MILK & WATER.

Waipawa Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8513, 5 August 1921, Page 2

MILK & WATER.

VENDOR HEAVILY FINED,

At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr R. W. Dyer,' S.M., Alfred Lambert was charged with, on the 15th June, supplying milk which on analysis was proved to contain 8 per cent, of added water. Defendant was represented by Mr Strang and pleaded not guilty. P. A. Wallwork, district inspector, stated that at 8.20 a.m. on the date in question he took samples of milk from the cans in -the’ vendor’s cart. One sample' was sealed and sent to the' Government analyst, who found that there was 8 per cent, of added water.

Examined by Mr Strang the witness stated that he had previously taken two samples from Lambert and found them satisfactory. Counsel was proceeding to question the witness on the. scientific aspect, when The Magistrate said he intended to take the Government analyst’s report as official. He must accept that unless the defendant had had his sample analysed elsewhere.

Mr Strang said he did not propose to attack the report of the analyst. Defendant would absolutely deny that he had added water to the milk on any occasion.

Alfred Lambert, in evidence, de nied that he had at any time tampered with the milk. The only explanation he could offer was that water found its way into the can before the milk was put in. Evidence, was given by two of defendant’s customers as to the excellence of the milk supplied by him. Counsel urged the Court to take into consideration defendant’s emphatic denial of having added water to his milk. He. was a hard-working-man and struggling to make a liv-

The Magistrate said there was only one way of looking at cases of this nature. The public are entitled to get pure milk up to the standard laid down by the regulations, and if they don’t get it the vendors are liable. Milk was the staple article of diet of the children, and the law must protect them. The maximum penalty for such an offence was £SO, and defendant would be fined £25 and costs totalling £1 17s 6d.