ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN87803FP007

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN87803BP009

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE A N A L Y S T . WATER AN ALP SIS . WE have before drawn attention to the question of the analysis of water by public analysts. There is no doubt that water ought in the ordinary course to form a fairly remunerative part of an analyst’s practice, and that the ofice of public analyst should secure for a competent man an increase in the number of samples of water submitted to him. But we regret to have to point out once more that a number of Public Analysts appear t o be analysing waters as if they were included under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act.We thought some time ago it was enough merely to draw attention to the second section of that Act ; that section enacts that the term ‘‘ food shall include every article used for food or drink by man OTHER THAN DRUGIS OR WATER.” There are no other words in the Act which in any way qualify or limit the definition here given, and it is perfectly clear that all public analysts are entitled to charge for samples of water as if they mere independent or private samples instead of analysing them as part of their official duties as public analysts.Some few may consider that this is a matter which concerns themselves only, but it does not appear so to us.On the contrary it is tolerably notorious that because in some districts samples of water are taken as if they were samples of food, analysts in other districts are expected to do work which the Act never intended to be given to them a t unremunerative rates. We do trust that in future we shall not hear of any samples of water being analysed except for separate fees on a fair scale.SOCIETY OF PUBLIC ANALYSTS. As the Neeting of this Society is held on the day we go to press we are compelled to hold over our Report of the Meeting until our next number, but we publish one or two papers which are to be read before the Society on that occasion. THE AMENDMENT OF THE SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS ACT. BY A. WYNTER BLYTH.Read before the Xociety of Public Analysts, on the 20th Zarch, 18%. IN this short paper I am going to strictly confine my remarks to a proposition or suggestion substituting a peculiar system of reference from one analyst to another, instead of the present Court of Appeal in Somerset House. That the present system is in the highest degree unsatisfactory, not alone food analysts but the general public are quite united in agreeing, and without attempting to prove what requires no proof, I may shortly state that in nine cases out of ten it is, as ha8 been frequently pointed out, a reference from a higher to a lower authority.If, for example, Dr. Duprk, whose ex- perience in the analysis of wine must be very great, should certify to the eophistication of a given sample, his decision is liable to be reversed by chemists, who have never by publication, or in any other manner, proved that they possess any special practice in, or knowledge of, that particular subject.Snch a case would be somevhat analagous t o the248 THE ANALYST. decision of a judge, versed in criminal law, being referred to ti solicitor in Government pay.If, however, experience had in any way justified the objectionable clause in the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, the anomaly, though still existing, would not have been worth notice ; but experience more and more serves to strengthen the suspicions that secret methods infallibly excite, and the vague reticence and inconsistency of the Government certificates confuse the magistracy, perplex the analyst, and provoke a t once the gratitude and contempt of the guilty tradesman.Opinions may differ as to the necessity of appeal at all, although there can be no difference as to the undesirability of continuing the present system. Allowing, however, that in the nearly 16,000 analyses of food which appear to be made yearly a few mistakes are possible, it may be freely conceded that any suggestion which would protect a really honest trader from the accident of‘ a false accusation on the one hand, and on the other support the food analyst in the conscientious discharge of what is often an unpleasant duty, Ehould be considered.The aim of appeal is the protection of the innocent, not the double conviction of the fraudulent ; and i t is self-evident, that the best protection of the former is to take every precaution that the accusation is well founded, and to render it almost impossible for any analyst, even should it happen that he is hopelessly unfit for his post, to give an untrue certificate, for it must be remembered that in the case of an accusation, subsequently shown to be unfounded, the injury lies in the accusation itself, and cannot be wiped away from record or memory; nor can you ensure that each living soul, who has heard or read the original charge, shall also hear or read the subsequent justification, and even if that could be done, how often it happens that the former is spirited and sharp, the latter dull.My proposal is this :- The analysis of all adulterated samples, 6y two independent analysts, the local analyst No charge heard, or summons granted unless supported by a joint certificate.This scheme is neither wild nor visionary. and a referee. It would require a system of referees, which might follow the registration divisions, viz., one or more for the Midland Counties, one or more for the Northern, for the South Western, &c., &c., the Metropolis and certain large towns being, of course, treated separately.The referees would naturally be appointed from the Society of Food Analysts, or at all events no referee who had not paid attention to the subject could be cousidered a desirable appointment. The details of the system would be something like the following :-There would be, say referees, A, B, C, D, for the Northern, Midland, South Western, and Eastern Counties, and taking the district A there would be analysts d, e, f.Either of the latter receives from their inspectors a certain number cf samples ; a few of these are found adulterated. The local analyst immediately forwards to A his sample, stating, if neces- sary, the processes he has employed and his conclusions. He also sends notice to the person who submitted to him the sample requesting him to forward his sample to the referee.If the conclusions of the latter are pretty well identical with the former, the referee merely countersigns the certificate ; if he differs entirely, a certificate would be merely given that there is a difference of opinion with regard to the sample in question, and then, of course, no action could be taken.Tf the referees A, B, C, D, are themselres in practice as food analysts, A’s samplesT3E ANALYST. 249 would go to B, B’s to C, and C’s to D, or otherwise as the Local Government Board might direct. The expense of the double analysis should, in every instance, where a conviction is obtained, be deemed part of the costs-the few cases in which a difference of opinion would exist, would have to be paid by Government.There should be no jealousy with rcgard to the appointment of the referees; they would probably be selected by the Local Government Board; and there should, on the part of the referees, be no assumption of superiority or precedence over their brother analysts. The only real objection to the scheme that I see is the possible protection and perpetuation of incompetence, as we all know several so-called analysts have disappeared, having been compelled to resign their posts, and one can readily pee that a competent referee would protect a very ignorant man from the ordeal of cross-examination in a public court. This is not, however, an insuperable difficulty, for I apprehend that all the certificates, both of conviction and of difference, could be transmitted to the Local Government Board, and that thus an analyst, unfit for his post, would be quickly dis- corered and dismissed. We can, on very few questions, hold the same opinions, but should a majority of the food analysts agree with me as to the desirability and expediency of this acheme, I trust they w i l l lose no time in trying to get it embodied in any amcnded act.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300247

