70 THE ANALYST. --- LAW REPORTS, S~GULAR FOOD AND bRuc+s Am PROSEOUPION,-DUY~C~ Brown, grocer, 300, Nuneaton Street, was charged before Sheriff Balfour, at the Glasgow Sheriff Summary Court yesterday, with a contravention of section d of the Sale of Rood and Drugs Aot, 1875, in so far as he sold to the Sanitary Department inspectors, on 9th January, a $lb, of black pepper whioh wag not of the nature, substance, and quality demanded, in respect that it contained 20 per cent. or thereby of added staroh. The defender admitted the oharge, and said he merely sold the pepper ge he had received it from a wholesale merchant. The aadhry iwpectors were examined, and Dr. Tatlock, the city analyst, confirmed their testimony by stating that on analysis he found the pepper in question had 20 per cent.more starch than was to be expected. Professor Dittmar, who was examined for the defence, stated that from the sample of pepper he had examined he considered there was a possibiGty of there being 10, 15, or 20 per cent. of added starch. The Sheriff held that opinion to be practically in accordance with Ilr. Tatlock’s. The Sheriff, in giving his decision, said this was the first prosecution of the kind he had heard of in Glasgow. The evidence of the analysts was that the effect of the added starch was not injurious to the pepper in any way, but only reduced its strength. It might be said for the revpondeat that he bought the pepper in the ordinaryTHE ANALYST. 71 way from a wholesale merchant, and he was not aware of the inferiority of it.At the same f i e , under the Act he was liable for tho sale. The evidence of the chemists practically was the same, and established the addition of the 20 per cent. of foreign starch. In the whole circumstances, seeing that that it was the first prosecution of the k i d , he inflicted the mitigated penalty of 10s. SIINCIUL~R Po1NTo-Iwportnfit to SeZlelr of Milk and Wntev.-At the Buckrose Sessions, Norton, on Saturday, before Mr. W. Preston and Captain Unett, Alfred Mackling, of Norton, &-seller, was charged by Superintendent Farrah with refusing to sen him, for purposes of analysis, a. pint of milk. The officer met defendant in the street, and when he a M for a pint of milk, Mackliu replied, I am not selling milk ; 1 am selling milk and water.” (Laughter,) Superintendent X’arrah demanded (( a pint of whatever it was,” and pulled out hh purse to pay for it, but defendant refused to comply.Mr, F. Langborne, who appeared for the defendant, argued that the offence hadnot beencommitted, seeing that the officer had made no “legal ” tender of the money. He admitted that he only “showed ” defendant his purse, and the Act said the price was to be ((tendered.” The Bench ruled the objection to be fatal, and dismissed the case. PERBISPENT MILK ADumEwmoN.-James DearPley, milk hawker, of Silver-street, Huddersfield, was summoned for selling impure milk. Mr. Kirk, the chief sanitary inspector, prosecuted, and said he felt he WAS quite justifled in describing the case as the worst that had ever come before that Court, The sample of milk in question had been deprived of the whole of its butter fat, aad besides that there had been agreat addition of water.Thewhole of the milk wassent to the Borough Analyst, and his certificate was then put in and read by the Deputy Clerk. It was to the effect that the milk consisted of the following parts :-Butter fat, 063 per cent. ; solids, not fat, 7.94 per cent. ; water, 91.43 per cent, The Borough Analyst was of opinion that the sample consisted of 12 per cent. of added water, and that 75 per cent. of its butter fat had been abstracted. It was stated that the defendant had been fined four times previously in that Court for selling impure milk in the BUMS of $6, 610,315, and $20 ; total, 2650. The Magistrates again fined the defendant, who did not appear, 820 and costs.TEE SAJ,E OF FOOD AuT.