View report page

71
FOOD SUPERVISION.
The amount of milk sold at the "miscellaneous" shops varied from one pint to two
gallons dailv, except at the " provision " dealer's, where the amount was ten gallons a day.
The " miscellaneous " shops fall into two groups.
(a) 17 shops, viz.:—
Grocers - - 8 Bakers - - 2 " Provision" dealer 1
Sweetshops - - 5 Butcher 1
These premises are " kept fairly clean." The counter-pans—the whole trade is done
over the counter—were iron cans, usually belonging to the firm supplying the milk, at 8 shops,
china pans at 9 shops. Four (4) of the counter-pans were found covered with muslin. In
6 cases the (iron) pans were cleansed by the firms supplying the milk.
(c) 58 shops, in 33 of which lamp oil is also sold. At 7 only of the 33 shops was the oil
kept out of the shop. The commodities sold in various combinations at such shops included—
Tea and Sugar - 50 Oil - - 33
Sweets - - 49 Vinegar - - 30
Wood - - 44 Coal - 5
Loose Pickles - 40 Pickled Fish - 2
Jams - 39 Beer - 2
The majority of the above are in themselves harmless to milk, but their association is
undesirable, as it makes it difficult to secure that cleanliness which is so essential for a pure
milk supplv. Others, such as coal, vinegar and oil, can undoubtedly contaminate the milk,
either by the dust arising from their handling, or from the fumes given off, which would be
readily absorbed by the milk.
The milk was found to be kept in iron cans at 49 shops, and in basins, jugs or counterpans
at the remaining 9. It is perhaps fortunate that in 46 cases the milk vessels were found
to be cleansed bv the firm supplying the milk. The Inspector states he did not notice
" a single utensil properly covered," as either the handle of the measure was generally on the
edge of the milk can, preventing the lid from closing, or the muslin cover was by the side of
the pan, not spread over the top.
The foregoing facts bring out strongly the importance of the work which ought to be
carried out in the provinces under the Dairies, Cowsheds and Milkshops Orders* but which
unfortunately receives but scant attention from rural authorities. Put simply and plainlv
the state of the case is this—the farmers, whose places and manner of producing milk should
come under the supervision of the sanitarv officials, have the appointment and practically
untrammelled dismissal of such officers in their own hands. Effective supervision is not to be
expected under such circumstances, and the only remedies available, appear to be the transference
of the administration of the Orders from the defaulting rural district councils to the
countv councils, or to give the authority of the district where the milk is sold powers to
obtain the names of farmers sending such milk into the district, to inspect the farms
whence the milk comes, and to prohibit the sale of milk within the district from farms not
conforming to prescribed standards. Having regard to the difficulties which would inevitably
be associated with the latter alternative, it can only be suggested to be set aside at once.
The intervention by the county council when default is made by the district council is the
proper remedy.
The inquiries made, also indicate that new regulations, or by-laws, are required to deal
with the sale of milk. It should be a penal offence to sell milk in a shop with other goods
likely to cause milk to be contaminated, or to keep the counter-pan uncovered. The
sale of milk in the " miscellaneous" shops (second group more particularly) is a matter of
trade competition. One shopkeeper cannot afford to give up the sale, but if such sale were
absolutely prohibited, no hardship would be inflicted.
* It should be stated that most of the large wholesale firms have very stringent clauses in their contracts
dealing with the water supply and sanitation of the farms, keeping of cows, &c.