London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972
View report page
Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Camberwell 1922
Report of the Medical Officer of Health for the year 1922
This page requires JavaScript
Ten samples of cream and one sample of milk were taken under the Public
Health (Milk and Cream) Regulations (see separate table), making a total of 1,069
official samples.
Milk.— 665 formal samples of milk and four samples of separated milk were
analysed, of which 13, or 1.95 per cent. were reported against. Table "B "
shows the percentage of adulterations for the past five years.
TABLE "B."
| Year | 1918 | 1919 | 1920 | 1921 | 1922 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage | 11.7 | 6.9 | 2.8 | 1.95 | 1.95 |
Table "C" gives the particulars of the adulterated samples and the result of
the legal proceedings.
Table "C" gives the particulars of the adulterated samples and the result of the legal proceedings. TABLE "C."
| Sample No. | Deficiency of Fat per cent. | Added Water per cent. | Result of Proceedings. |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. 864 | 13 | – | Dismissed. £1 1s. Costs. |
| No. 972 | 8 | – | Fine £1. £2 2s. Costs. |
| No. 1,065 | 6 | – | No Fine. £1 1s. Costs. |
| No. 16 | – | 7 | Dismissed. £2 2s. Costs. |
| No. 161 | 10 | – | Dismissed on warranty. Appeal made to High Court and same allowed and case sent back to Magistrate to convict. Fined £20 and £5 5s. Costs (previous convictions). |
| No. 282 | – | 6 | Fined 10s. £1 1s. Costs. |
| No. 283 | – | 8 | Fined 10s. No Costs. Same defendant as No. 282. |
| No. 392 | – | 6 | Dismissed on warranty. |
| No. 437 | – | 6 | Dismissed. Costs 10s. 6d. |
| No. 440 | – | 6 | Dismissed. Costs 10s. 6d. |
| No. 452 | – | 18 | Dismissed on warranty. |
| No. 631 | 4 | – | Dismissed. Costs 2s. |
| No. 768 | 39 | – | Fined £2 2s. £1 1s. Costs. |
The two following cases might be specially mentioned: —
Milk Sample No. 161. — This summons was in respect of a sample of
milk which was certified to be 10 per cent, deficient in fat. A warranty
defence was set up and the learned Magistrate dismissed the summons.
A case was stated for the High Court. The appeal was upheld on the grounds
that the contract or warranty simply specified "New Milk" and that
the words "New Milk" might mean "New Separated" "New Skimmed,"
etc. The label on the churn of this particular consignment bore the words
"(Guaranteed pure unskimmed milk with all its cream," but there was
nothing to connect the label with the stipulations in the agreement. What
was required was a guarantee that the milk satisfied the requirements of the
Statute. The words "New Milk" did not constitute such a guarantee.
The guarantee did not therefore satisfy the Statute. The case was sent
back to the learned Magistrate to convict.
Obstruction of Inspector.— During the interval pending the hearing of
the above-mentioned appeal, another sample of milk was obtained from this
vendor. At the same time a sample was demanded from another receptacle.
This was refused and both the inspector and his assistant were obstructed
and assaulted. A summons was issued for the obstruction, the defendant
being fined £5 and £5 5s. costs.