SHORT WEIGHT IN BREAD.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 8, 10 January 1903, Page 4

SHORT WEIGHT IN BREAD.

HOW THE PUBLIC LOSE £400,0C0 A YKAK • Petitions now being prepared for presentation to the Board of Tiude and the London County Council set forth that the London public alone are robbed of £400,000 a year in the short weight of the bread sold to them. "For once, this seems to bj really an under statement uf the f cts, for if only half the bread eatea in Londm is but two ounces shcri in weight it would amount to a robbery of J£400,000, u shout a twopenny general rate. Theris good reason for believing tha*; th. percen'age cf short weig-Jt is muc 1 greater. Tbe anoimloua s'ate of th> law is respsnsibls for this, togetbe: with the careless ignorance of the consumer. * As long ago as the reign of Georg« IV., the last Bread Act was pissed declaring that- " tread shall be sold b) weigh'." Yet p;ople still ask foi " quartern " and " half-quartern' loaves, and do not know thin they ar> entitled 1o get 41b and 21H weight o' biead respectively. Few delivery carti on hand-barrows are (quipped witl scales. The o*)ly remedy the house keeper his is to r< fu r e the biead, whicl for the majority cf Londoner?, vvb< hare running accounts with theii bakers, would mean a swift cill up o

the arrears. To save "county courting," th-) short wt-ight bread is tiker> in, and no qu»s*icns are asked. The losp-c'ors of Weights an l " Measures ucd-r tin London Count) Council haw, unfortauat ly, co powfi to deal with outdoor deliv ry cf S'o:tweight breai. Tiny can st p the coilheaver in t v e 8 let't and wMj;h hif sacks or take a sample of mi k from 'lit can, and bjth p iwere hava reeul ed ii many prosacutions and much ber.tfit t< the public. - The p .weri of the inspector in regard tJ 'ore- d are limited eolely "to loaves - bought over the counter. A of the case 3ii which they give pres'cuted shows tha' the average short 'ge on the 2U> loaf i about 3|oz*., and the average fine inflict. d about 15s. * Id is quite in accordanci wi h the tepsy-turvy nature of the facts that i» is not tbe suffering consumers who are agitating for tbe new Bread Act, but >an association of master bakers who do almost entirely a counter trade, and are thus compelled to give full weight o ran the risk of beicg prosecuted.