MILK QUALITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 127, 31 May 1935, Page 8

MILK QUALITY.

VENDORS' LIABILITY.

SUGGESTION BY MAGISTRATE.

SEVEBAL FINES IMPOSED,

During the hearing of several milk prosecutions brought by the Department of Health in the Police Court this morning, Mr. Wyvern Wilson, S.M., said that vendors of milk, who had to bear responsibility for the milk they sold, should obtain a written undertaking from suppliers or producers that the milk sold was of good quality. William A. Lye, for whom ill*. Uren appeared, pleaded not guilty to charges of selling milk containing 9 per cent of added water, and selling milk deficient in milk solids other than milk fat. ill'. Uren admitted the facts, but said that defendant had no doubt been "let down" by one of the two farmers wlusupplied him. He had been trading for 'nearly live years, and his milk had always been well up to standard. I:i imposing lines of £2 and costs in each case, the magistrate st.id it was not a dillicult matter for vendors to make tests of the milk they sold. - Below Standard. Charged with selling milk which did not comply with test, Charlotte Swanson was fined .i-2 and costs, while foi a similar offence Amburys, Ltd., was fined dCI and costs. Mr. Lind Mitchell, counsel for Amburys, Ltd., said that the test made by the Government analyst showed that the milk stood up to the test for two hours and a half, whereas the test provided for three hours. The milk was of good quality, and the offence was purely a technical one. The magistrate remarked that the milk was of better quality than that sold by the previous defendant. Sarah Yofing, for whom Mr. Allan Moody appeared to plead guilty, was also lined £2 and costs on a similar charge. Mr. Moody said his client bought the milk from a well-known firm and had relied on its quality. Mr. Wyvern Wilson said the difficulty was that vendors had to bear responsibility for the quality of miHc they sold. "They should obtain a written undertaking from the suppliers or producers that tlie milk is of good quality," he said. "I think the matter might be traced further than to the shops which sell milk." Sub-inspector Fox, who prosecutcd, said that full inquiries were always made. Unusual Allegation. Also charged with selling milk which did not comply with the test, Patrick Scullion, proprietor of a small shop in Freeman's Bay, for whom Mr. J. J. Sullivan appeared, pleaded not guilty. Inspector Furness said the sample taken by him "went off" in SO minutes, whereas the. minimum provided by the Art was three hours. Mr. Sullivan submitted that the charge must fail. Defendant was supplied by Ambury's Limited. As the result of the tests made from a sample taken by the inspector on February 11, Scullion kept a watch and found, on March 22, that one of the cans supplied by Ambury's was unclean. He communicated with the Health Department, with the result that Ambury's, a fortnight ago, was fined £1 and costs on a charge of delivering milk in a can which was not clean. Scullion did not order any further milk from this firm. Mr. Sullivan submitted that his clicnt had taken every reasonable precaution. The prosecution which succeeded against Ambury's was the result of Scullion's complaint. Defendant and his wife said that a roundsman employed by Ambury's approached them and suggested that they should plead guilty to the charge and say that Mrs. Scullion forgot to clean the can. The roundsman, it was alleged, further stated that he and other employees of Ambury's were in danger of losing their jobs, and that they would pay Scullion's fine if he pleaded guilty. Mr. Wyvern Wilson said he was asked to assume that because Ambury's was lined for a dirty can on March 22, the same firm was responsible for the milk, a sample of which was taken from defendant on February 11. "Defendant look no steps to ascertain if the quality of his milk was all right," said Mr. Wilson. "That is not proper conduct for persons who sqll milk. He is fined £1 and costs."