Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

YESTERDAY’S SITTING,

Two cases were brought under the Pure Food Act beofre Mr W. A. Barton, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning. Samson Bros., auctioneers, for whom J. Samson appeared, pleaded guilty ±o a charge of selling butter m unlabelled jmckages. Mr Nolan, counsel for the prosecution, stated that the Health Inspector, Mr F. 0. York, while inspecting the stock, found butter enclosed m packets bearing no label stating the nature of the contents. There was no suggestion that defendants had nofc purchased in good faith. Mr Samson stated that the mistake was due' to the fact that before the passing of the Act some of the country people, had been' accustomed to send in their butter made up. in that fashion, and they had not got out of the habit. His Worship said that did not excuse defendants as the previous cases of the kind should have warned them. Defendants were fined £1 and costs £1 Bs.

Benjamin Hoe pleaded guilty to a charge of selling milk containing less than the required amount of butterfat. Mr Dawson appeared for defendant.

Mr Nolan, for the Health Department, stated that the required amount of butter-fat- was 3.25 per cent, whereas the sample taken of defendant’s milk contained only 2.95 per cent. Thiss ample was taken from the cart on the street, while other samples taken at defendant’s dairy showed an excess of the required amount. Defendant stated that he purchased milk from another dairyman, and went to get it early in the morning, starting straight on his run. _He had had no opportunity of tampering with the milk. He could offer no suggestion as to why the percentage of but-ter-fat was short. His Worship said defendant was responsible for" the purity of the milk he sold, whether it was his own or another dairyman’s. Defendant was fined £5 and costs £1 18s 6d.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19160119.2.49

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Times, Volume XLV, Issue 4141, 19 January 1916, Page 7

Word Count
315

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Gisborne Times, Volume XLV, Issue 4141, 19 January 1916, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Gisborne Times, Volume XLV, Issue 4141, 19 January 1916, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert