View report page

failed to comply with the Order. One sample of jam, sold as "apricot," was found
to be " peach." Proceedings were taken in respect of one of the drippings and a
conviction wasobtained, while in the other a caution was given to the vendor. The
purchase of the apricot (peach) jam led to proceedings being taken under the Public
Health Act, 1891, in respect of a consignment of jam found to be unsound at the
premises wherethis particular sample was purchased.
Of the cases that were heard at the Lambeth Police Court the following may
be worth noting : —
(1) A vendor of watered milk was sent to prison on two occasions, viz., in
March and July, the first period being for two months and the second for the
maximum sentence of three months with hard labour.
(2) In another case milk was being supplied to the outdoor poor by a vendor
under a contract with the Camberwell Board of Guardians ; a fine of £20 and
£7 7s. costs was inflicted by the Magistrate for supplying milk adulterated with
1 2 per cent, of added water.
(3) Under the Mother and Infant Welfare Order milk was being supplied to
a recipient by a vendor under a contract with the Borough Council. By means of
informal sampling it was discovered "that the milk was badly adulterated; on this
occasion the offence being aggravated by the fact that the milk was delivered to a
child. An official sample taken at the shop in the course of delivery to the
recipient (the child's mother) was found to be genuine, but the suspicious actions
of the vendor on this occasion were such that the matter was followed up. After
many weeks of informal buying, by a young girl, it was found, as anticipated, that
when the milk was served from a certain receptacle, it always showed that it had
been tampered with. When the official sample was purchased and found to be
badly adulterated, proceedings were taken and the vendor was fined £25 and
£10 costs.
(4) A sample of milk purchased from an old offender was found to be
adulterated. A summons was issued. On behalf of the defendant it was stated
that his portion of the sample had been certified as genuine, and at his request
the third portion was sent to the Government Laboratory. Though this analysis
practically agreed with that of the Public Analyst, the Magistrate dismissed the
summons.
(5) In a summons for adulterated whisky the licensee was fined £2 and £6 6s.
costs, and in a
(6) Summons for selling sausages containing an excessive amount of boric acid
the vendor was fined £2 and £4 4s. costs.
With regard to vinegar, the percentage of adulteration in 1920 was nearly 19,
while this year it fell to 2.5.
Six official samples of cream were purchased, four containing preservatives. In
two cases the purchaser's receptacle was wrongly labelled and the receptacle containing
the bulk unlabelled. In the other two instances both the customer's
vessel and that containing the bulk were unlabelled. Cautions were given by
order of the Public Health Committee in each case. The remaining two creams
were free from preservatives and complied with the requirements in all other
respects.
Informal or Test Samples.
The number of samples obtained under the above heading amounted to 190.
They include the following:—Butter, 96; milk, 80 ; whisky, 5; margarine, 4
preserved peas, 1; preserved cream, 1; gin, 1; and dripping. 1.
Of the samples submitted to the Public Analyst the following were reported
against:—Milk, 14; gin, 1; and whisky, 1.
None of the butters submitted to the Public Analyst were reported against.
(Signed) GEORGE T. DEWEY, Food and Drugs Inspector.
There is little to add by way of comment to the above report
except to express the opinion that the cruel fraud perpetrated by
the sellers of the milk to which Mr. Dewey draws attention called
for severer punishment than was meted out.