View report page

82
Milk.—792 samples of ordinary milk were taken during the year
Of these 75 (9.40 per cent.) were reported by the Analysts to be below
the standard of the Board of Agriculture, and 47 samples were just on
the border line, making a total of 15.4 per cent. of the samples. The
percentage of adulterated is below the average (13.5 per cent.), of the
preceding 4 years. The Analysts have graded the samples submitted
to them into four groups:—Good quality, in which the fat was over 3.8
per cent.; fair quality, in which the fat was between 3.3 and 3.8 per
cent.; and poor or inferior quality, in which the fat was between 3 per
cent. (the official standard) and 3.3 per cent., or in which the non-fatty
solids were between 8.5 and 8.6 (if the fat was also below 3.8).
terated are below the standard.

Forty-three prosecutions were taken with regard to adulteration—
18 for fat abstracted, 5 for added water, 2 for both offences in the
same sample. Warranties or disclosures were proved in 18 instances
Eleven cautions were given to sellers whose milk contained less
than 5 per cent. of added water, or had less than 5 per cent. of fat
abstracted; in none of these was it found necessary, on subsequent
samples being taken, to take further proceedings; 68.8 per cent. of the
samples were of good or fair quality, well above the official standard
as compared with 64.3 in 1906. Details of the proceedings taken are
appended.
Sunday Samples.—One hundred and forty-nine of the samples of
milk were taken on eleven Sundays during the year; 11 (7.30 per
cent.) were found to be adulterated and 1 (0.50 per cent.) was inferior,
an improvement on 1906, when the figures were 10.5 and 3 per cent.
respectively. Sunday used to show a larger percentage of adulteration
than week days.
Samples taken in course of Delivery—
(a) At Railway Stations.—Fifty-three samples of milk were taken
on arrival at Victoria and Charing Cross Railway Stations. Thirty-six
were reported of good quality, 15 fair, 2 poor, and 1 adulterated.