securing it from one of the defendant's assistants. An analysis was made by Mr Pond, colonial analyst, ■and Hewitsonfs sample fownd to he adulterated by the addition of 1i.3 per cent of water, - j ' •

„In consequence of. questions put by tht , defendants solicitor to the witness, Mr Cotter remarked {hat a special defence could be raised that the milk was boujiht under guarantee, but the defendant was required to. give. the prose.cution. notice. , . 1

Mr Beale said the affair had; been on about a month, but the summons was only served on Monday. His client had a written guarantee from the man from whom he purchased the milk, and was prepared to prove that'it was sol* as received. . . -

The defendant gave evidence that he had been 25 yeara in business iv Auckland. This was the. first occasion that a complaint had been made about the quality of his milk, though it had been tested by the authorities four times a year at least. He" sometimes tested it himself. Hie supply was obtained by a Mr Hill of Mount RoskfU. who contracted under written agreemenfc to provide" a perfectly pure milk. The milk supplied to the inspector had not been delivered more than minutes, and he was certain that it went on the counter just as it was received."

Florence Shear, the assistant who served the milk, which was analysed, said.she held the.counter can while the milk was emptied -into it- from a. dandy in which it came, from Mount. Roskill.

. His Worship remarked,? in giving his decision, that the milk was 2 -per cent under the.proper standard of /milk solids required.. The agreement relied upon by. the defendant, not sufficient. . An agreement -to supply a ce;r-;. tain class of article did not • go. so far as .a>written warranty certain article was up to' a=. particular: standard. He should have taken more precautions thaa he , did to see., that' tlie milk, was up to the standard. If the .defendant had been constantly selling milk for .25 years"hei should have some* method o£ testing it when received from outsidersThe evidence showed that he had acted bona fide in the matter, but he was tech-.-nically guilty of an offence, and -would W fined Jfl with, costs;-:. : w \i:!;... ■'