View report page

94
Vendor's
Sample.
Action taken and
Resi
Consignor's
Sample,
number
taken.
Result of
Analysis.
Action taken and
Result.
Had 7 per cent.
fat abstracted.
Had 13 percent.
fat abstracted.
Contained 3.5
percent. added
water.
Had 8 per cent.
fat abstracted.
Prosecution. Warranty
proved, summons
dismissed.
Prosecution. Warranty
proved, summons
dismissed.
Prosecution. Warranty
proved, summons
dismissed.
Prosecution. Notice
of warranty given
but the Magistrate
was not satisfied
and ordered defendant
to pay £2 2s.
costs.
10
4
5
6
All genuine
3 genuine, 1 adulterated
(5
per cent. fat
abstracted).
All genuine.
AH genuine.
No action.
Solicitors advised,
no action against
consignor.
No action.
No action.
Analysis of Milk Samples.—Percentage of adulterated samples since
1910 is given on page 95.
The legal minimum standards for milk fat and non-fatty solids as
laid down in the Sale of Milk Regulations, 1901, are 3 per cent, and 8-5
per cent, respectively. Samples which do not show higher percentages
than these are regarded by the analysts as of poor quality. Therefore it
may be taken that the legal standards do not indicate any degree of
excellence but rather milk which has barely escaped the stigma of adulteration.
The grades of quality as set up by the analysts are as
follows:—
Good quality: Over 3.8 per cent. of fat.
Fair quality: Between 3.3 per cent. and tinder 3.8 per cent.
Poor quality: Between 3 per cent. and 3.3 per cent.
Adulterated: Below 3 per cent. fat and 8.5 per cent. non-fatty
solids.