REPORT. 



The year 1908 has not been unusual in point of violations 

 of dairy laws ; in fact, the number of such violations has 

 been rather less than in some previous years; 104 prosecu- 

 tions for violations of oleomargarine laws, 51 for violations 

 of the renovated butter law and 1-1 for violation of the milk 

 laws is the record. The amount of oleomargarine handled 

 in the State is about the same as formerly; it is, however, 

 handled in more legitimate ways. Renovated butter seems 

 to be falling off in total sales. The greatest popular inter- 

 est has been in the cases for violation of the milk laws. 



During the early part of the year there was much agita- 

 tion in relation to the milk standard. Numerous bills were 

 presented to the Legislature, with the result that a new stand- 

 ard was adopted. The standard now calls for 12.15 per 

 cent total milk solids and 3.35 per cent milk fats through- 

 out the entire year. 



There is a strong and growing feeling in the State — a 

 feeling that is shared by nearly all classes — that the milk 

 standard law, unwisely enforced, incurs unwarranted hard- 

 ship upon the producer. In the opinion of this Bureau 

 such a law is mainly for the purpose of holding the milk 

 product at a given point, in the interests of the public at 

 large. Our policy and practice is, wherever we find milk 

 which contains added water, to put the person nearest re- 

 sponsible for the condition of such milk into court under the 

 milk adulteration act (R. L., c. 56, <§. 55). Whenever we 

 find milk below the standard and still apparently unadulter- 

 ated, we first notify the producer, and frequently offer him 

 suggestions as to how to improve its quality. We find pro- 



