Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Poplar, Metropolitan Borough]
This page requires JavaScript
Continued from previous page...
| Sample Procured (date). | Sample. Particulars of Adulteration, Ac. | Summons heard, (date) | Costs. | Penalty. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1911. | 1912. | £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | |
| Brought forward | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 2 Dec. | Milk deficient in solids not fat 7 per cent. (Defendant previously summonsed on 29th May, 1902. Summons withdrawn.) | 4 Jan. | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| 8 Dec. | Milk deficient in fat 96'6 per cent, (itinerant vendor). Summons dismissed as Magistrate was of opinion the sale was not to the prejudice of the purchaser.* | 4 Jan. | - | - | ||||
| 29 Dec. | Milk deficient in solids not fat 8-2 per cent.) | 19 Jan. | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total for Quarter ended 31st December, 1912 | £3 | 9 | 0 | £3 | 7 | 0 | ||
*In the above case the evidence given before the Court was that on December 8th
milk was sold in Newcastle Street, Cubitt Town, without declaration at the time of the
purchase that it was separated milk. No notice or placard was displayed on the
barrow from which it was sold to that effect. On the barrow was marked in large
letters, "The New Farmers Milk Supply." On the side of the hand can engraved in
the metal was marked, " Separated Milk." This could not be seen at the time of
purchase as the milk seller fetched the jug from door of 17, Newcastle Street, took it
into the street to his barrow, and returned with the milk. It was pointed out to the
Magistrate that had this lettering on the hand can been in black or white it could have
been seen. In cross-examination for the defence, the person who purchased for the
Inspector admitted having some time previously purchased some milk from defendant's
man at 3d. per quart. It was therefore urged that she knew the milk to be separated.
The Magistrate, in dismissing the case, warned the defendant, and remarked that when
separated milk was sold the fact should be clearly advertised. Section 11, Sale of Pood
and Drugs Act, 1899, does not apply to ordinary separated or skimmed milk. The
Section in question states that every tin or other receptacle containing condensed,
separated, or skimmed milk must bear a label clearly visible to the purchaser on which
the words "machine-skimmed milk" or "skimmed milk," as the case may require, are
printed in large and legible type, etc., etc., etc. Under these circumstances, and from
the result of the above case, it would be as well if, when further legislation upon the
sale of food and drugs is being considered, a similar clause should be inserted respecting
skimmed or separated milk, and a placard conspicuously displayed on the barrow in the
case of itinerant vendors.
The Public Health and Housing Committee considered the report on the