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

T3E ANALYST. 249 ON D I S E A S E D M I L K . BY C. HEISCH, F.C.S. Read before the Society of Public Analysts, on 1st Hay, 1878. THE question of milk from diseased cows having been recently, for the second time, brought under my notice, both by the cases of Mr. Wiper, at Plumstead, and one sample received by myself from Hampstead, I am induced to lay before the society the details, not so much of the recent case (of which, beyond the microscopical appearances, I know nothing), as of two which came to me aome time since, of which, through the courtesy of the owner of the cows, I got a more than usually complete history, though some points were not as clear as could have been wished ; nevertheless, some features of the case were so peculiar and of such interest as to be worthy of note.First, with respect to the recent case. The milk presented no peculiar appearance; the cream rose in the ordinary way, and had the ordinary colour. On examining a drop under the microscope I found numerous bodies similar to those deecribed by Nr. Wynter Blyth, in his paper read before the Society and published in its Proceedings* (which, for convenience, I Rhall speak of as Blyth’s bodies), pus corpuscles, blood corpuscles, and pieces of skin strongly tinged with blood.Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 *32 Solids not Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-66 Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.67 Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -65 Cream 10 per cent.by volume. Chemical analysis showed little peculiarity. Of this case I have no further history, the Vestry not yet baving made up its mind about prosecuting * Bee vol. 1, p. 239.250 THE ANALYST. On January 17th, 1876, I receiwd from a prirate client two samples of milk and one of cream, with the intimation that all the members of the family who used the milk had been ill, and it was believed the illness was caused by the milk.The cream was from a mixture of the milk of both the cows, which had yielded the samples of milk. No 1 gave the following results :- Total Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1397 Solids not Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.61 Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4-35 Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *71 Cream 12 per cent. by volume. Examined under the microscope, showed many Blyth’s bodies larger than those mentioned in his paper ; blood corpuscles and unmistakable blood bands in the green, when viewed in the spectroscope. All the foreign bodies rose to the surface with the cream, leaving the milk free. No.2 gave :-- Total solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.64 Solids not fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.64 Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -90 Ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -60 Microscope showed colostrum, or a body closely resembling it; blood corpuscles and blood bands in spectroscope.No. 3. The cream had a peculiar reddish colour, and showed all the above ap- pearances in a marked degree. I subsequently received the following particulars from the gentleman m7ho owned the corns :- Both cows had foot and mouth disease, not severely, in July, and to all appearance quite recovered; both were in calf. No. 2, a young cow, calved in August; the family being from home, all her cream was made into butter, and sent t o them; the skim milk being used by the servants.The butter milk was given to the pigs; as they had been suffering from foot and mouth disease, no particular notice was taken of its effect. Cow No. 1, an old one, calved on December 24th ; her milk was not used till January 1 lth. Two days after, the children and nurses using the new milk, and those members of the family who used cream, were attacked with symptoms strongly resembling severe influenza, were very feverish and suffered from great eoreness of the inside of the mouth, throat, and tongue, which were covered with small pustules.The servants, who took only the skim milk, were unaffected. One child, who for two days refused everything but water, got pretty well rid of her symptoms, but they returned as Boon as she began to use the milk.The use of the milk was then given up, and all bad symptoms disappeared. The samples of milk were then sent to me, and the results of the examination were as above given. The reason both milks were sent, though no mischief had been traced t o No. 2, was that the milk of the two cows had been mixed before using.On 24th January I received two more samples of milk from the same cows, which gave the following results :- No. 1.- No ill-effects were produced. Total Bolids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-77 Solids not fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-60 Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-17 Ad1 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -68 The cream was very thick, of a slightly reddish colour. The microscope showed aTHE ANALYST. 25 1 ~ few of Blyth’s bodies, not so many as on the 17th, and the b1 visible. bands were scarcely The skim milk as before was quite free from abnormal substances. No. 2.- Total solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.86 Solids not fat . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-82 Fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.04 Ash... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -82 Microscope showed colostrum-like bodies and casts of the mammary glands, and blood bands were visible in spectroscope. The remarkable change in the character of this milk leads to the idea that first runnings had been sent in one case and last in the other, but the appearance of colostrum, or a body so like it as to be undistinguiehable from it, so long after calving is very remarkable.On February 1st 1 heard from the owner that they were again using the milk with no bad results. The case of cow No. 1, to which alone mischief was traced with anything like clezrness, seems t o be one of those in which disease after it has disappeared i n a pregnant animal re-appears in some form after confinement, sometimes the young animal being affected, and sometimes, as in this case, the milk ; but such a case raises the somewhat difficult question horn far a milkman can be held reponsible for selling milk containing all these abnormal constituents, and capable of creating so much mischief, if the cow from which it is obtained is apparently in perfect health ? It Todd seem as if no milk from a cow which has been ill during pregnancy ought t o be sold till it has been examined and found free from abnormal consituents.I n both these cases all the abnormal constituents rose with the cream, which was not the case either with the sample recently sent from Hampstead or with Mr. Wigner’s samples.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300249

