MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Colonist, Volume LI, Issue 12475, 27 February 1909, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

A DAIRYMAN FINED.

NELSON— FiII DAY, FEB. 26th. Before Mr H Eyre Kenny. S.M. BREACH OF THE- DAIRY REGULATIONS.

T. W. Moorehouse was charged on the information of T. C. Webb, Inspector of Stock with having on December 31st last, failed to clean&e four milk cans within four hours of . the cans being iised for the distribution of milk. The information was laid under the "Dairy Industries Act 1908" and the Dairy Regulations. Mr Fell appeared for the informant and Mr Hayes for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Mr Fell said there were three other informations against , the same; defendant and he would like all the charges heard together. As the first charge might not be sustained the other informations had been laid Mr Hayes . objected to the four charges being taken together. He offered no objection to the second, third and fourth informations being bunched. ■ The first information was then withdrawn. . The other informations were that on December - 31st last • defendant (1) failed to clean a cooler used in connection with the dairy within four hours of it being used; (2) failed 'to clean a strained within.. four hours of use; (3) failed to dense a receiver within four hours of use. Mr Hayes, for defendant ,said :tha: the offences were committed quite inadvertently; The man who had been milking for defendant left his employ on December 31st without notice, the result being that milking was not finished that day until 12.30 p.m. The cans were being cleaned by a boy when the inspector visited' the dairy between three and four o'clock in the afternoon,- and two of the four cans were then finished. Ib was owing to defendant being left shorthanded .that the utensils were not cleaned. Defendant had obtained help as soon as- he could. W. Stobie, Inspector of Dairies, stated that on December 31st he visited defendant's dairy about 4.15 p.m. and saw a boy washing milk cans. The cooler, strainer, ~ and vat were very dirty. The cooler had not beer, properly washed for a couple of days at least. Defendant had been verbally cautioned by him several times, and two written notices had been delivered by him to defendant. (Copies of the- written notices were put in;) Defendant denied that he had ever received either the verbal or written notices from Mr ■ Stobie. .except 'one in reference to whitewashing . the sheds. It was 3.40 p;ml when' Mr Stobie visied his dairy on December • 31st. He did not have a copy of the regulations. v In giving judgment the Magistrate referred to the necessity for the regulations in regard to the cleansing of dairy utinsels being strictly carried out pointing out that when there was. an outbreak of typhoid fever the dairies were' the firt places to be inspected as milk was so susceptible to contain-' mation. In regard to the present cases defendant .had clearly been shortlianded; and as he • had pleaded guilty to the informations ',that would be taken into consideration. In the matter of the cooler, which was the most serious, a fine of £1 would, be imposed, with costs £J. 18s (including counsel's fee £1 Is) ;■ on the other informations a.fine-of' los each was imposed, with costs 7s. Counsel's fees were not allowed in the second and third informations. \ The convictions carried with them the cancellation of the defendant's. lir cense; but a new ■license will.be^immediately granted by the Agricultural Deptrament on application,- --..■■.::.■; 'drunkenness. A first offender, for drunkenness, was convicted and discharged.