BUREAUCRATIC PROPOSALS 299 



correspond with such definition, he shall be guilty of an offence 

 against the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, 1875 to 1907. 



3. The Board might make regulations in the supposed interest 

 of the consumer which would entirely alter the Sale of Food and 

 Drugs Acts in a manner disastrous to important branches of 

 agriculture. The following examples illustrate the grave danger 

 of such legislation : 



MILK. 



If the Bill becomes law the Local Government Board may 

 make a regulation defining milk as a fluid containing, inter alia, 

 3 per cent, of butter fat. The seller of genuine milk will then be 

 liable to a penalty of 20 every time he sells milk which happens 

 to contain less than 3 per cent, of fat, and it will be no defence to 

 prove that the milk is genuine. If the Local Government Board 

 decided to fix the limit at 3.25 per cent, of butter fat, or even 

 higher, there is nothing in the Bill to prevent them doing so. 



4. Such a regulation would be contrary to the principle for 

 which the farmers of Great Britain have been contending for 

 many years past that milk which is of poor quality as regards 

 butter fat, but still is as it comes from a healthy cow, shall not 

 be treated as adulterated. It would displace the Sale of Milk 

 Regulations, 1901, issued by the Board of Agriculture, and undo 

 all the efforts made by the Chambers and agriculturists generally 

 to induce local authorities to work under the Sale of Food and 

 Drugs Acts and the Milk Regulations, with the object of pre- 

 venting adulteration, instead of using these Acts to prevent the 

 sale of milk of poor quality. The number of prosecutions and 

 convictions of perfectly innocent farmers under such a regulation 

 would be most alarming. 



BUTTER. 



5. The Local Government Board may also define butter as 

 an article containing not more than 16 per cent, of moisture. 

 Butter blended or re -worked in factories can be kept well under 

 the standard of 16 per cent., and, accordingly, under the Butter 

 Act, 1907, a butter factory is liable to conviction if butter in 

 that factory is found to contain more than the 16 per cent, of 

 water. But the case of butter made in farm dairies is quite 

 different. Under the existing law farmers' butter containing 

 more than 16 per cent, (as it often does) is presumed to be adul- 

 terated, but he still has the chance of contesting the presumption 

 by showing that he used proper precautions to prevent an excess 

 of water in his butter. The fact that a farmer has this defence 

 prevents officials of local authorities from instituting proceedings 

 recklessly in cases of excess water in farmers' butter. Under 

 such a regulation as it is open for the Local Government Board 

 to make, the farmers will have no such opportunity. 



6. Such a regulation would make it dangerous for farmers 

 to make any butter for sale. It would also annul many provisions 

 of the Butter Act, 1907, which were purposely introduced into 



