View report page

Sampling Observations
It will be seen from the detailed classification that of two
hundred and eighteen samples taken during the year 1.38% were
found to be other than genuine and labelling Infringements
accounted for a further 2.29% making a total of 3.67%.
For comparative purposes the figures for 1958 were 4.98% and
2.71% respectively, making a total of 7.69%.
The pattern of sampling has followed that of previous years
in that a wide range of commodities has been covered. A satisfying
result has emerged since the infringements revealed were generally
of a minor character and with the willing co-operation of retailers,
importers and/or manufacturers were usually readily adjusted.
Comments by the Public Analyst
The public analyst, in performing his duties under the Food
and Drugs Act, Is largely dependent on samples taken by sampling
officers of a Food and Drugs Authority, and I have always found
the initiative and co-operation of these officers In Sutton and
Cheam to be particularly helpful in disclosing uncommon forms of
adulteration and misdescription. This latter offence Is much more
usual now than adulteration, which is usually taken to mean the
substitution of part of an article of food by another substance
which cannot readily be detected by the purchaser, such as, for
example, the watering of milk, the mixing of margarine with butter
and the 'dilution' of pepper with rice. Some offences fall into
both categories and examples may be found in the eight articles
of food (other than milk) which were reported against during the
course of this year. No.2657 for instance (Chocolate Cream
Pastries) Is both a misdescription under Section 6 and Section 47
of the Act and an adulteration since part of the milk fat has been
mixed with some other fat.
I am finding that the ordinary purchaser is less critical now
of both adulteration and misdescription and It is becoming
Increasingly difficult to prove prejudice under the time-honoured
Section of successive Food and Drags Acts that "it is an offence
to sell to the prejudice of the purchaser an article of food
which is not of the nature or substance or quality demanded".
With the advent of self-service stores, a demand for an article
by name is rarely made and customers are willing to accept on
sight lesser known articles of food of whose true nature they may
only have a hazy idea. It is not always realised by those who
have the responsibility for enforcing the Act that where a label
applied to a food is false or likely to mislead, even if it does
not mislead every customer or even a majority of customers, then
offence is committed. In so far as the Analyst is responsible
for expressing an opinion on such articles he cannot ignore such
descriptions and labels without departing from principles of
integrity and honesty which it would be wrong to forego.
I obtained very little support for my opinion that a Cornish
Pasty (Ref. Sample No.2764) is not a meat and potato pie, and that
27