View report page

24
The undermentioned samples were taken and found to be
unsatisfactory and resulted in the following prosecutions :–
Milk. Two samples contained 7% added water. The vendor of
these samples was summoned under the Food and Drugs Act,
1938. The defendant in turn summoned the driver under
Section 83 (3) of the Act. The charge against the original
defendant was dismissed but the driver was fined £5. 0s. Od.
Two further samples contained 9% and 13% of added
water respectively. The vendor was the same in each case
and he was summoned under the Food and Drugs Act. A
conviction was obtained and he was fined £15 and ordered
to pay £3. 3s. 0d. costs.
Steak. Two samples which had been sold as steak were found
on analysis to be horseflesh. The vendor was summoned for
contravention of the Food and Drugs Act, 1938, and was
fined a total of £6. 0s. 0d.
Doughnuts. These were found on analysis to contain mineral
oil which is prohibited as an ingredient in food-stuff under the
Mineral Oil in Food Order, 1949. The vendor was summoned
and fined £5. 0s. 0d. and ordered to pay £9. 9s. 0d. costs.
Pastry Mix. A sample was found to contain only 20% of fat
instead of 45% as stated in an accompanying notice. The
defendant was summoned under the Defence (Sale of Food)
Regulations, 1943, and fined £4. 0s. 0d. He was also
ordered to pay £1. 1s. Od. costs.
Food and Drugs Act, 1938–Section 13.
17 informal notices were served during the year on owners of
premises coming within the scope of this section of the Food and
Drugs Act, 1938. No statutory action was required.