View report page

11
NARRATIVE AND CORRESPONDENCE.
I.—On September 24th, 1897, a sample of milk, "No. 53," was
submitted to me for analysis. I completed the analysis on
September 25th, and found that the sample contained:—
In 100 parts.
Fat 2.69
Non-fatty Solids 8.25
Total Milk Solids 10.94
In these determinations, the turn of the balance was always
given in favour of the Vendor; and, in estimating the added water,
I went upon the basis that there was certainly not more than
II parts of milk-solids in each 100 parts of the milk. Then, as
"a good average milk" contains not less than 12.50 per cent. by
weight of milk solids, each 100 parts of this sample contained
88 of "good average milk," and 12 of added water.
I thereupon certified as follows :—
"I am of opinion that the above sample of milk contains
12 parts per centum of added water—good average milk being
taken to contain 12½ parts per centum of milk-solids."
On October 7 a prosecution was ordered by the Vestry.
The sample of milk taken on September 24th had been divided
into three portions—each into a six-ounce glass bottle furnished
with a glass screw-stopper and red rubber washer. One of these
three portions was handed to the vendor, one was brought to me,
and one was retained in the custody of the Vestry in order to
be available for a control analysis.
The summons was returnable on October 27th, at the Police
Court, Great Marlborough Street.
II.—Upon receiving the summons, the defendant ascribed the
adulteration to the Farmer or to the wholesale milk dealers.
Next day (October the 15th), without warning to the wholesale
dealers, a sample of their milk—then in course of delivery to the
defendant, was taken and submitted to me for analysis. I found
that this sample contained:—
In 100 parts.
Fat 3.98
Non-fatty Solids 9.10
Total Milk Solids 13.08
I reported this sample as "excellent milk."