View report page

120
"The question as to what constitutes a sufficient written
warranty within the meaning of Sec. 25 (Sale of Food and Drugs
Act, 1875), is by far the most difficult of any that have yet arisen
under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts. It has been discussed
in a great many cases, and upon several points the mind of the
courts has fluctuated so that it is impossible to state with accuracy
what the law is at the present time."
To sum up, then, it is desirable that a prosecution should issue
whenever a Finsbury sample of milk is found to be faulty on the
local standards, even though it may be ascertained and known
that the vendor has a warranty in respect of such milk. The
reasons why this course is urged are briefly:—
1. The warranty may involve difficult questions of law or fact
for determination by a magistrate.
2. By Section 25 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1875,
the sufficiency of the warranty has to be demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the justices or Court.
3. In Court the defendant has to give evidence on oath in
support of his warranty, and is subject to cross-examination.
Such cross-examination may show that the warranty is faulty or
may elicit grounds for a prosecution for giving a false warranty.
4. The warranty may fail through a technical error, e.g., it
may not be pleaded in time.
5. The warranty defence generally means that the original
warrantor gives evidence on oath, and is subjected to crossexamination,
which may elicit material for a prosecution for
giving a false warranty.
6. It is desirable that any explanation which a defendant may
have to offer should be made on oath to a magistrate in open
court. Statements made to' the Public Health Committee or to
an officer of the Council are not on oath. The Public Health
Committee have no means of compelling a milk vendor to state
truthfully whether he has a warranty or not in respect of any consignment
of milk. It is, however, still open for the Public Health
Committee on the application of a milk vendor to interview him,
to hear his explanation and to deal with the case on its merits.