MILK BELOW STANDARD

Southland Times, Issue 19097, 15 November 1923, Page 7

MILK BELOW STANDARD

DEFICIENT IN SOLIDS. * VENDOR PROSECUTED. A Meal milkman, John Coster, was charged with supplying milk not up to the standard required by the Act, at yesterday’s sitting of the Invercargill Magistrate’s Court. Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M., was on the Bench. Mr W. Macalister prosecuted,, and Mr Haggitt appeared for the defendant. In opening the case Mr Macalister said that the milk on being tested by the Government analyst had been found to be deficient in milk solids. The standard was 31 per cent, of milk fat and per cent, of other solids. In milk fat the milk had been found to be a little above the required standard, namely, 3.544 per cent., but it was deficient in milk solids. He understood that Coster bought the milk from another party. He was the vendor, however, and the only one responsible. He also understood that a sample of the milk had been analysed by ,Mr Mclndoe who had found 8.3 per cent, of other milk solids, which was still below the legal standard. Mr Macalister went on to say that the offence could not be treated lightly. The greater proportion of milk consumed was considerably above the standard. It was a matter of very great public interest that milk should be up to the required standard. It seemed playing with the question to suggest otherwise than that the Government analyst was correct.

Mr Haggitt said the prosecuting counsel had characterised defending the case as absurd, having regard to the small difference in the two analyses of the milk. But the defendant was a man making his living by selling milk and here, practically through no fault of his own, he was charged with defrauding the public. John Gordon Young said that he had 30 cows and had been supplying Coster for 18 months. The milk had been tested before but never found to be deficient. The milk in question had been taken straight from the cow, strained, and delivered to the defendant.

The rest of the evidence for the defence, when it was not of a lengthy technical nature, was mostly concerned with the value of the Government analysis. After hearing Dr McKibbin, Health Officer for Otago and Southland, Dr Lynch, Government analyst, and Mr G. D. Mclndoe’, who analysed the milk for the his Worship said he was perfectly satisfied that there had been no addition to the milk. After all, if this had been done it would have been done by Young, and from what he had seen of him he did not for a moment think he would do such a thing. AH this, however, did not affect the law Of course, if a person really adulterated milk he should be sent to gaol, or at any rate very severely punished. The milk in the present case was short in sugar-of-milk, and it was nobody’s fault, but Young’s bad luck. He would enter a conviction, but he did not think it was a case for a fine. Defendant was accordingly convicted and ordered to pay costs amounting to £4 0/8.