§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to the paragraph in the interim Report of the Butter Regulations Committee in which it is said—
The Committee, moreover, understand that the vendors of this type of butter containing water in excess of the proposed official limit would he legally protected, provided that a sufficient disclosure is made to the purchaser. This consideration finally decided the Committee to recommend a single limit, and to leave it to the vendors of Irish salt firkin butter to protect themselves in the simple manner indicated.And whether, in view of the crisis which may be said to have arisen in the butter trade, he will say whether the legal advisers of the Department have been con sulted Upon this matter, and whether they agreed with the view of the law expressed in this paragraph of the Report of the Committee.
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. HANBURY, Preston)I had no power under the statute to do more than state what the standard should be—and in the opinion of my legal advisers the fact of the fixing of a standard did not necessarily prevent disclosure of an excess of water being a sufficient defence—but I cannot, of course, say what view the Courts may take. In any case, the Report of the Committee was intended, I understand, to do no more than safeguard, for a reasonable period, the old-fashioned industry in which brine is used for the purpose of preserving the butter. In any steps I have to take to prevent the fraudulent addition of water—an object in which all makers and sellers of genuine butter in both countries are interested—the view taken by the Committee as to brine preserved butter will be recognised.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDDo I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that the opinion of the legal advisers of the Department is that disclosure is a protection?
§ MR. HANBURYThat is so.