The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-10

Judge Glasgow says He Need Not Know
Pumps Work

Judge Glasgow yesterday rerSarAts ar
important dsciscion IN the case Of the esrv
ssfsus george Amos, charged with sell-
.1s aouitsfaied or watered milk holding
"hsre man disposed OF milk which
ne .DSifesea TO De pure nothing having
transpired TO cause him TO make snoutr,T
ne could not be held responsible for the
AZ ana therefore was not guilty under
the ordinance.
ABOUT ten days ago Milk and Market
inspector Braymer discovered that a lot
OF Iorty-six gallons OF milk which came
~ from Renton from the farm OF W. II.
liam CONSIGNED 10 George Arnoa n
nnAfpan doing retail business on his
own account In this city. was warered.
he took sample of IL for himself gave
sample 10 Nr. Amos and dumped the
paiance OF u In the gutter His sample
was TAKEN 10 the Office OF City Chemist
bosarduss who found BY an analysis that
Out OF the forty-six gallons from ten IN
L"eiye had been water Brayuer imu,e-
1'aseiy s"ore out a warrant under ordin-
ance z.iie. which provides that s.auv one
having adulterated milk in his ro~sessior,
WIN the Intention Of Offering IN for sale
Vas guilty of violating the ordinance"
ne case was tried before Judge Glasgow
yesterday, and Market inspector BRAY
mer testified to his discovery and suhse-
iuent disposition OF the adulterated milk.
heaith Officer Palmer testified to Mr..
Amos acknowledging the ownership Of
the milk. City Chemist Rngard1ts tola az
MS analysis of IL. George Amos, I'm his
own behalf. corroborated the prosecution.
ana said that he had been getting milk
IRON this same ranch for over three
years; that IL had been frequently tested
ana found pure. that about three months
ago Mr. Putnam assumed charge OF the
ranch. and that since that time the sup
~ mill had a
thirty to forty-six and forty-eight gall
ions; that this had not particularly at
tractec his attention, as IL was the spring
time. and new cows were coming in; that
the milk had not been tested since he had
been getting II of Putnam: that four or
five OF his customers had recently COM
planned that the milk was not as good
as IL had been; that ne believed that IL
was owing TO the fact that when cows
are fresh the milk Is not as rich as I'm
the fall or winter, when the cows are
shippers that Immediately on being
notified that the milk was watered he
went Bp 10 the ranch and confronted Mr..
Putnam with the analysis. and demanded
TO know why he had put water In the
milk. Putnam denied all knowledge of
the watered milk and laid IL on his son.
who. he said. had charge of the milk.
Amos further stated that he paid IL cents
-a gallon for the milk. which was whole
sale price for frst-cIass milk: that he
had always paid Putnam promptly. and
felt much put out and aggrieyed to think
he had been imposed upon
Judge Glasgow held in passing upon
the case that Ignorance of the law is no
excuse; ignorance of the fact is de-
fense.- The law may make 1t the duty
OF one 10 exercise a certain amount or
diligence and precaution when the fail
ure to do so might be made crime.
This ordinance does not require the sell
ers OF milk 10 examine and test. and II
does not appear that the defendant here
was any more negligent than any man OF
ordinary business prudence would have
been He has been in the milk business
for three years and. has never met with
any experience calculated 10 make him
suspect that this milk was watered.
Judge Glasgow condemned that section
Of the ordinance which empowers the
marke, inspector to condemn the milk
deemed by him TO be adulterated ana
pour the same upon the ground as I'M
constitutional and In violation OF the con-
stitutionai guarantee that no one shali
be deprived OF his property without due
process OF law. He therefore could not
ind MIR. Amos guilty when he was con-
WINGED that he fAmosl did not know, or
even suspect that his milk was not anso-
lutely pure The defendant was dis
charged.