262 THE JUDGE'S CHABGE. 



provisions for the security of life and health in the city of New 

 York, and therein to distribute appropriate powers and duties to 

 the members and employees of the Board of Health, which shall be 

 published in the City Becord. Any violation of said code shall be 

 treated and punished as a misdemeanor." It has been proved in a 

 satisfactory manner by the certificate of the Clerk of the Board of 

 Health, that on the 23d of February, 1876, the Board of Health 

 adopted this ordinance, which I f will read to you : " Section 186. 

 No milk which has been watered, adulterated, reduced, or changed 

 in any respect by the addition of water or other substance, or by 

 the removal of cream, shall be brought into, held, kept, or offered 

 for sale at any place in the city of New York, nor shall any one 

 keep, have, or offer for sale in the said city any such milk." You 

 will notice that the words of the section of the sanitary code which 

 I have read to you are not that no one shall keep knowingly for 

 sale milk which has been watered, adulterated, reduced, or changed 

 by the addition of water. The question of the constitutionality of 

 the act to authorize the Board of Health to pass ordinances un- 

 known to the Legislature, and which were thereafter to be passed, 

 declaring violations of such unknown ordinances to be misdemean- 

 ors that question has not been raised ; but, if it had, I have 

 looked over the opinion of Judge Daniels, in another milk case, at 

 the General Term, and I am inclined to think that the General 

 Term intended to pass upon that very question. They held that 

 that section of the act of 1873, a portion of which I read to you, was 

 constitutional ; so I understand the opinion. It is plain, I think, 

 that the word milk in this ordinance means cows' milk, and I charge 

 as matter of law that this is the meaning of the word, so far as I 

 have the right to charge that matter as matter of law. The indict- 

 ment on which the defendant is being tried has two counts. The 

 first charges that on the 25th day of August, 1876, the defendant 

 unlawfully and knowingly exposed for sale at his store in the city 

 of New York blank quarts (the number not being filled in in the count, 

 but being left blank) of impure, adulterated, and unwholesome 

 milk, against the form of the statute. I think it may be presumed 

 that that count was drawn under the act of the Legislature passed 

 in 1864 The second count of the indictment charges that the 

 defendant, on the 25th of August, 1876, at his store and place of 



