View report page

56
Condensed Milk.—The one sample I received consisted
of skimmed milk (five-sixths of the butter-fat having been
extracted), condensed to about one-third of its original volume,
with the addition of 45 per cent, of cane sugar. Such milk is
unfit for nursery use, and is certainly not cheaper than an
equivalent quantity of fresh skim-milk. The tin containing
the sample was labelled “Prepared from skimmed milk.”
Eucalyptus Oil.—The sample received was a fair
specimen of this vegetable oil. This article varies considerably
in quality, and so far no definite standard of strength has been
fixed.
Gin.—8 samples were genuine, and of the strength shown
below:—
1 sample was 26° u.p.
1 „ 30¼° „
1 „ 31¼° „
1 „ 34¼„
4 samples were 35° ,, respectively.
Four samples were diluted below the legal strength, viz.:—
to 37°, 38°, 40° and 44° u.p., respectively.
Two samples were very slightly diluted, being 353° and
36½° u.p. respectively.
This trifling extra dilution was probably accidental.
Milk.—Of 56 samples 42 were genuine and of varying
quality.
The adulterated samples were as follows:—
One sample contained 18% added water (also deficient in
butter-fat 65%).
1 sample contained 17% added water
1 „ „ 6% ,,
3 „ „ 5%
3 ,, ,, 4% water beyond the average
also 2 samples were deficient in fat 25%
1 sample was ,, ,, 30%
2 samples were ,, ,, 15%
Of these, the 3 samples containing 4% water and the 2 samples
deficient in fat, 15% must be classed as possibly genuine but
very poor milks.
Seidlitz Powders.—One sample (labelled “extra strong”)
was approximately of the correct strength, but the other
(labelled “The improved seidlitz powders”; was almost exactly
half the proper strength. The improvement, therefore, is not
very obvious, except for the fact that the price charged for the
powders was also half that of the stronger article.