View report page

It has been estimated that the consumption of milk at present in the Metropolis is
63,000,000 gallons per annum, about 2,000,000 of which is derived from cows in the Metropolis,
the rest being imported from the country. There is no doubt whatever that our high infantile
mortality, and the largest share in the production of the present physical degeneration is due to
improper feeding of infants. This applies very particularly to Boroughs like Bermondsey, where
the population is practically composed of the working classes. Even if mothers in Bermondsey
knew how to feed their infants properly they can't get the means to do it. There is at present
very little clean or wholesome milk here. Prom the time it leaves the cow till it comes into the
hands of the consumer it is open at every stage to contamination, not to speak of adulteration.
This contamination or dirt cannot be remedied under the Pood and Drugs Acts, and is more
injurious to infant life than at least the milder degrees of adulteration.
I certainly think it is a standing disgrace that the largest and richest city in the world
should have one of the worst milk supplies. There is at present no method at all of dealing
with dirt or bacteria unless they produce one of the notifiable diseases, and as regards adulteration
the only powers are those possessed by the individual Boroughs, which are confined to their
respective areas. What is wanted are powers by some central body such as the London County
Council to enable them to deal with the milk supply of the metropolis as a whole, beginning
with the source of supply in the country till it is distributed among the various sanitary
authorities, and further joint powers should be given both to the local and county authority to
deal with general contamination as distinct from adulteration.
As pointed out in a previous report, about 50 per cent, of the poorer inhabitants of
Bermondsey use condensed milk, either alone or in conjunction with cow's milk, but more
commonly alone. About 90 per cent, of these use condensed skim milk, at prices varying from
2¼d. to 3d. per tin.
In order to get some idea of the quality of the samples of milk taken, I asked the Public
Analyst to state on all his certificates the percentages of ingredients. Out of the 374 samples
of whole milk which were taken I have made a rough classification according to the amount of
fat of 371 in which the certificates were available, as follows : —
Under 3 per cent. 32 = 8.63 per cent, of total
3 per cent. and under 3.5 percent 134 = 36.12 „ „
3.5 „ „ 4 „ 135 = 36.8 „ „
4 „ and over ... ... ... 70 = 18.87 „ „
From these figures it appears that 42 per cent, of the samples show a milk of very poor
quality, for no milk can be considered passable which has not at least 3*5 per cent, of butter fat.
The Board of Agriculture standard of 3 per cent, is much too low, and is only met with in cows
poorly fed and boused and milked at improper times, and no farmer would have any difficulty
if the standard were 3.5 per cent., by paying attention to the breed of his cows and the other
details which conduce to a high standard of milk and are perfectly well known to farmers.
There is a lot of adulteration of milk going on in Bermondsey unpunished, and in many
streets skimmed and separated milk are sold to the unwary as whole milk at a cheap rate.
To detect these frauds a considerable amount of sharp practice must be used by the
inspectors in talcing sample*. The number of prosecutions may thus represent as much the
skill of the inspector who takes the simples as the amount of adulteration prevalent in the
Borough.
Many other articles of food and drugs were taken, as a glance at the Table will show, but
they do not require special mention since milk is much the most import int.
The question of punishing those who adulterate milk is becoming more difficult every day
and it will soon be impossible to do so.
The defence of "Warranty "which the Act allows, is becoming the most common one, and
the only method I see of dealing with it is either to do away with warranty altogether, or to give
additional powers in proceeding against the giver of the warranty.
The difficulties of the subject are illustrated by the following report of the Public Health
Committee, presented to the Council on October 6th, 1903 : —
Adulterated Milk—Warranty.
We report having had under consideration two prosecutions in regard to the sale of
milk, both of which prosecutions resulted in failure.
In the first case the milk was sold by Mr. A. Handsley, and was found on analysis
to be deficient in cream to the extent of 10 per cent. Handsley gave notice that be
relied on a warranty which was duly proved and the summons dismissed. The summons
against the farmer for giving a false warranty was also dismissed, the farmer
submitted evidence to prove that he delivered the milk as it came from the cow.
In the second case a Mr. Jones, of Tabard Street, was summoned for selling milk
which the analysis proved contained 16 per cent, of added water. Jones gave notice of
a warranty from the Great Western Dairy Co., against whom a summons was taken out
for false warranty. The Great Western Dairy Company gave notice of defence, relying
upon warranties from three farmers. Summonses were therefore issued against the
three farmers for giving the false warranties, but these summonses were eventually
withdrawn. Mr. bodkin represented the Council and Mr. Ricketts represented the
Defendants. The retailer, Jones, produced evidence to prove the warranty from the
Great Western Daily Co., and that he sold the milk as received, and that be had no
reason to suspect that it was not pure, with the result that the summonses against him
and his servant were dismissed with £l Is. costs in each case. The Great Western
Dairy Co. then gave evidence to prove that the milk was sold in the same condition as
received, that they bad no reason to suspect the quality of the milk, they had