View report page

The following information is given with reference to the
unsatisfactory samples:-
Fresh Fruit: Two separate traders were each found to have sold
Packham's Triumph pears when William pears had been requested.
Proceedings were instituted against each trader; one was fined
£3, the other was fined £5, and each was ordered to pay 1 guinea
costs.
Sugar Confectionery: A sample of Coffee Fudge was found to be
labelled with misleading statements as to the presence of
vitamins. Fudge Rum was found to contain no proof spirit. A
letter of caution was sent to each of the manufacturers concerned.
Another trader supplied a sponge cake filled with imitation
cream in response to a request for Cream Sponge; this request
was prompted by the manner in which these cakes were labelled
when exposed for sale. Proceedings were instituted and the
trader was fined £5 and ordered to pay 4 guinea costs.
Merchandise Marks Acts, 1887 - 1953 The majority of the
inspection work carried out under the provisions of the above
Acts relates to ensuring that the requirements of the various
Marking Orders made under the provisions of the Act of 1926,
and which relate to the marking with an indication of origin of
certain imported foodstuffs when exposed for sale or sold, are
complied with. Inspections were made at 195 separate premises
of 798 displays of meat, apples, tomatoes, poultry, dried fruit,
and butter.
One trader was prosecuted for exposing for sale imported fresh
apples not marked with an indication of origin; a fine of £1
was imposed.
Labelling of Food Order, 1953: This Order requires pre-packed
food to be marked with the name and address, or with the
registered trade mark, of the packer or labeller. It also
requires such food to be labelled with its common or usual name
(if any) and with the names of the ingredients of a compounded
food. It also controls the manner in which the presence of
vitamins and minerals is disclosed and prescribes specific
labelling of certain foods.
A total of 213 articles of pre-packed food was examined at 55
premises to ascertain whether the above requirements were
complied with; no serious infringements of this Order were
detected.
False or Misleading Descriptions: As in previous years food
advertisements and labels have been scrutinised for false or
misleading statements and descriptions. Much of this scrutiny
of food labels can be combined with inspection work under the
Labelling of Food Order. No serious infringements were disclosed.
Corrective action was secured in relation to descriptions applied
to "Milk Block", "Double Tea", an imitation cream powder, cakes
filled with a mixture of butter and sugar, canned mixed
vegetables raspberry syrup, powdered soup mixes, medium red
salmon, gorgonzola cheese spread and cheese spread.
Safe Milk: In addition to the foregoing, 7 samples of raw milk
were procured within your district and submitted to test for
the presence of tubercle bacilli. None was found contaminated.
29