19 C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. lease of the Governor's present residence expires, it should be decided that he should once more occupy the house of his predecessors, it does not appear that there has been any dis- position or irrevocable change to prevent it. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed, and the appellant will pay the costs. (HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.] MASTER BUTCHERS LIMITED DEFENDANTS, G. LAUGHTON & COOMBS LIMITED PLAINTIFFS, APPELLANTS ; AND RESPONDENTS. ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Privy Councin. 1915. ~~ ATTORNEY- GENERAL For New Sourn Waters v. WitiiaMs. Public Health—Sale of diseased animals—Knowledge that animals are diseased— H. C. or A. Health Act 1898 (S.A.) (61 & 62 Vict. No. 711), secs. 106*, 109, 111*. 1915. ee) Sec. 109 of the Health Act 1898 (S.A.) provides that 'no person shall sell, \ernounwe, consign, or expose for sale, or supply for food, any diseased animal." * Sec. 106 of the Health Act 1898 pro- vides that "all owners, on discovery that their animale are diseased, shall give written notice to the Local Board, and isolate such animals from all other animals. It shall not be a defence to any prosecution under this section that the owner did not know that the animal was diseased unless he shall also show that it was not practicable to discover such disease by the exercise of reasonable diligence." Sec. 111 provides that no person shall (infer alia) supply to any person the milk of any diseased animal, or allow any person suffering from any infectious disease to milk any cow, and continues: 'It shall not be a defence to any prosecution under this section that the owner did not know that the animal was diseased, or that the person was suffering from an infectious disease, unless he shall also show that it was not practicable to discover the fact by the exercise of reasonable diligence." March 26, Griffith O. Isaacs, Gavan Dufty and Rich JJ. Joy 350 HIGH COURT (1915. H.C. or A. Held, that knowledge that an animal is diseased is necessary to constitute 1915. an offence against sec. 109. ees Miseme Special leave to appeal from the decision of the Supreme Court of South = Buroners Australia refused. Lap. : v. f ' GLavanron AppLicaTION for special leave to appeal. ; ooMES i Fi E Lr. An action was brought in the Local Court of Adelaide by 2 —— _ G. Laughton & Coombs Ltd. against the Master Butchers Ltd. to recover £4 16s., being the price of two pigs sold by the plaintiffs ; to the defendants by auction. The defendants pleaded that the pigs were diseased animals, and, therefore, that the sale was contrary to sec. 109 of the Health Act 1898. The sale was subject to the condition that the pigs were not warranted free from disease. The Special Magistrate found that at the time the pigs were sold they were diseased, and gave judgment for the | defendants, but he reserved for the Supreme Court the question whether the sale was contrary to the provisions of sec. 109 and illegal without proof of mens rea. The Supreme Court answered the question in the negative. The defendants now applied to the High Court for special leave to appeal from that decision. Starke, for the applicants, referred to secs. 106, 109 and 111 of the Health Act 1898. GrirritH C.J. We do not see any reason to doubt the accuracy of the conclusion to which the Supreme Court came. The appli- cation will be refused. : : Special leave to appeal refused. Solicitor, H. M. Lee, for E. J. W. Ashton, Adelaide. Body