25(3 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc, 



Dennis J. Quinn, a duly appointed agent of the Boston inspector 

 of milk, purchased a half-pint of cream, which was delivered to- 

 said Quinn by the defendant. The analysis of said substance so 

 sold and delivered as cream showed that it contained an added 

 foreign substance, to wit, boracic acid, a compound of boron. 



The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and defendant excepted. 

 The Supreme Court overruled the exception, saying: "The word 

 milk in the Public Statutes, chapter 57, ' of the inspection and sale 

 of milk,' is shown by section 7 to include milk from which no part 

 of the cream has been removed ; and we are of the opinion that it 

 is used as a general name, and in a sense broad enough to include 

 cream. The offence under section 5, of having in one's possession, 

 with intent to sell, milk to which a foreign substance has been 

 added, is committed by having, with that intent, cream to which 

 boracic acid has been added." (Commonwealth v. Gordon, Suffolk, 

 ss., April, 1893.) 



Public Statutes, chapter 57, section 2, so far as it authorizes 

 inspectors of milk to enter all carriages used in the conveyance of 

 milk, and, whenever they have reason to believe any milk found 

 therein is adulterated, to take specimens thereof for the purpose 

 of analyzing or otherwise satisfactorily testing the same, is consti- 

 tutional. (Commonwealth ^>. Carter, 132 JSIass., 12.) 



1. A person may be convicted of selling adulterated milk, 

 under Public Statutes, chapter 57, section 5, although he did not 

 know it to be adulterated ; and an averment in tlie indictment that 

 he had such knowledge may be rejected as surplusage. 



2. It is not necessary in such indictment to aver that the milk 

 was cow's milk. 



3. An indictment alleging a sale of adulterated milk to a. 

 woman is not defeated by proof that she was married and was 

 acting as agent for her husband, if the seller had no notice, 

 express or implied, of these facts. 



4. An indictment under Public Statutes, chapter 57, section 5, 

 which charges that the defendant sold a certain quantity of 

 "adulterated milk, to which a large quantity — that is to say, 

 four quarts — of water had been added," is not bad for duplicity. 

 (Commonwealth v. Farren, 9 Allen, 489.) 



1. An indictment which alleges that the defendant "did 

 unlawfully keep, offer for sale, and sell" adulterated milk, charges 

 but one offence. 



2. In support of such indictment, one who in a great many 

 instances has used a lactometer for the purpose of testing the 

 quality and the purity of milk may testify to the result of an 

 experiment made by him with the same lactometer upon the milk 



