View report page

91
The action taken in regard to the two samples which did not
conform to the standard for "Pasteurised" milk is reported
above.
Eleven of the samples of ordinary milk taken at schools were
found upon bacteriological examination to have a high bacterial
count. These results were reported to the London County Council.
Six of these samples were of milk supplied by one firm of dairymen
and the County Council withdrew its contract with this firm.
Thirty-two of the samples submitted to bacteriological examination
were also tested for the purpose of ascertaining whether tubercle
bacilli were present in the milk. In no instance was definite
evidence obtained of infection with tubercle bacilli.
Identification of Milk Supplies.—Section 6 of the Milk and
Dairies (Consolidation) Act, 1915, provides that:—
"Every person who himself or by his servant in any highway or place of
public resort sells milk from a vehicle or from a can or from other receptacle
shall have conspicuously inscribed on the vehicle or receptacle his name ancl
address, and in default shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not
exceeding two pounds."
It is quite clear that an offence is committed if a dairyman sells
milk from a vehicle or from a receptacle which is not inscribed with
his name and address, but where milk is delivered in bottles the
position is not so clear.
The practice of dairymen delivering milk in bottles belonging
to other dairymen does not always come within the scope of this
section.
A case was dealt with during the year in which two milk
barrows belonging to one milkman were found to hold 166 bottles, of
which only four bore the name of this dairyman, the remainder
bearing the names or trade marks of other dealers.
No specific duty lies with local authorities to take action in a
case of this sort unless it falls within the scope of Section 6 of the
Act. In this case it appeared that action could only be taken under
the Merchandise Marks Act, 1887, and as the Council has no power
to take proceedings of this nature under that Act, one of the Food
Inspectors was authorised to take action as a private individual. A
fine of 40s., with £7 7s. costs, was imposed on one summons and two
others in connection with the offence were withdrawn.
Ability to identify milk suppliers from their milk bottles is
regarded by the Council as a matter of importance. The attention of
the Ministry of Health was, therefore, drawn to this question with
a suggestion that the law should be amended so as to allow local
authorities to take action in these cases. The Ministry has intimated
its intention of carrying the suggestion into effect as soon as
opportunity occurs.