-AL the Liverpool County Magistrate’s Court, on Saturday, before MessrB. G. H. Horsfall, a. W. Noss, and A. Earle, Mr. James Sedson, grocer and provision dealer, of Rice Lane, Walton, wab charged with selling adulterated butter. Police-constable 818 said he visited the defendant’s shop on February 19th, and purchased a pound of butter for Is. 2d. He then informed him that he had made the purchase for the purpose of having it analysed, and offered to leave a portion at the shop. The defendant replied that it was butterine. Mr. Superintendent Walsh produced an _analy- sis of the butter, showing that it contained 70 per cent. of beef fat. In reply t J the Bench the police officer said butterine was sold from Sd, per lb. upwards.The magistrates told the defendant that he was selling as butter an article which he knew to be butterine, and imposed a penalty of 40s. and costs.- &fr, C. Bocock, grooer and provision dealer, Walton Village, was summoned for a airnilas offence, and fined 40s. and cost8. The butter had been adulterated to the extent of 76 per cent. of beef fat.-’M”. I?. SynaFh, grocer and provision dealer, Rice Lane, Walton,‘was also summoned for selling butter which contamed 76 per cent, of beef fat, Defendant denied that he sold the d c l e as butter, and said the most ignorant housekeeper knew that what was sold for 1s. a pound was not pure butter. It was a (6 French oomposition.” Superintendent Walsh said he had bought butter at 1s. a pound, The Bench imposed At the Wandsworth Police Court, on Tuesday, Mr. Ernest Lloyd, grocer, Battersea Park Road, was summoned before Mr.SheiI, by Nr. Corsellis, clerk of the Wandsworth Board of Works, for selling coffee adulterated with chicory. Mr. Corsellis produced a cartificate of the analj st showing that the sample of coffee contained 45 per cent. of ohicory. The defendant said it was sold as a mixture of coffee and chicory, and produced tt label to show the way in which the stamp was used. MI?. J. A. Smith, the inspector, said that aftes he had purchased the coffee, the defendant told him tlie cover was stamped. He examined the packet of coffee, but he was unable to see the stamp. Mr. Sheil looked at the coves produced by the inspector, and said that the stamp was very faintly printed.As it was folded with the Atamp inside the case had the appearance of fraud. He fined the defendant &lo with 12s. 6d. costs. Mr. Emmerson subsequently appealed to the magistrate to reduce the penalty, a8 the defendant was unablc to pay it. He Naid chicory was not injurious. The inspeotor said it was injurious in some cases. Mr. Sheil refused to alter his decision, but allowed the defendant time to pay the money. AN UNFORTUNATE SANITARY INsPEcToB.-At the meeting of the commissioners for the Burgh of Govanhill (a mburb of Glasgow), held on Tuesday-Bailie Hugh McDougall, jm., grocer, Mount Florida, presiding. Mr. Thomas, the sanitary inspectur, stated that he was appointed three years ago by the Commissioners of Supply for the county 8s inspector under the Food and Drags Act at a salary of 45 per annurn, but he had some diflioulty in getting the expenses paid.Meanwhile there were a number of cases of adulteration of food going on in the burgh, which he felt he was powerless to dea? penalty of 40s. and costs,72 THE ANALYST. with without authoritative instructions which would guarantee expenses, He could point to $our shops where butterine was sold deliberately as butter’. Last Friday he went to one of these shops for butter, and asked the salesman if it redly was butter, The reply was whispered, ‘‘ He’s no in -el’ ; but it8 butterhe.” (Laughter.) He was anxious to take the matter up, but must wait instructions. Mr, Bobertson, the clerk, said that unfortunately the local authority of the burgh was not the local authority under the Food and Drugs Act, and he was afraid the Commissionerk? could not give instructions without incurring liability for the expense.He suggested that the Provost, as an ex o$ico member of the County Commission, should be asked to bring the matter up before that Board. This was agreed to. ALLEGED ADULTERATION BY A PUBmum.