DAIRYMEN IN TROUBLE.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13007, 8 January 1908, Page 2

DAIRYMEN IN TROUBLE.

PLAIN SPEAKING BY THE MAGISTRATE.

Two dairymen appeared beforo Mr H. W. iiifciLop, S.iu., at the j tmtes Court yesterday, each charged with two breaches of the Dairy Inuuetry Act, 1898. Albert Clark, for whom Mr Bea-ttio appeared, wtus charged by Alevanxle-r Maophereon, Dairy inspector, with selling im-purc nuMc on Deconvbor 14th, o-tao with uaing uncleau milk cans. Mr Wright prosecuted. The Inspector stated that on the day in question ho accosted defendant (who •was driving a milk-cart), and asked him if the milk ho had in his cans was pure. Defendant replied in tho affirmative. Witness took samples of tho milk away in two bottles, one- of which he forwarded to Mr A. Bickerton, Government Analyst. Tho analysis had shown that the, milk contained loss than the 3 per cent, butter-tat specified by the Act. A. Bickerton gave evidence ac to the milk only containing 2.9 per cent-butter-fat. For tho defendant, who was not prosent in Court, Mr Beattie stated that the samples had been taken three hours after defendant had been on his round, and tho first customers had consequently had the benefit of most of the cream. Defendant had never received complaints from his customers as to tho quality of the milk. A fine of 20s and costs was inflicted. On the charge of utilising unclean milk-cane, a conviction was also entered, a similar fine being imposed. Amos J. Cook next pleaded guilty to charges of failing to cool milk for human consumption and milking cows in sheds which were not kept in a clean condition as specified by the- Act. ' Defendant was fined 20s and costs on each charge. During the hearing of the caees. the Dairy Inspector (in answer to questions by tho Magistrate) stated ho had 600 sheds to inspect, and ho had one assistant. In connection with the last case it was probably four months since his previous visit. The Magistrate: "A place might get mighty bad in four months. I .' Continuing. Mr Bishop remarked that the regulations of tlie Act would have to bo complied with by dairymen. 13reaches of tho Act did* not very often come before tho Court, and tho natural inference was that tho dairymen were satisfactorily fulfilling the requirements of the Act. It was absolutely essential for the protection of tlhe- public that the milk simply should be keitrt pure, ajid when any future charges of selling impure milk ca.mo before h»m. and he- wae satisfied that such milk was a nvenaeo to the health of tho comrmircaty, ho would deem .1 his duty to inflict a very severe penalty.