View report page

179
ative in each instance. The decrease in the number of samples
adulterated with preservatives is probably, in part at least,
accounted for by the climatic conditions which prevailed in the
summer of 1907 rendering it unnecessary to resort so frequently
to their use. All of the six samples related to milk.
The amount of adulteration ranged from 1.006 to 22.4 grains
per pint. Proceedings were taken and convictions obtained
in 3 cases, fines and costs being inflicted. In 2 of the remaining"
cases, owing to the small quantity of adulteration reported
by the Analyst—less than two grains to the pint—the summonses
were withdrawn on payment of costs. In the remaining
case, for a similar reason no proceedings were taken.
A circular letter was issued to local authorities in 1906 by
the Local Government Board, in which the Board suggested
that milk vendors should be advised by the District Councils
that proceedings would be taken under the Acts in instances
in which preservatives are reported in milk, and that in cases
where a declaration is made with the object of escaping liability,
the Board suggested that frequent samples should be taken to
ascertain the condition of such milk in regard to preservatives;
and in cases in which preservatives are reported in milk then
sold, the question would arise whether, in view of the nature
and quantity of the preservative added, it can be considered
that the article has been rendered injurious to health to an
extent sufficient to justify proceedings. The Board state in this
circular letter that they are advised that the presence in milk
of formalin to an amount ascertained by examination within
three days of collecting the sample to exceed I part in 40,000
(I part in 1,000 of formaldehyde), and in the case of boron
preservative, to an amount exceeding 57 parts of boric acid
per 100,000, or 40 grains to the gallon, raises a strong presumption
that the article has been rendered injurious to health.
As pointed out in my Annual Report for 1906, it was to be
feared that use would be made as a defence of the Board's
circular letter, in cases where a disclosure is made, in reference
to proceedings where no disclosure is made when the quantity