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 25 1 ON SOME RECENT CASES OF DISEASED MLLK. By G. W. WIGNEB, F.C.S. Read before the Society of Public AnaZysts, on the 1st Hay, 1878. I HAVE recently had some samples of diseased milk brought to me officially by the inspectors of one of my districts, and they present such features of interest, not only chemically and microscopically, but in view of the fact that for the third time the magistrate has convicted where diseased milk has been sold, that for the general in- formation of others I give the characteristics of the milk in question.The immediate cause which led to their being brought to me was that an outbreak of fever had occurred almost simultaneously through a considerable portion of Lee, Kidbrook, and Blackheath, and consequently, as the outbreak mas supposed to be due to the milk, I directed the inspectors to bring me samples from every milkman supplying those districts.The first of the diseased samples was received by me on the 19th March ; its colour had a decided tinge of blood, which was visible even through the tinted glass of the common medicine bottle in which it was contained. The portion I poured into the cream tube had a blood or orange wine tint, and the cream which rose in the tube showed this peculiar colour still more markedly.As soon a8 the inspector brought the sample I called his attention to its peculiar tint, but he had receiyed no information from the vendor which threw any light on the matter. I commenced the n,icroseopicd exarninatic,n almost immediutely, and found that the252 THE ANALYST.sample showed a very large number of pus corpuscles rery different in their appearance from the true fat corpuscles of milk, and the addition of a minute drop of ether to the milk on the slide brought up the tristellate nwleus very distinctly in many of them. I n some parts of the slide there was a distinct reddish colouration, which, however, was not uniformly spread over the whole field.Nearly every field contained a considerable number of pieces of epithelial matter and other animal debris, mostly tinged at the edges with a blood colour. The micro-spectroscope showed blood bands plainly when any of these blood tinged pieces of epithelial matter were in focus, but when the fieid was shut down by a diaphragm so as not to include any of the streaked pieces i t was not possible to detect the blood bands, Blood discs could be seen in some few places, sometimes singly but mostly arranged in groups like clotted blood. I n other parts of the slides, but irregularly distributed, were a considerable number of the peculiar bodies described by Mr.Wynter Blyth, in Theproceedings of the Society of Public Analysts," as being found in milk yielded by cows suffering from foot and mouth disease ; aome of these bodies were scimitar shaped, and others more closely resem bled the appearance which would be produced by the coalescence of five or six fat globules in an almost straight line, the division between the globules being almost entirely obliterated.On the second day the physical characteristic8 of the milk as distinguished from the microscopical were still more indicatire of peculiarity.The residue of the sample remaining in the bottle had not curdled in the ordinary way in which milk curdles when it turns SOU, but had partially solidified much in the same way as ordinary colostrum milk solidifies when it is boiled-via., to a consistency closely resembling that of ordinary blancmange in hot weather.This blancmange adhered with some little force to the sides of the bottle, and when the latter was shaken so as to detach the blancmange the glass was left quite clean, while the milk itself moved about in the bottle, still retaining its semi-fluid condition. The cream had, of course, to some extent risen t o the top of the bottle, and was of an orange colour, while the colour of the lower part of the milk was very little changed.I n the cream tube the top surface of the cream had by this time (is% after 24 hours) assumed an unusual appearance, being mottled i n colour and corrugated, resembling more closely the crust of a Stilton cheese than any other common object with which I can compare it. The microscope still showed many of Blyth's bodies although not so many as on the previous dsS ; many colourless blood corpuscles mere visible, and by using a %-inch objective and B eyepiece it was easy to count a considerable number of coloured ones.The pieces of skin, which were stained with blood, were as visible as before, and the colour did not appear to have altered in intensity. When a small portion of the cream alone was taken out on the point of a stirring rod it was found that the abnormal characteristics of the milk were exaggerated in the cream- i.s., there was a larger proportion of the foreign bodies than was present in the whole milk sample, evidently showing that there was a tendency in the cream on rising to entangle with it the pus and blood corpuscles.On the third day there wad a atill further change in the appearance of the cream tube, for the top of the cream was covered with a peculiar and (to me) unknown fungus, although the tube had been standing side by side with seven other samples of the same date, none of which presented that appearance.The lower part of the milk in the tube was breaking up in a manner which as far as I can judge at present is perfectly characteristic * See Vol.1, page 239.THE ANALYST. 253 of diseased milk. Instead of curdling to an irregular mass, or instead of the separation of the whey taking place up to a certain level in the tube, the whey had separated in peculiar streaks, running in a vertical or almost vertical direction up and down the tube, these streaks being from 9 to inch wide, and in some cases as much as 3 inches long.The whey viewed in these streaks against the background of curd in the tube had a tint resembling Irish whisky. On this day I examined 10 or 12 slides but I could not succeed in detecting more than 3 or 4 of Blyth’s bodies. Here then we have a tolerably convincing proof that whatever these bodies may be they disappear either by becoming transparent or by breaking up as the milk decomposes.Some of the pus and blood corpuscles were still visible, but the number of the former was decidedly less, and some of them seemed to be bursting or else gradually becoming eo transparert as to be invisible. On the sixth day the sample was so much decomposed that if I had then examined it for the first time, although I should certainly have said that it presented some abnormal characteristics, I should have been unable to identify them in the way I have already described.I n other words, for practical work the examination on this day would have been useless. Having obtained such results as these I had no hesitation, notwithstanding that the chemical results were perfectly consistent with genuine milk, in certifying that the sample came wholly or in part from a diseased cow, and was therefme unfit for human food.I did not state that it was much more likely t o be an admixture of the milk of a diseased cow *ith the milk of healthy cows, but still from the streaky condition of the milk and by the slides which I examined, I am inclined to that opinion. The above results being so unsatisfactory I directed the Inspector on the 20th March --i.e., one day after receiving the fist sample-to procure another sample from the same vendor, I examined this sample in precisely the same way and with the earn18 precau- tions, but the difference between the microscopical appearance of the two samples was very slight, the second one contained rather fewer pus and blood corpuscles, and I think there were also fewer of Blyth’s bodies present, but in other respects the general characteristics of the samples were as nearly as possible the same.The milk in the cream tube had a little higher colow, perhaps more correctly described as a brighter colour. The chemical results of the second sample were slightly better, showing solids not fat 9.7 instead of 9.3.Mr. Heisch examined both samplee at my request within a very short time of their reception by me, in fact the second sample he examined as soon as I did, and his results fully confirmed my own. Here, therefore, we have a clear case of diseased milk sold for ordinary consumption. The question now comes what was the character of the disease, and the evidence which was given on the hearing of the case threw Some light on this, although unfortunately it did not fully identify the source from which the milk came; that is, although it waB proved that it came from a dairy one cow in which was diseased, it was not proved whether the actual churn from which the sample was taken contained any of this diseased cow’s milk.I, however, think the inference is clear that it did, and for these reasons-My first sample was purchased by the inspector on the morning of the 39th March ; on the evening of the 20th, finding that the milk was abnormal, I wrote to the inspector for a seeond sample, On the same day-the 20th-one of the defendant’s cowa254 THE ANALYST.presented signs of illness, and his attention was drawn