View report page

34
not, "without the consent of the Customs Officer, examine an article of food in regard
to which the duties of the Customs Officer have not been wholly discharged.
This leads to a great deal of difficulty, particularly when a Food Inspector has
a big district to cover. He sees a consignment of food, but cannot examine it because
the entry has not been passed. When he returns later he may find that in the meantime
the entry has been passed and the goods have been removed. Of course, a
great deal depends on the relations between the Customs Officer and the Food Inspector,
but at the best this article of the Regulations leads to a great deal of waste of time.
2. Proportion of Foodstuffs examined.—It would probably be impracticable to
examine a definite minimum proportion of every consignment of canned food, but
I think we might agree on the proportion of unsoundness found on sampling which
should result in:—
(a) the passing of the consignment;
(b) further sampling;
(c) sorting of the whole consignment.
3. Action to be taken in regard to blown tins.—We are all aware that in some
cases the contents of blown cans could be consumed without danger to health, but
we cannot be certain of the wholesomeness of the contents of any blown can till
we have opened the can and examined the contents. Moreover, it is possible to land
canned food in this country in such condition as to cause no suspicion as to its soundness.
If a can is blown then there is some fault somewhere, either in the nature or
quality of the product canned or in the can or in the process of canning or in the
subsequent handling and storage. If we release blown cans of food for human
consumption in any form we place the careless or inexpert canner on the same footing
as the careful expert one. I hold very strongly the view that so far as the Food
Inspector is concerned every blown can is a bad can and should be condemned, and
that the contents should not be allowed to be used for human consumption in any
form. Having said so much I would ask you to consider the following questions:—
(a) Should any argument be admitted as to the fitness for human consumption
under any circumstances of the contents of a blown can? e.g., Hydrogen swells
for ordinary consumption, condensed milk for toffee-making, pulp for jam-making.
(b) Should odd blown cans found in routine sampling be condemned or
returned to the cases?
In some districts it is, I believe, the practice to return blown cans to the cases
when the proportion of unsound cans is not sufficient to warrant a complete
examination of the consignment, the argument being that since on examination
the whole consignment is to be passed none of the cans should be removed. While
I admit that there will be in the unexamined portion of the consignment a proportion
of unsound cans approximately equal to that in the sample examined, and therefore
I am knowingly allowing a few unsound cans to go forward, I take the view that
such unsound cans as actually come under the notice of the Sanitary Authority should
be removed and condemned.
4. Action to be taken in regard to "repaired" cans (i.e., cans showing evidence of
re-soldering of seams or vents).—From time to time cans which are apparently sound
are found to show soldered perforations or re-soldered seams or edges. The contention
is that such soldering is done in the factory before the goods are shipped. This may
be true, but if we admit such cans how are we to stop cans which have been blown,
vented and re-soldered, or which have leaked and been repaired? My own view
is that if we have reason to suspect that any can has been unsealed at any time we
should unhesitatingly condemn it, admitting no plea that our action should be based
on the results of bacteriological or other examination of the contents.
5. Action to be taken in regard to so-called "Slack Cap" cans.—In trade examinations
of canned goods a term "Slack Cap" is used indicating that the top and bottom,
of the can spring up and down when pressure is applied by the fingers. The suggestion
is that this is a structural defect in the can and that the contents are perfectly sound.
I take the view that in the majority of these cases the condition indicates an early