View report page

64
remember that the average customer probably knows nothing of the
Food and Drugs Acts. It would be unfortunate if a form of notice
could be hall-marked by the Courts, so that any seller could evade the
Act by hanging the notice up. To repeat a phrase used in the argument
in the present case, it is not possible for the Court to "pass" a
form of notice, because the sufficiency of the notice in the circumstances
of the case is for the Justices in each case.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
The results of the prosecutions are set out on page 56.
The case is reported in 41, "Times" Law Reports, 132, and in
Knight's Local Government Reports, Vol. 23, page 22.
Public Health (Milk and Cream) Regulations, 1912 and 1917.
These Regulations aim at securing that cream containing preservative
shall be distinguished at all stages of sale from cream to which no
preservative has been added.
It is no longer permitted in any case to add preservative to milk.
The Ministry of Health require the Medical Officer of Health to
report on the administration of the above-mentioned Regulations and,
for convenience, the report has been drawn up under the following
headings:—

Nature of preservative in each case in column (b) and action taken
under the Regulations in regard to it. Nil.
2.—Cream sold as Preserved Cream.
(a) Instances in which samples have been submitted for analysis to
ascertain if the statements on the label as to preservatives were
correct, 4.
1. Correct statements made, 4.
2. Statements incorrect, nil.
3. Percentage of preservative
found in each sample—
0.40, 0.38, 0.37, 0.27 per
cent., by weight.
Percentage stated on
Statutory label—
0.40 per cent., by weight.