to it. On the 2lst the lnepector received my letter requesting a second sample, but he had not time to procure it that day.On that day (the 21st) the defendant came to the conclusion that the cow was suffering from lung disease, and sent for a veterinary surgeon. On the morning of the 22nd, according to the evidence, the cow had very nearly “gone off” milk. The Inspector bought another sample that day which was characterised by the defendant’s wife as being streaky, and after the bottle was filled the defendant’s wife said it ‘‘ must have had blood in it ” ; consequently the Inspector emptied the bottle and took another sample from the same churn.Later on the same day (the 22nd) the veterinary aurgeon came and fiaw the cow, which he said was suffering from pleuro-pneumonia, and it was consequently killed.The evidence, therefore, that the milk which I pronounced diseased came from this cow is purely circumstantial, but the chain of circumstances is so complete that I think there is no fair reason to doubt that it was so. In considering, however, the results I obtained, and my reasons for saying that I thought the sample injurious t o health, two or three other points must be borne in mind.My reason for classing it as an injurious sample was that I believe the presence of pus or blood corpuscles, or of any abnormal ingredients of this Eind in milk must, to some extent, be liable to produce gastric irritation, and therefore to prove injurious to health; but, on the other hand, it must be pointed out that the outbreak of fever which led to the examinations of these milks was not due to the milk from this particular diseased cow, as the fever had occurred some two or three weeks before the sale of this diseased milk, and L cannot find any evidence to prove, or to lead me to think, that the cow had been ill more than a few days.There were, however, clear proofs that there had been other cases of pleuro-pneumonia in cows in the same district, just about the time when the fever broke out.As there was nopost mortem examination of the cow, it is not possible to say whether the pleuro-pneumonia was complicated by any disease of the udder or not, but the defendant did not produce any evidence of disease or injury to any other cow, or of injury to the diseased cow. One of the most important lessons to be derived from this case is the absolute neccs- sity of making a microscopical examination of every sample of milk, and of doing so immediately the sample is received. The case should also serve as a hint to those who still believe that the determinations of the solids not fat and fat are all that is requisite, and that the use of the microscope is unnecessary. In this case, although feyer had been spreading through the district in which this milk was being distributed, and although the milk was conclusively proved to have been diseased, Set the samples were of such a character as to satisfactorily PUSS an ordinary chemical analysis.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300251

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

254 THE ANALYST. THE BROMSGROVE MILK CASE. WITH reference to this case, a report of which appeared in our March number, page 227, we reprint from the Worcesterdiive Chronicle the following report of Dr. Swete, presented to the Worcestershire Quarter Sessions :- I have the honour to report to you that, during the last quarter, I have received for analysis 27 samples of food. Ten of these were milk, of which 2 were adulterated with water seriously, 1 to a very slight degree, and 7 were genuine ; 4 of butter, which were genuine-1 sample had the low melting point and general appearance of butterine, but a complete analysis proved it to be genuine, 12 of bread, 9 genuine and 3 contained alum in small quantities, but insufficient to suppose a wilful adulteration.I have d s o received 6 samples of wiiter, 4 were polluted and 1 wholesome, Some seeds and the body of a pigeon audTHE ANALYST.255 the crop of a bird were brouqht to me by thepolice for analysis, from Upton-on-Severn, I found that the birds had been poisoned by strychnine, and that the seeds were wheat, boiled with the seeds of strychnos nux vomica, containing thr deadly poison of strychnine and mucine in large quantity.The person who exposed these seeds was fined for the offence. I append to my report the tahulated statement required by the Local Government Board. In my last report I stated that I had received 6 samples of milk from Bromsgrove, of which 6 were adulterated and 1 (marked W) of excellent quality. I regret to state that in the case of Y. B.(Thomae Fisher) I was in error, and in justice to him and to myself think it right to lay before you the details of the case, and the way in which 60 lamentable an error occurred, The samples were sent to me by letter, and I need not say that it could make no difference to me whether the analysis showed them to be good or bad. If there was any difference it would be in favour of my reporting them as good, as I was informed in that case one vendor wished me to make a second analysis and give him a report for publication; so that I should have received another fee.The milks were all analysed at the same time, with the same care, and using the same ether, which I specially distilled the samo day for the purpose. Yet W turned out to be good and the rest more or less bad.The care and the ether were clearly not at fault. That part of the analysis which was conducted in platinum vessels of known weight, and the weight of which hardly alters during a year, agreed with the results of the analyst for the defence and the chemists of Somereet House. The error, therefore, was traced to the porcelain dishes of various weights in which the fat was determined.The old plan used to be to use platinum dishes for this purpose, and to measure, not weigh, the milk. Finding this plan gave a disadvantage to the vendors of milk, I adopted that of weighing the milk and using porcelain dishes, and on tracing out the mistake, I found that it clearly arose from my assistant, when weighing the empty dishes, making an error in noting the weights, which of course invalidated all the results.I do not for a moment wish to shelter myself by an error of an assistant, but I can coufidently &ate that the chemical part of the analysis, which I personally performed, was conducted with extreme care, and with the purest chemicals. I was myself anxious that the sample should be sent to Somerset House, as I was fully convinced of the honesty of my analysis.Afterwards, on re-analjsing the milk, I found it to be pure, and that the analysis of the defence was correct. A sample of milk waa also sent me, labelled ‘6 Bromsgrove,” just before these cases were heard at Petty Sessions. This I certified as pure, and I found afterwards it had been taken from the dairy of one of thc magistrates, and was notably sent to me as a test of my process of analysis of milk. After the decision of Somerset House, I received a request that I would declare the milk of a Mr.Whitehair also pure, and that I had made a similar error in his case. I replied, I could not do this, as I did not know which sample belonged to him, not having before heard his name ; that aa his sample was not challenged by the defence, the remainder bad been destroyed, so that I could not re- analyse it, but I advised my explanation should be shown to the Court. I then received a legal notice that if I did not at once pay the costs and expenses of Mr.Fisher, nearly €20, I should be proceeded against in the County Court. I replied that I woulc! pay no compensation on compulsion, as I was ready to defend any suit, and that a~ Somerset House had condemned the analyses of many very eminent public analysts, it would not be right of me to create such a precedent.Finding, however, that Mr. Fisher was a poor man, that he ww fully satis6ed with my explanation, and did not impute any incompetence to me, and that his solicitors expressed their satisfaction at the way in wbich I met the case, I sent him as compensation five guineas, which, with the guinea allowed him by the Magistrates and the certificate of Somerset