View report page

57
One summons for absence of name and address on the milk
barrow.
Four summonses for exposing margarine for sale unlabelled.
Six summonses for serving margarine in a plain wrapper.
Thus 13 summonses were taken out for offences in which the
warranty defence was not possible.
The rate of dismissed summonses owing to warranty pleading
calculated on the total summonses for the two years was 12.5 per
cent., but if calculated only on those summonses where it is possible
and usual to plead a warranty, the rate would be 16.3 per cent., an
increase of 3.8 per cent. If we add this to the percentage of
dismissals relating to all the London Boroughs, for I believe their
experience is much the same as Hackney's, we get for the years
1916-17, a total percentage dismissal of 22.4. This figure more
accurately represents the pernicious effect of the warranty defence
on the efforts of Local Authorities to enforce the provision of the
Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.
If we consider the question of prosecutions for false warranty
we will obtain further evidence of the adverse effect of the warranty
clauses.
Prosecutions for False Warranty.
Under Section 20 (6) Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, 1899,
which deals with such prosecutions, Local Authorities are
provided with a remedy where summonses have been dismissed
on production of a warranty, viz., the person giving the warranty
may be prosecuted for false warranty.
The data I have collected relating to this point, during the last
eight years, enables one to say definitely whether this is an effectual remedy.