SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1273, 31 October 1911, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

AN APPEAL. THE FRESH FOOD AND ICE COMPANY. In the Supreme Court yesterday rnorn--1 ing Mr. Justice Chapman hoard the c.use 1 oi the Fresh Food and lee Company, Ltd.. v. P. ,1. Jones. This was an appeal of the Wellington Fresh Food and ice Company, Ltd., against a decision of Mr. W. Li. Jliddell, S.M., who on October 15. 1!)10, fined the company .C 2, and costs ,t2 l!!s. Gel., for a breach of the Sale of Fond and Drugs Act, 1908, in selling milk which contained n substance (water), the addition of which is prohibited by the Act. Tho appeal was made on the ground that tho finding was erroneous in point of law. Tho following facts were held by the Magistrate to have been admitted or proved:—On August 10, 1910, Carl Albert Schaucr, Chief inspector under the Public Health Department, bought a samplo of mflk from the company, and handed it to Dr. J. S. Maclaurin, Dominion Analyist, whose certificate (produced in Court) showed that the milk contained 11.72 per cent, total solids, 4.3 fat, 7.12 6olids not fat, and 12.71 per cent, of water in excess of that permissible. According to the regulation, published in the New Zealand Gazette, I'JOS, milk must contain not less than 12 per cent, of total solids, not less than 8.5 .solids not fat, not less than 3.25 per cent, of fatty solids, and r.jt more than 1 per cent, of ash, and the addition of water to milk is prohibited. No change had taken place m tlie condition of the milk, which would interfere with the analysis, and tli© correctness of it was not. disputed. The Fresh Food and Ice Co. called Professor Easterfield, who gave his opinion that no water had been added artificially, but Dr. Maclaurin was called in rebuttal, ami expressed the opinion that water had been added artificially. Without determining the question 'of fact as to whether water had or had not been added artificially to the samplo of milk the Magistrate determined as a matter of law: That the analyst's certificate was prima facie evidence of the statements contained therein, That the certificate showed that tho particular sample contained 12.71 per cent, more water than allowed by standard, and that, as the certificate was not disputed, it was sufficient to show that the sample contained a substance whose addition was prohibited, That it was not necessary for the prosecution to show t)'at water had been added after tho milk had been taken from the cow, That the evidence called by the defendant company to show that no water had been added was not relevant to the charge. A conviction was therefore recorded, and tho defendant company now appealed. Mr. T. C. A. Hislnn appeared for . the appellants, and Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crown Law Office, for the respondent. During the course of argument Mr. Ostler submitted that, if the ease was decided against him on the point of law, it should be referred back to the magistrate to determine the question of fact. His Honour concurred. IN BANKRUPTCY, GEORGE PINNOCIC'S DISCHARGE. Tho Chief Justico (Sir Robert Stout) presided at a sitting of the Supreme Court in Bankruptcy yesterday, when George Pinnock applied for his discharge. Mr. A. L. Herdmnn appeared for the applicant and Mr. W. 11. D. Bell for the Official Assignee. Mr. Herdman stated that the application for discharge was not: opposed, and ho asked that it be granted. The estate had realised ss. in the £~ and might realise a little more. Mr. Bell slated that, when tho application had previously been made Mr. llordman liau made an attack on tho Official Assignee on the ground that the matter had not been dealt with impartially. 110 wanted an opportunity to refute those charges. The Assignee had continually received anonymous letters from poople and ho had been maintaining inquiries into the matter. Tho Official Assignee had taken a perfectly proper course and tho suggestions of impropriety were not justified. His Honour said that there was no objection t'o the application as no specific charge was made against the bankrupt. The Assignee should not be too thinskinned when people whom he was looking after found fault with him. That' was inevitable. II was better to be in a minority of one than in a majority that was wrong. Tho suggestion was that bankrupt's wife was only his dummy, but' that had not boon proved. Mr. Herdman: That can be absolutely ; disproved, your Honour. llis Honour: That being so there is no reason why the discharge should not be granted. ]