32
REPORT OF THE KING INSTITUTE, GUINDY
the case of food-stuffs of naturally varying composition such as milk this gives satisfactory
powers for dealing with such adulterations as skimming or watering, and protects a milk
vendor owning a cow which yields milk of abnormal composition. But the powers given are
insufficient when it comes to laying down regulations, prohibiting or limiting the addition of
substances which may be considered undesirable, as the vendor can counter the presumption
of adulteration by proving a "custom of the trade," either generally or in a particular
locality. This means that varying decisions would be given by magistrates according to the
weight of evidence brought before them, it further means that local authorities have to go to
the expense and trouble of bringing expert evidence to contest a defendant's claims. The
same difficulty will arise should Government decide, as I very strongly recommend to prohibit
the sale of watered milk. The standards which I propose below can deal with the sale of
watered milk as milk, but it appears very possible that some vendors may attempt to sell
watered milk with a declaration to the effect that it is not sold as genuine milk. The Act as
it stands could not prevent this. The sale of watered milk either with or without notice was
totally prohibited in England, under the Public Health Act Regulations until recently, it is
now prohibited under the new Milk and Dairies (Amendment) Act, 1922. I consider that a
prohibition of the addition of water to milk is even more necessary in India where water
-borne disease is of fairly common occurrence. A further point with which the Act as it
stands could not deal is in connexion with the sale of "fore-milk" (the calf being allowed to
take the last and richest portions of the milk) as "milk," in cases where a vendor establishes
a plea of "custom of the trade." I deal further with this point below.
The recent regulations made in England for regulating the sale of condensed milk and
dried milk are of immense importance in connexion with infant welfare, defining as they do
preparations made from full-cream milk and skimmed milk and prescribing labels in the case
of the skimmed milk products stating that such foods are "unfit for babies." I consider that
similar regulations in Madras might be of great value but that under the present Act
they could not be made.
I suggest later amendments to the Madras Act, by which it might be made to combine
the functions of both the Food and Drugs Acts and the Public Health Acts (so far as they
concern food adulteration) in England. The amendments would, in my opinion, enable
Government to take powers which I consider necessary if adulteration of foods in the Madras
Presidency is to be dealt with on modern lines.
A committee on preservatives in foods in England has recently presented a report to the
Ministry of Health with draft regulations, the intention being that all the numerous existing
regulations shall be repealed and the whole subject dealt with in one consolidated order.
When these regulations are finally approved under the Public Health Acts, I consider that
it is very desirable that Madras should be in a position to adopt similar regulations at once,
otherwise there will be a very considerable probability that food-stuffs held in stock in
England, which the new regulations render unsaleable, will be shipped to countries where
similar regulations are not in force. The published draft regulations suggest a very con
- s i d e r a b l e t i g h t e n i n g o f t h e c o n t r o l o v e r t h e a d d i t i o n o f p r e s e r v a t i v e s o r c o l o u r i n g m a t t e r s .
A further desirable amendment is the inclusion of the words "or other food" after
"cheese" in sections 5 ( d ) and 20 ( e ). At present there is no authority for the fixing of
standards for substances of naturally varying composition other than milk, cream, butter,
ghee and cheese. Government have already been approached to fix standards for tea on
similar lines to those made under the Bengal Food Adulteration Act, 1918, and later it may
appear desirable to fix standards for other foods such as coffee. Substances which are not of
varying composition do not require a standard and can be dealt with under section 5 (1) ( a)
which corresponds to section (6) of the English Act of 1875.
A further amendment is necessary to enable sample-takers to add a preservative to milk
samples, otherwise there is a possibility, particularly in the case of samples sent from a
distance, that the sample bottle may burst en route or that on arrival at the Analyst's labor
- a t o r y i t m a y b e t o o b a d l y d e c o m p o s e d f o r a n a n a l y s i s t o b e p o s s i b l e . P o w e r s t o m a k e s u c h
an addition have been taken by the Government of Bengal in their regulations under their
Food Adulteration Act but I am of opinion that under the Madras Act as it stands at present,
any such regulation would be ultra vires. On the other hand should a sample taker add a
preservative without legal authority I consider that the vendor might plead that the sample
as analysed by the public Analyst was not as sold by him, and might get a dismissal of his
case on the technical point.
Milk standards.
It is necessary to fix two standards for milk, viz., a standard for fat, and a standard for
solids-not-fat. Solids-not-fat are in solution in milk. They do not separate on standing
and cannot be removed by mechanical means. Accordingly a deficiency of solids-not-fat