House in his favour, will, I trust, prevent him from being injured either in pocket or reputation by 80 lamentable an error, which I deeply regret.I have since conducted, and shall continue to conduct, food analyses in duplicate, so that any laboratory error may at once be detected.Sir Richard Harington (deputy chairman) said that notwithstanding the explanation that had been offered by Dr. Swete, this seemed to him to be a matter of very serious importance indeed, because if a mistake of this sort was committed on one occasion, it must necessarily tend to give excuse for controverting the accuracy of the analyst on future occasions. He therefore thought it became the duty of the Court to look with some care into the explanation that had been offered.When the case wss before the Magistrates -[Sir Richard was on the Bench]-Dr. Swete’s analysis was-solids not fat, 11.22 ; fat, 1.76 ; ash, -7. The defendant in answer to that called Dr. Bostock Hill, the public analyst of a neighbouring county, whose analysis was-solids not fat, 9.22; fat, 3.45 ; ash, *69.Upon that the thitd sample, which was kept under the provisions of the statute for that purpose, was sent to Somerset House, and the result of the analysis there was-solids not fat, 9 ; fat, 3.35 ; ash, *74. This was really more favourable to the vendor than his own witness’s analysis was. I t was not in his (the speaker’s) recollection that anything was mentioned as to any part of this matter having been entrusted to an assistant. Dr.Swete was cross- examined on the various steps which he took in the course of the analysis, and though no question was put to him which required a categorical answer, whether he employed an assistant or not, hc did not remember any mention being made that an assistant had anything to do with the matter. Dr.Swete was then confident that his analysis was correct. I t would be observed that there were two errors in Dr. Swete’e analysis as compared with the other two-the solids not fat were about two per cent, more, aa oompared256 THE ANALPST. with the other two analyses, and the fat about the same quantity less, How that was explainable by a mistake in weighing the porcelain dishes only he (the speaker) did not understand.Mr. Curtler said it was extraordinary that the explanation was not forthcoming until after the analysis at Somerset House; this explanation ought to have taken place when the case was before the Magistrates at Bromsgrove. Dr. Smete’s certificate wm taken to be conclusive evidence in cases like that under discussion, but he (Mr.Curtler) wanted to know whether any Magistrate in the county would now convict on his certificate. .He did not think tbat the Court, acting as the trustees of the public, had any right to accept Dr. Swete’s explanation. He thought there should be an inquiry to ascertain whether Dr. Swete was a skilled man or not. Dr. Swete, who desired to give an explanation, said, in reference to the Bromsgrove case, that he took every possible precaution, as he thought, but unfortunately did make the error.He did not keep an assistant, but a friend was staying with him just before Christmas, when the sample of milk came in, end his friend, finding he (Dr. Swete) was very busy, offered to weigh the dishes for him and write the weights down.Dr. Swete explained how the analysis was conducted, and said he could not declare his error to the Court because he bad not then discovered it. When he found out his error he wrote to the analyst engaged by the defendant, and told him how wrong he (Dr. Swete) was, and begged him to show the letter to Sir Richard Harington at the Court. The Chairman asked why Dr. Swete did not make the explanation which he had made to-day before the magistrates at Bromsgrove when the case.was decided. Dr. Swete replied that he was not cited to attend, and he did not consider he had any right to appear there. In reply to Sir R. Harington, he added that he said nothing, when cross-examined, about employing an assistant, because he then hardly knew it himself. It was only when he came to look throcgh the thing, and his books, that he found how the mistake occurred.Then he remembered that a relative wis staying with him and assisted him. If not, the Act of Parliament would be a dead letter. Whether he mistook a 3 for a 6 , or how it was, he could not say. After a consnltation with the magistrates, The Chairman (Earl Dudley) addressing Dr. Swete, said that a more grievous mistake than he had admitted could not have been made, He (the Chairman) thought it quite sufficient for Dr.Swete to have appeared in Court and made the remarks that he had done, and to have been called upon to listen to the observations that had been made. He did not think, at the present moment, that any further action should be taken; what the future might suggest to any magistrate he did not pretend to say-as he was now addressing Dr.Swete he did not think it requisite to do so ; but, at the same time, he should not be performing his duty if he did not say that the position in which Dr. Swete had placed himself-inasmilch as the duty was always an invidious one, and one which must always call down upon him a great deal of hostility-was a very awkward one, by the fact that an error had been committed which he himself had been constrained to allow. Dr. Swete said he would take care that no assistant was employed in future, and as he intended to execute all analyses in duplicate any error would be at once discovered. The Chairman said that if an error had been committed-and a very grievous one, it might be-he did not think that any other course could be pursued than that it should be fully admitted, with an expression of regret and a promise that, as hr as a man could possibly carry out a promise of that sort, it should not be repeated, Any such repetition would be looked upon as a very serious calamity.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300254

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

256 THE ANALPST. REUARKS ON THE WORK DONE BY PUBLTC ANALYSTS DURING 1877 UNDER THE SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS ACT. BY G. W. WIGNER, F.C.S. Read before the Society of Public Analysts, on the 1st Nay, 1870. I AM very glad t o be able t o lay before the Society this evening these returns of the work done officially by our members and a few other gentlemen who are not members, but who haye kindly forwarded to me their lists.Part of these returns were published in a tabulated form in the April number of THE ANALYST, and the remainder will appear in the forthcoming number, together with the remarks I shall make upon them this evening. The first point, of course, which attracts attention is as to how the general per- centage of adulteration stands as compared with previous years. During the time of theTABULATED STATEMENT SHOWING THE WORK DONE BY PUBLIC ANALYSTS, UNDER THX SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS’ ACT, DURING) THE YEAR 1877.Compiled specially for THE ANALYST. (CONTINUED FROM THE APEIL NUMBER.) Wiue, Spirits, and Beer. MIlk, Butter-milk Butter. and Cream. Bread and Elour. Qroceries, Drugs, &e, TOTAL. REMARKS. 2 6: fis a - 1 9 12 - 7 89 69 4 1 1 2 1 4 7 3 7 1 1 3 11 - - - 3 3 2 17 0 P 65 z.d 4 - .3 12 81 74 54 1769 300 2 18 15 33 21 1 21 51 18 48 25 16 9 74 5 27 8 19 14 12 81 0 1 2842 1943 ,4785 - - C. -4. CAMERON ...... Carlow (County) ........... ...... Cavan ,l - ...... Clare ,, ........... ...... Down ...... Drogheda (Town) ............ - 19 Dublin (City) - ...... ,, (County) - ...... Ferman h (County) ...... ......Eerry (County) ............... ...... Kildare ,, ................ - ...... Leitrim (County) ............ - ... Limerick (City). - ...... ,) (County) ............ ...... Mayo ,) ............ ...... Meat6 7l ............ L ...... Queen’s ll ............ ...... Roscommon ,? ............ ...... Sligo ,) ............ ...... Tipperary ,, - ...... Waterford (City) ............ - ......,, (County) ......... + ...... Westmeath ,. ........ - ...... Wexford ,, ........ ...... Wicklow ., ......... - ............ Y, 91 13 - ........................ - 9? ...... ............... 7 ) 9 9 ............ - ...... >l Galway p i t y and County) - ,9 97 7 1 Kilkenny (City and County) 11 9 ) ,* ,¶ 1 , ? 7 91 19 9’ 7 9 1 , 9 9 I , ? 9 - ...... - .............. - - - - - ............- C. ESTCOURT ......... Macclesfield .................. S ,) ............ Oldham ........................ 35 A. BOSTOCK HILL ... Stratford-upon-Avon.. ....... - F. 1’. PERKINS ...... Exeter ........................ - 4: in last number ........................... 3171 L_ Totals brought forward from Table All waters. Only 12 articles of food were examined, and all were adulterated; the rest were waters.& $ Both waters 2 g U - 1 - - I - All waters. All waters. - 1 - - - ! - 1 -- - I - - - 248 37 1 6191 - -- - 20 96 1331 96 1351 -- 23 1 85 181 85 6341 10671 73- 818 .77THE ANALYST. 257 Xancet commission 65 per cent. of the samples were found t o be adulterated, while when the I872 Act was in force 26 per cent. were adulterated. During the years 1875-76, according to our returns, the adulterated samples had decreased t o 18.10 per cent., while the present returns show that the percentage has decreased again to 17.71 per cent,, or -39 per cent. less than previously.This is a change for the better, although a small one, as showing adulteration to be still an the decrease, but this slight decrease may also be taken to indicate that the fines imposed areinmost cases insufficient t o repress adulteration; while, looking at it from another point of view, it may be considered satisfactory, inasmuch as a gradually-increased amount of work having been done, and a larger number of freeh districts having been brought under the influence of the Act, fresh hotbeds of adulteration, so t o speak, have been opened up.The increase in the number of samples analysed is very striking. During the two years ending December, 1856, the total number of articles examined in 103 districts was 15,989 samples, while our returns this year, from 127 districts, show a total of 14,785 samples, or a little more than 1,000 less than in the two previous years. The labour entailed upon individual analysts in preparing these returns is so great that, gladly as I know they are welcomed by others, I can scarcely wonder that in a few cases they are deficient in some of the details it was thought desirable to set out in the table. Owing to this fact the percentages of adulteration of each individual article may differ ve ;htly from the real fact, but iis, out of nearly 15,000 samples, we have full partic of about 12,000, the error is a trifling one.Calculating each article or class of article separately, and omitting Dr. Cameron’s and Mr. Horsley’s figures, because they give no details, I find that the number of samples purchased, and the percentages of them found adulterated, are as follows :- Purchased. Adulterated. Milk . . . . . . . . . 3,214 . . . . . .. . . 26-07 per cent. Butter . . . . . . . . . 681 . . . . . . . . . 12.48 ,, Uroceries . . . . . . . . . 2,993 . . . . . . . . . 13.00 ,, Wines, Spirits, &h: ... 1,351 . . . . . . . . . 47.00 ,, Sundries . . . . . . . . . 8 18 . . . . . . . . . 2 1-6 3 .. Drugs ... ... 403 . . . . . . . . . 23.82 ,, Bread and Flour.., ... 1,067 . . . . . . . . . 6.84 ,, A glance at the above figures will show that milk has lost the worst position which it occupied last year, and that its place has been taken by wines and spirits, in which the amount of adulteration is nearly equal to half the samples purchased.In both these cases the adulterant may, in nearly every instance, be assumed t o be the same, namely, added water, but, in one view of the matter, the offence is greater when water is added t o a valuable liquid than when it is added to a liquid of comparatively small intrinsh value.Prom another point of view, I find that the adulterated samples alone may be divided as follows : - Milk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B W per cent. Butter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 ,, Groceries . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 ,, Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 ,, Wine and Spirits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 6 ,, Sundries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7 ,, Bread and Flour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 9 , 100.0 I n this case again the milkman and the grocer show an improvement upon the last The percentage of adulterated milk has decreased from 51.22 to 36.6, and returns.the percentage of groceries and butter from 29.1 to 26.8.THE ANALYST. Drugs appear worse than before, as may be expected, when it is seen that out of the 403 purchased 96 were adulterated; and yet, notwithstanding this state of things, I do not at present call to mind a single case in which the Pharmaceutical Society has, during the past year, instituted a prosecution for the sale of adulterated drugs.Bread and flour have a slightly larger percentage than previously, but the principal increase is in the case of wines, spirits, and beer, where, instead of the 6.04 per cent. which appeared last year, we now have 27.6 per cent, There is, however, in my opinion, no doubt that a great deal of this increase is more apparent than real.Prior to the date of the last returns it is doubtful whether an analyst would have been justified in certifying diluted spirits to be adulterated, but the decisions which, from time to time, have been reported in THE ANALYST have shown, with approximate accuracy, what the standard of spirits was expected by magistrates to be, and therefore many samples, which would previously have been passed as satisfactory, hare been condemned.We may also look at these returns in another light, and notice what the percentage of adulterated samples is on the total number purchased. Omitting Dr. Cameron's and Mr. Horsley’s figures as before, I find that 11,430 samples were purchased, and out of these the adulterated samples were as follows :- So far Milk .. . . . . . . . Butter ... -.. ... Groceries . . . . . . Drugs . . . . . . . . . Bread and Flour ... Sundries . . . . . . then for the general Wines and Spirits ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.33 per cent. ‘73 9 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.70 ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *83 ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.54 ,) ‘64 9 , . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 1.55 ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . features of the rcturns, and now in a few words I.will consider the special ones. The first thing which strikes the eye is the vastly different proportions between the number of samples analysed in different districts. Thus for instance we find Somersetshire with 814 samples, Surrey with 455, Stafford with 667, and Cornwall with 28, while Norfolk figures with a grand total of 7 samples.I n this last case it really seems wonderful that notwithstanding Mr. Sutton’s well-known standing his inspectors should not have taken more samples to him or that it should have been considered unnecessary to have more than that number examined. In Mile End Old Town, where according to the previous returns 1 in 72 samples was adulterated, the authorities appear to consider that enough has been done, and therefore during the past year no samples a t all wLre purchased.Hampstead previously showed 1 in every 59 to be adulterated, it now shows 7 in 62, which approaches a little more to the sveiage proportion. A t Hackney we had before 9 in 214, we now find (omitting 10 waters, all of which were condemned,) 20 in 110-in the latter case it is clear there ha3 been some improvement in the mode of purchasing samples, perhaps instead of inspectors in uniform procuring them unknown persons have been employed.Scotland, again, appears in a very unfavourable position, the number of samples anillysed being only about 350, while Ireland, on the other hand, shows a very large total, mainly as the result of Dr.Cameron’s 2748 samples. Looking at the returns as a whole I think they bear out the statements which have been so often made, that the Act needs to be made compulsory, and that the samples should be purchased by unknown persons, and not by well-known officials. Viewing the matter in a broad light it seems an almost incredible thing that in a country like Xngland one-fifth of the samplespurchased by officials are found to be adulterated within the meaning of the Act. Surely if one-fifth are found adulterated when purchased in this way the percentage of adulterated articles obtained by private purchasers must be very much larger.THE ANALYST. 259 ._ - - -- . ~ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - - ..________ It seems to me very important that this tabulated statement should be brought under the notice of the Local Government Board as early as possible, as naturally their returns cannot yet be made up so completely.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300256

