London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Shoreditch 1913

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Shoreditch]

This page requires JavaScript

53
scalded. With regard to the remainder of the samples below standard the small
percentages of adulteration rendered it so very unlikely that convictions could be
obtained, that prosecutions were not considered advisable. In seven instances
letters of caution were sent to the vendors. The percentage of the adulterated
samples in which it was not thought advisable to prosecute was 77 as compared
with 61 in 1912, 65 in 1911, 69 in 1910, 80 in 1909, 66 in 1908, 65 in 1907, 66 in
1906, 60 in 1905, and 55 in 1904.
In the cases in which convictions were obtained the penalties for milk
adulteration amounted to £26, which is equivalent to 4.6 per cent. of the full
amount of the penalties to which the defendants were liable as compared with 6.9
per cent. in 1912, 6.6 in 1911, 4.4 in 1910, 28 in 1909, 11.2 in 1908, 5.6 in 1907, 5.6
in 1906, 7.8 in 1905, 6 in 1904, 8 in 1903 and 13 in 1902.
Taking fines and costs, which in the aggregate amounted to £52 3s. 0d., the
average amount paid by the defendants on conviction was £2 14s. 1d., as compared
with £3 15s. 5d. in 1912, £2 8s. 3d. in 1911, £1 11s. 6d. in 1910, £12 6s. 4d. in
1909, £3 1s. 4d. in 1908, £1 13s. 7d. in 1907, £2 9s. 6d. in 1906, £2 19s. 3d. in 1905,
£2 6s. 10d. in 1904, £1 18s. 6d. in 1903, and £2 18s. 4d. in 1902. The marked
excess of the figures for the year 1909 was due to two defendants being very
heavily fined.

The numbers of samples and the percentages of those found adulterated during the four quarters of the year are as shown in the subjoined table:—

Quarter of the year.Number of Samples.Number not genuine.Percentage adulterated.
1st41......
2nd3525.7
3rd19......
4th3712.7

Of the samples sold as butter which were not genuine one was a sample of
margarine, one contained foreign fats in a large amount and was probably a
mixture of butter and margarine, and one contained water in excess of the
16 per cent. standard. The summons taken in the case of the excess of water was
dismissed, a warranty being proved. Proceedings were then taken against the
person giving the warranty; the summons again was dismissed as this person
sold under a warranty. A third summons was then taken in February of the
current year against the person who gave this warranty, but this also was
dismissed as the butter came from France under a warranty.