Previous Page  59 / 264 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 59 / 264 Next Page
Page Background

GAZETTE

MARCH 1977

LEGISLATION RELATING TO FOOD

Presidential Address to Medico-Legal Society

( 1976 - 77)

Thelma King, Solicitor

I propose to deal briefly with the recent historical

aspect of this subject, to outline the present statutory

safeguards and to touch on the E.E.C. Directives.

The first attempt to deal effectively with the problem

was The Public Health (Ireland) Act 1878 which (Section

132) empowered a Medical Officer of Health to inspect

food exposed for sale and if found unfit for human

consumption to remove it and have it dealt with by a

Justice.

The following Section directed the Justice to condemn

such food if it appeared to him to be unfit for human

consumption. The owner or the person in whose

possession or in whose premises the food was found was

liable to a penalty not exceeding £20 for each item so

condemned, or to imprisonment for a term of not more

than three months.

"(S. 132) Any sanitary officer of the sanitary authority

may at all reasonable times inspect and examine any

animal, carcase, meat, poultry, game, flesh, fish, fruit,

vegetables, corn, bread, flour, milk or butter exposed or

being conveyed for sale, or deposited in any place for the

purpo se of s a l e, and i n t e nd ed for the

food of man. The proof that the same was not

exposed or being conveyed or deposited for any such

purpose, or was not intended for the food of man, will

rest with the party charged. If any such animal carcase,

meat, poultry, game, etc., appears to such sanitary

officer to be diseased or unsound or unwholesome, or

unfit for the food of man, he may seize and carry away

the same himself, or by an assistant, in order to have the

same dealt with by a Justice. Should he seize the same

in a public thoroughfare, he may require the person

conveying the same to give his own name and address

and that of the owner of the article seized, and in default

or if the officer has reasonable ground for suspecting the

names or addresses so given to be false, may detain such

person and give him into custody until his real name and

address be ascertained. Any person giving a false name or

address to any officer authorised to demand the same

under this Section shall be liable to a penalty not

exceeding five pounds.

"If it appears to the Justice that any animal, carcase,

meat, poultry, game, etc., so seized is diseased, or

unsound or unwholesome or unfit for the food of man, he

shall condemn the same and order it to be destroyed or be

so disposed of as to prevent it from being exposed for sale

or used for the food of man. The person to whom the

same belongs or did belong at the time of exposure or

conveyance for sale or in whose possession or on whose

premises the same was found, shall be liable to a penalty

not exceeding twenty pounds for every animal carcase or

fish or piece of meat flesh or fish or any poultry or game

or for the parcel of fruit, vegetables, corn, bread or flour

or for the milk or butter so condemned, or, at the discretion

of the Justice without the infliction of a fine to

imprisonment for a term of not more than three months."

The Justice who, under this Section is empowered to

convict the offender may be either the Justice who may

have ordered the article to be disposed of or destroyed, or

any other Justice having jurisdiction in the place.

50

These Sections have been repealed by the Health Act

1947. The term "Justice" included any police or

Stipendiary Magistrate invested with the powers of a

Justice of the Peace in England and any Divisional Justice

in Ireland. By virtue of the Courts of Justice Act these

powers were later vested in Peace Commissioners.

The Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1875

Three years prior to the 1878 Act the Sale of Food and

Drugs Act 1875 had been enacted. The term "food" is

defined therein as "every article used for food or drink by

man, other than drugs or water".

The Act imposes a penalty of £50 for the injurious

adulteration of food intended for sale, but, if the person

charged could show that he did not know and could not

with reasonable diligence have discovered that the food

was adulterated, he could not be convicted.

The Act contains another Section which is rather

interesting in that it is designed to protect the

requirements of the individual purchaser rather than to set

an objective standard.

"(S.6) No person shall sell to the prejudice of the

purchaser any article of food or any drug which is not of

the nature, substance, and quality of the article demanded

by such purchaser, under a penalty not exceeding twenty

pounds."

The penalty for infringement of the provision is a fine

not exceeding £20. Section 25 of that Act contains a

provision which is somewhat similar to a provision in the

Act which now governs our legislation, namely the Health

Act 1947.

"If the defendant in any prosecution under this Act

proves to the satisfaction of the Justices or Court that he

had purchased the article in question as the same in

nature, substance and quality as that demanded of him by

the prosecutor and with a written warranty to that effect,

that he had no reason to believe at the time when he sold

it, that the article was otherwise, and that he sold it in the

same state as when he purchased it, he shall be discharged

from the prosecution but shall be liable to pay the costs

incurred by the prosecutor, unless he shall have given due

notice to him that he will rely on the above defence."

The abstraction of part of a food so as to affect its

quality, substance or nature also rendered the vendor

liable to a penalty. One wonders why such provisions

were not availed of by the proponents of health foods.

The Act makes provision for the appointment of

analysts and any member of the public as well as the

Medical Officer of Health was entitled to have an analysis

of any item of food carried out by the public analyst on

payment of the sum of 10s 6d.

The person causing the analysis to be made was

entitled to take proceedings for the recovery of the

penalty before any Justice in Petty Sessions.

This Act was clarified rather than amended by an Act

of 1879 entitled "An Act to Amend the Sale of Food and

Drugs Act 1875".

The Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899

We now turn to another aspect of the sale of food as

provided for in the Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899.

The Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1875 and the Sale of

Food and Drugs (Amendment) Act 1879 and the

Margarine Act 1887 together with the Act I am about to

refer to, namely the Sale of Foods and Drugs Act 1899

and the later Acts of 1907, 1935, and 1936 are

collectively known as the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.