LONDON "NEW-LAID"EGGS

Evening Star, Issue 13012, 5 January 1907, Page 8

LONDON "NEW-LAID"EGGS

In the course of an action concerning some eggs, heard at Southwark, London, defendant raised the point that the three days allowed by the rules of the egg market in" which to reject eggs was unreasonably short, and quite out of proportion to the age of the eggs. Deputy Judge Layman : But the fault is with yon, because you did not attempt to examine these eggs within three days. Defendant: It would have been no use examining them, because you cannot tell whether they are bad or good until they are broken. Deputy Judge Layman: Then it might be many days before you found out ? Mr Philcox (plaintiffs solicitor) : It might be not until the next election. — (Laughter.) Defendant: The sanitary inspector condemned these eggs on July 12. Deputy Judge Layman : And yon took delivery on June 28. What you have to prove is that the eggs were bad when you took deEvery. They might have been the best in the "world on June 26. Defendant: Oh, no; impossible. If tbey had they would not have been bad on 'July 12. "There is not an egg in London that we are selling on the egg market less than a month, six weeks, or two months old.—(Laughter.) Deputy Judge Layman: Then I don't think 1 shall eat any more London " new laid" eggs.—(Laughter.) Defendant: Well, what I tell you is true. They say on the invoice that three days are allowed for examination, but it is an" elastic term, like the age of the eggs. — (Laughter.) Defendant lost the day, His Honor holding that he had not rejected within a reasonable time.