-At the Sessions House, Boston, on Wednesday, the adjourned hearing of the charge against Mr. John Willey, of Kirton, for selling beer adulterated with 60 grains of salt per gallon,-was heard, and excited considerable interest, the court being’ filled with listeners.--Mr. B. B. Dyer, instructed by the Boston Licensed Victuallers Association for the defence, in the course of his remarks said the water used by Mr. Willey naturally contained a large pro- portion of salt, which, in the process of brewing, would be increased to the amount found in the beer, he had had the water and beer both analysed, the analyst being in court to give evidence.-Mr, Charles H.Southwell was called, and in amwer to Mr. Dyer, said he was a pharmaceutical chemist by ex- amination, and had been engaged in chemical pursuits aU his life. Amongst other appointments he had held one as rn-anager and analyst in a large manufnchiring pharmaceutical establishment. He read the following ceilificates :- ‘ 4 No. 1, ANAXYTIUAL REPORT :-I have quantitatively examined for salt a sample of water received by me from M i Willey on the 11th Feb., 1884. It contains 30.28grains of AlkalineChlorides, i.e, salt, per imperial gallon. Beer brewed with such water would contain48 to 60 grains of salt per gallon, per- haps more ; the ingredients used in brewing and the concentration of the chlorides through loss of water by boiling mould increase the amount of salt 18 to 30 grains per gallon.An analysis of the water used by Messrs. Allsopp and Go., by Dr. Henry Bottinger, vide ‘( Bood and its Adulteration,” by HaRsaU, page 681, gives 10’12 grains of salt (Ch1oride:of Sodium) per gallon. The beer brewedfrom such water, according to the same authority, contains 28 grains of (Alkaline Chlorides salt) per imperial gallon ; thus the process of brewing did in that case increase the amount of salt nearly 18 grains per gallon. The water received from Mr. Willey by me was contained in a chemically clean bottle provided by me for the purpose.It wa8 sealed with the monogram 9. C., the following certificate being attached-LA cer- tificate from Dr. Story witnessing the collection of the water.1-CHAS. H. SOUTHWELL, Pharmaceutical Chemist, Boston.” 6 1 No. 2, A~.LYTICAL REPOBT.-I have quantitatively tested for salt, a sample of beer received by me from Mi-. Willey on the 12th February, 1884. It contains 12’7G grains of chlorine per imperial gaJ,Ion, equivalent to 64 grains of Chloride of Sodium (salt). The beer was contained in a wine bottlo insecurely corked with a piece of old cork, which might have been easily extracted without injuring the seal. This manner of collection might materially alter the result of the analysis. Samples of beer for analysis &odd be collected in chemically clean bottles closed with glass atoppers.--Cms.H. SOTJT-L, phma,ceutical Chemist, 33ostOn.” supt. Crawford took exception to the accusation against him of unfairness j n collecting the k r . Mr, Southwell explained that no accusation waa intended, nor even an imputation. He merely drew attention to the slovenly way of collecthg samples for analysis (producing the bottle.) He further explained that the time employed by brewers for boiling varied from two to five hours ; he believed ~ S O P P S boiled two hours. Of course the more time taken in boiling the more salt would be fond, the water evaporating and the salt remaining.-The bench after this evidence, irnmediatel~ dismim;eil the case. BOOKS, &c., RECEIVED. The Chemist and Druggist ; TheBrewers’ Guardian ; The British Medical Journal ; The Pharma- ceutical Journal ; The Sanitary Record; The Miller; The Provisioner; The Practitioner; New Remedies ; Proceedings of the American Chemical Society ; The Inventors’ Record ; New Pork Public Health ; The Scientifia Amerioan ; Society of Arts Journal ; Sanitary Engineer of New Pork ; Cowkeeper and Dairyman’s Journd ; Sugar Cane ; Country Brewers’ Gazette ; The Medical Record ; The Grocers’ Gazette ; London Water Supply, by hokes, Odling and Tidy ; Chemical Review ; Independent Oil and Drug Journal and Paint Review ; Soience Monthly ; Journal of the Society of Chemical Industry,