![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0059.jpg)
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.