AN UNUSUAL CASE

Southland Times, Issue 19598, 9 July 1925, Page 9

AN UNUSUAL CASE

ALLEGED WATERING OF MILK. INVERCARGILL VENDORS CHARGED. A case in which two Invercargill milk venders were charged with selling milk adulterated with water contrary to the Sale of Foods and Drugs Act -was decided in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M. Arthur Alfred Ayres (Mr Gordon Reed) was charged with selling to J. P. Terry, milk to which water had been added. Defendant pleaded not guilty. For the Health Department, Mr H. Macalister said that defendant was a milk vendor in Invercargill and purchased his milk from a man named William Sycamcre of Clifton. Chi May 19. his milk was tested and found to contain 7.2 per cent, of water. John Percy Terry, Inspector of Health at Invercargill, said that the defendant had sold milk that he received from suppliers. For the defence, Mr Gordon Reed said that Sycamore’s milk was not scld on the milk run, but over the counter. Defendant took reasonable to see that the milk was not adulterated and tested it from time to time. Counsel contended that the delivery of a quantity of milk was not a sale within the meaning of the Act. Arthur A. Ayres said he had been getting frem 16 gallons to 20 gallons of milk a day. It was guaranteed verbally and when tested on various occasions for specific gravity, it was found to be all right. “I am satisfied that reasonable precautions were taken,” said his Worship. The case was dismissed. William Sycamore (Mr Gordon Reed) was charged with delivering for sale milk that had been adulterated with water. For the Department, Mr Macalister said a sample of defendant’s milk was taken on May 19, as it was being delivered to Arthur A. Ayres in Tweed Street. It was found that the milk contained 10 per cent, of water. William Sycamore, carter, said that he milked 10 cows and at present supplied Ayres. His girls and his boy did the milking, their ages being from 11 to 15 years of age. When he discovered that a sample had been taken by the Inspector he had the milk tested and the result was a 3.6 test. He was not satisfied with this, but later found that his little girl had put water in the milk to save having to strip the cows. He had forced her to milk, but she was unwilling, and by filling the can up with water she had made it appear that the cows were stripped. Nobody was in charge of the byre, but he could trust all the children save the girl. He had had trouble and had smacked the girl. She persisted in denying that she had put water in the milk. Defendant was convicted and ordered to pay CQ646 £3 Ua.