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 259 IlUSTlTUTE OF CHEMISTICP. INAUGURAL DINNEU. (By your own TeZephonne.)--From the Chemist and Druggist. AMONGST the many varied and highly important capacities in which I have been employed, I can recall no instance where my services have been called into requisition for a more laudlble purpose, or with a view to such interesting results, as on the occasion that I had the honour of placing myself a t your disposal to report the proceedings of the Institute of Chemistry of Great Britain and Ireland, at its inaugural dinner.This eminent Association, true to its praiseworthy resolve to shroud its proceedings in mystery, and its members in seclusion, had determined, as most of your readers will be aware, to exclude from its festive board, with the utniost rigour and impartiality, every species of representatives of the Press.But, sir, when, in the historic tones of Xlr. James G . Bennett, you commanded me to “go and find Franklin,” I did not, as most of the members of the “ Institute” would probably suppose, immediately dash away to the Admiralty and buy the Pandora, nor telegraph to the Nontserret Company for six million pipes of litne juice, and then frantically appeal through the Eecond column of the Times for information as to the where- abouts of Sir George Nares.X 0, sir ; for as the pensive gloaming gathered round the last hours of that day in the calendar, marked by so many sad experiences and chastened reflections, snugly shelterd beneath the arm of my great protector, Mr. Graham Bell, I was reposing in the bar parlour of the ‘( Burlingtou Arms,” whilst my noble guardian was cajoling a wily waiter into permitting him to view the feast, a t which the sons of alchemy were soon to congregate.Once within the banqueting chamber it was but the work of a few moments for my good genius to secure me a safe retreat immediately beneath the president’s dinner napkin. From this ambush, unseen and unsuspected by the guests, I was soon busily a t work, For oncc the veil of’ secresy was rent ; a “ chiel” had crept in within the mystical doors of the ‘‘ Institute,” diamond had cut diamond, and your readers are enabled to participate in the events of that festive night from the moment when the chairman’s first burst of rhetoric sent my diaphragm vibrating away at the rate of six hundred million pulses per second (Benson’tl time), until the last faint strains of that classic ode, ‘‘ We won’t go home till morning’’ were being gently wafted down the areas of Piccadilly.The inaugural dinner of the members of the Institute of Chemistry of Great Britain and Ireland wae held on the evening of April 1, a t the Burlington Arms, Piccadilly, W., the President, Dr.E. Frankland, occupying the chair. The band of‘ the Canterbury company was in attendance, and by its high-class and patriotic music, contributed much to the enjoyment of the evening. The cloth having been removed, the Chairman rose and said :- Gentlemen,-The first duty which I have the honour to perform to-night is to propose the toast of “ The Queen.” It was my hope that one member, a t least, of the Royal Family would have been graciously pleased to join us a t our inaugural dinner. O w Council addressed, as you may be awaie, a letter to His Hogal Highness the Prince of Wales acquainting him with the important nature of this meeting, and mggesting that His Royal Highness would be adding another to the many deeds of glory which have marked his career, by associating his name on this occasion with the peers of the realm of chemistry.(Loud applause.) His Royal Highness, however, very gracefully replied that, much as he appreciated the proffered honour, and constantly as the welfare of our Institute was “ uppermost in his mind,” he must abstain from taking part in gatherings of this kind during the seasoti of Lent.(The company here joined in singing the “ T e Deum.”) The Chairman then said : I must next ask you to drink t s “ The Army, Navy, and Reserve Forces.” Such a toast, at such a period as the present, needs, I am sure, no words from me. I t is true that we have neither the Duke of Cambridge nor Admiral Hornby a t our table ; but, gentlemen, I venture to say, that when the history of our first csmpaign comes to be written, the fame of Professor Abel will outvie that of Wellington or Nelson.(Cheers ) From his proficiency in the art of knowing how to destroy his fellow-creatures on the most extensive scale, his godparents would have been better advised had they given him the name of “ Cain.” He also desired to point out that the gentleman on his right (Mr. Gore) was more a t home on the field of glory than he was.Mr. George Gore, F.R.S., a t the request of the president, then sang with great effect the new national antleiu, b ‘ llere stands a Post.” Professor Abel, in a humorous spcech, briefly responded. His name, he said, was a misnomer.260 THE ANALYST. The Chairman: I t is with unbounded pleasure that I now rise to ask you to fill your glasses in honour of f h e toait of the evening, which I need hardly explain is “Prosperity to the Institute of Chemistry.” (Vociferous cheering.) Gentlemen, I consider that the present occasion offers a fitting opportunity for a few remarks from myself with relation t o the formation of this Institute. (Hear, hear.) Me are, all of us, I fear, but too well aware that, outside our own favoured circle, there exists an ill- disguised feeling of envy and discontent. A lying spirit is abroad, whispering uncharitable things of the philanthropic project upon which we are engaged, and attributing other than the mosl disinterested motives to our laborious efforts to float this Institute successfully. (Cries of shame.) Now, gentlemen, let me remind you how this association originated.I n September last I received a communication from the Board of Trade, intimating its desire to form a company for the protection of the interests and the advancement of the position of the consulting and analyticai chemists of Great Britain and Ireland, and requesting my advice and active assistance in carrying out the proposal. Well, gentlemen, for a long time I was sorely puzzled as to the course it would be best to take.I could see that, for any society of the kind to be successful, it must be, in the first place, exclusive, and in the second, that its members must be bound together by some common tie. (Cheers.) By means of two thousand post cards I communicated with every member of the Chemical Society for the purpose of ascertaining the number and names of those chemists who employed the organic carbon and nitrogen process for the examination of potable waters.I received a courteous reply to each of my applications, and had the satisfaction to find that no less than sixteen professional chemists were in the habit of using the process referred to. Need I say that these sixteen gentlemen, with myself, were immediately registered by the Board of Trade as a limited liability company ‘( to promote the Advancement of the Profession of Chemistry and to maintain the Profession of the Consulting and Analytical Chemist on a sound and satisfactory basis.” (Great cheering.) At length, gentlemen, a happy idea seized me.The toast having been duly honoured, Professor Redwood, in response to loud calls, sang, with telling effect, a song which he had composed for the occasion.The