View report page

137
the administration of the former, section 3 (1) (a) of the latter should be .
borne in mind in dealing with those cases where the defendant is an alien
who has committed an offence under either of the above-quoted sections of the
Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, 1875-1891, that render him liable to
imprisonment without the option of a fine. The following is the text of the
Aliens Act referred to: —
Aliens Act.
"Section 3 (1).— The Secretary of State may, if he thinks fit, make an
"order (in this Act referred to as an expulsion order) requiring an
"alien to leave the United Kingdom within a time fixed by the order,
"and thereafter to remain out of the United Kingdom.
"(a) If it is certified to him by any court (including a court
"of summary jurisdiction), that the alien has been convicted by
"the court of any felony or misdemeanour or other offence for
"which the court has power to impose imprisonment without the
" option of a fine and that the court recommend that the
expulsion should be made in his case either in addition to or in
"lieu of his sentence."
DIVISION OF SAMPLES CONTAINED IN PACKETS.
Smith v. Savage.
In this case, heard before the Lord Chief Justice, in the King's Bench
Division, on the 12th April, 1905, an inspector had bought four packets of
cream of tartar from one box. He emptied the four into one place and mixed
them up and divided the mixture into three parts. The Justices dismissed
the summons and the case was taken to a higher Court, which allowed the
appeal upon the following grounds.
The case was different from that of Mason v. Cowdary upon which the
respondent relied when the case was before the Magistrates. Some question
might arise if different articles not of a similar name or articles coming from
different people were mixed together in the same shop; that, however, was
not the case in this instance. Here the appellant has asked for cream of
tartar, which, for the purpose of measurement, was put up in penny packets.
He said he would take four packets, and they had to determine whether,
because four packets of the same article, labelled in the same way and sold at
the same time as cream of tartar, were mixed together and then divided into
three parts, it was a good objection to the analysis that followed.
The Court was of opinion that it was not a good objection, and sent the
case back to the Justices for trial.