FINE OF £10

Evening Star, Issue 19275, 14 June 1926, Page 5

FINE OF £lO

MILK BELOW STANDARD ' BUT i:g waxes added In the City Police Court this morn» ing Mr H, W. Bundle, S.M., gave judgment in tho case in wiiich tiro Health Department proceeded against Margaret t.oodidl lor selling jmiik below standard on April 7. In the course ol his judgment the Magistrate said: “The deueieuey of milk solids (other (linn milk lai) is admitted, such solids being 7.2 c per cent., and the required .standard S.d per coni. It is also alleged that tho milk contained 2d per cent, of added 'aator. The regulations provide that milk shall not. contain any added water or other added substance. The dejondrint contends that no water nas added, ami says that the milk samples taken were natural, if poor, milk.

“I he defence that- the milk was abnormal in quality is obviously onelbat must' he very carefully scrutinised. The standard laid down is not an arbitrary one, and si care fill perusal of statistics and authorities .shows that it is a reasonable one, Mr Glasgow was called lor tho defence, and gave evidence as to tests carried out by him ott May if!. These tests were in respect of six cows, it being staled that since April 7 defendant, had sold tho poorest of her cows. Mr Glasgow’s evidence was that milk from two of tho defendant's cows was abnormal, tlio specific gravity being ].021 and 1.022, a.s against the normal gravity of I.(131: and the freezing points were .35 and against a normal freezing point of .00, the apparent amount of added wilier approximately db per cent. “ It is nnfortunalo that the test carried out by Mr Glasgow was not carried out tinder the .supervision of a qualified officer of the Health Department. Any test a defendant desired to make should bo earned out as far as possible in the same manner a-s a test made by an inspector under the Act. Mr Glasgow’s evidence shows a. strangely abnormal high percentage of apparent added water in the milk of two of the cows whose milk is the subject of prosecution. Apart from his evidence. I would have no hesitation, after perusing authorities and on hearing Dr CrawHiaw’s evidence, in finding (hat water had been .added to tho miTk before, sale. After careful consideration I may accept his evidence and do not find that water was added.” Defendant was convicted for selling milk deficient in milk solids other than milk fat, and fined .Clo, solicitor's fee £.3 3s. analyst’s foe Bis Od, and cour* costs 7a.