View report page

34
your Committee on various occasions, and more particularly
in respect of what is known as "milk warranty
defences."
At the risk of some repetition, and even of weariness,
I am venturing, in this month's report, to once
again direct attention to a few of the more special cases
which have occurred in our recent experience, and
which cases will, I venture to think, throw some additional
light on the increased cost and difficulties of
administration, as well as the amount of fraudulent
trading possible, and the difficulties experienced in
securing convictions under our illusory and inefficient
"Sale of Food and Drugs Acts."
MANUFACTURING A WARRANTY DEFENCE.
Milk Sample No. 559.—Although a small case in
itself, is important as throwing some light on the way in
which these warranty defences have been arranged.
This sample was purchased by an agent of Inspector
Ainley in the ordinary way, and found upon analysis
to be 27 per cent, deficient in fat or cream. The retail
shopkeeper being, in all probability, the innocent victim
of other people's delinquencies. When the case was
heard at the Court the defendant was asked from whom
the milk was purchased. He replied "from F. C. . . "
and innocently added that, when he informed his wholesaler
that the Inspector had taken a sample, he said,
"Did you tell the Inspector that you hadn't got a warranty?"
On the vendor replying in the affirmative, he
said, "Oh, that is a pity, because if you hadn't said
anything to them about it, I could have given you a
warranty, which would have got you out of this all
right."