View report page

180
The Inspector ran up to him and took the can from his hand,
stating' his intention to take it as a sample in course of delivery
He then said to the Inspector: "This is not a proper sample. I
did not sell it to you." But on the Inspector insisting, he varied
this statement by admitting that it was not milk at all, but a drop
of water which he had obtained from a public-house for washing
his cans out with. He refused to accept the third portion of the
sample when it was offered to him. The sample on analysis was
found to contain 15 per cent, of extraneous water. He was convicted,
and fined £10 and costs, or a month in default. He went
to prison rather than pay the fine.
In July following two samples were taken from the same
man by Inspector Chuter on the same morning in different parts
of the district, one being taken from his son, and the other from
himself. These were reported by the Public Analyst to be deficient
in fat to the extent of 14 per cent, in each case. Before proceedings
were taken, still another sample was taken from this
man, which on analysis showed 11 per cent, of extraneous water.
Summonses were taken out, but the defendant absconded before
the hearing. He was later traced to another address in the
Borough, and a warrant having been obtained, he was arrested in
bed early one morning.
At the hearing, the Magistrate dealt with one case only, and
he was convicted and fined £20 and 12s. 6d. costs, or three months'
imprisonment with hard labour, accepting the latter alternative.
The other cases against him were withdrawn.
Another example is of interest as showing the uselessness
of inflicting small fines on these fraudulent persons,
which in no sense appear to act as a deterrent. A milk purveyor,
who has his business premises in Battersea, did most of his round
in an adjoining Borough. He started on his round very early in
the morning, and had only a very short distance to go to get
outside the Borough boundary. Early in January he was convicted
and fined £4 and £1 3s. costs for selling milk which, on
analysis, was reported to contain 33 per cent, of extraneous water.
A month or so later a sample was taken from his hand-can on a