View report page

90
(1) That the action was entirely without precedent. That was
so, and the plaintiffs had not been able to produce any
authority for it.
(2) The remedy of appeal to the Minister of Health was prescribed
by the Statute, and, on the usual principle, excluded
the remedy by action.
(3) That the Attorney-General should be there to see that the
public interest was protected, and
(4) That if these other points could not be got over it was a
fatal objection that the Minister of Health was not a party,
and that the construction which had been put upon the
Order by the plaintiffs could not be maintained without
hearing the Minister.
Apart from these objections, the Judge said that it was good
enough to say that, if he had to decide it, he would hold that the
action was not maintainable, but he held that the contention of the
plaintiffs could not be sustained and the Council was right, and the
Judge accordingly dismissed the action with costs.
The plaintiffs subsequently transmitted the sum of £3 10s.
to cover the fees for licences in respect of all their establishments
within the Borough.
During the year, 109 samples of specially designated milk were
purchased and submitted to bacteriological examination for the
purpose of ascertaining whether they conformed to the standards
laid down in the Order. Four samples of "Pasteurised" milk and
three samples of Grade A (T.T.) milk did not conform to the
standards for these grades of milk. The vendors concerned
furnished explanations, which were accepted, as to why the milk did
not conform to the standards. Further samples of milk obtained
from these firms at later dates proved to be satisfactory.
Milk Supplied to Hospitals and Schools.—Samples of the milk
supplied to the London County Council's hospitals and schools in
the Borough are taken periodically and submitted to bacteriological
or chemical examination.