first verse ran;- Come chemical lads, take leave of your “fads,” And away to the Institute hie, For every care will vanish there While Frankland’s standing by. And Carteighe shall have his Way, And Smith will find his Brown ; And puff it, puff it,puff it, puff It, Puff it up and down.The Secretary (Mr. C. E. Groves), said that after the able and exhaustive speech of their President, he need not himself enter into any details respecting the reasons which led to the formation of the Institute. He desired, however, to offer a few remarks in reference to the malicious observations which were from time to time being made out-of-doors regarding the strict secrecy which the directors of their company maintained on all matters connected with its constitution, and its objects.He would in the first place remind them that every member of the Council had pledged himself by a most solemn oath not to divulge the motives which had induced him to join the Institute, and ever to preserve in public the most abject silence as to the policy and intentions of the executive.I t needed but a slight acquaintance with history for them to perceive what an immense power was wielded in the political world by secret societies, and i t was something akin to that authority for which they were craving. It would, of course, be necessary that members should have some means of identifying each other, and it had been suggested that, in mafionic fashion, some sign, such as placing the fore-finger upon one side of the nose woiild be a convenient emblem of recognition.But after much deliberation they had decided that in future every member should, on admission, be branded with the initials M.I.C.E.’ (Member of the Institute of Chemistry, England). H e might add that Mr. Fletcher, of Warrington, was manufacturing for them a very powerful hot blast blow- pipe for the purpose.blr. Michael Carteighe, as one of the promoters of their Institute, in a speech which showed great mastery of detail, pointed out some additional qualifications which candidates for fellowship would in future be required to possess. They would have to produce a certificate of vaccination, countersigned by not less than three magistrates, and, amongst other things, give satisfactory evidence that they habitually consumed not less than three bottles of fluid magnesia per week.Mr. C. T. Kingzett insisted that it should be a sin2 qud norz that candidates should also be prepared to prove that they were immediately before admission, thoroughly disinfected with “ Sanitas.” Dr. C. R. Alder Wright was sure that no candidate was fit for election who had not published an original memoir upon the Aconite Alkaloids and their Derivates. Professor Attfield, in a most pathetic speech, then proposed the last toast, ‘(Absent Friends.” There were many faces, the Professor remarked, whom they would have welcomed at their table, but who had not yet been brought to see the inestimable blessings which the lnstitute was prepared to convey. His heart ached to recognise as a friend the “ Credulous chemist,” and as for Dr. Muter, he could assure them he yearned to clasp him in a fond embrace. He would conclude by calling upon their President to respond to the toast. The Chairman appropriately replied, and to the great delight of the company, sang to the ac- companiment of the band, a touching melody, commencing- (Loud applause.) ‘‘ 0 Wanklyn, we have mlssed you.” After joining in the Evening Hymn, the company separated,

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300259

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 261 LAW REPORTS. DISEASED MILK.-A case under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, of a somewhat different nature to those of late heard in the Greenwich district, came before Mr. Slade, on Tuesday. George Pring, cowkeeper, of Lee, appeared to answer two summonses against him, the first for selling milk with which there was a mixture of pus and blood, and the secord for selling as milk an article not of the substance demanded.Mr. Biron, barrister, appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Plumstead District Board of Works; Mr. C. J. Carttar was for the defendant. The first summons was taken under section 3rd of the Act, and the second under the 6th, but in regard to the former, the Simmons was snbsequently amended. If the case had been proved under that section defendant would have been liable to a penalty not exceeding $50.The purchase of two lots of milk, the first on ttie 19th of March and the second on the Zlst, was deposed to by Mr. R. J. Baker, an inspector under the Plumstead Board, and Mr. Wigner, Public Analyst, certi- fied that it consisted wholly or in part of milk which had been obtained from a diseased cow, and that the milk had in consequence of the cow’s disease become mixed and coloured with pus and blood corpuscles, so as to be utterly unfit for human food.Mr. Wigncr stated in his evidence that he had examined the sample chemically, but had not found i t either watered or skimmed, but as the sample when delivered to him had an un- natural red colour he thought it best to examine it at once microscopically, anti on doing so he found a number of pus corpuscles and colourless blood corpudes, a few coloured blood corpuscles, a large number of pieces of skin of epithelial matter, probably derived from the mammary glands, and a number of peculiar bodies, unnamed, but which are never found in ordinary milk.He also detected blood bands by the spectroscope. The cream of the milk was of an orange yellow colour, and speedily became covered with a growth of mould or fungus.Mr. Heisch gave corroborative evidence and Dr. Burton, medical officer of health for Lee and Kidbrooke, confirmed their testimony. Mr. Carttar called evidence to prove that immediately the defendant ascertained that one of the cows was attacked with disease he sent for Mr. Indersoll, the veterinarv officer, at Lewisham, who had the animal slaughtered, and that all the other cows were then and now liealthy.Mr. Indersoll said they were a very good shed of cows, and some of them superior. As a rule when a cow was suffering from pleura pneumonia, the disease the one in question was labouring under, it did not give milk. The evidence as to the second summons showed that there was not quite so much impurity in the milk as in the first case.Mr. Balguy said the colouring of the milk as shown must have taken place in the body of the COW. Mr. Carttar said that was no fault of the defendant’s and it was not even suggested that water had been added to it afterwards. Mr. Biron said he was not prepared to prove that the defendant had caused the mixture to be made.Mr. Balguy said in his opinion the defendant was guilty of not having exercised sufficient caution in examining the milk, and there was a case under the 6th section of the Act. He was not satisfied that either the defendant or his wife wilfully sold such milk. He must impose a punishment which would act as a warniog to other cowkeepers. Defendant must pay a fine of 20s.on the first summons and $10 on the second, with costs of the summonses. JAMES GOBEY, milk dealer, also of Lee, appeared to two sumronses charging him with eelling milk not of the substance demanded. Mr. Baker proved the purchase. The analyst was of opinion that the milk was from a cow that had recently calved or had an external wound on her udder. There was no water added.Mr. Daniel Phillips, farmer and cowkeeper, saici he never had a cow milked until the fourth meal after calving. Mr. Fowler, cowkeeper, of Deptford, said sometimes one cow would tread on the udder of another, which would injure the milk. He believed that in the case of Mr. Pring the evil was owing to a diseased udder. Mr. Balguy inflicted a fine of 20s. and 2s. costs in each case.SINQULAE CHARQE OF STEALING MILK.-William Rockett, 35, was charged with stealing three gallons of milk, the property of his master, Lawrence Watson, on the 26th of February.-Mr. Smith prosecuted, and in opening the case said the prisoner was indicted for stealing thrco gallons of milk, but that was merely a nominal quantity, and the jury might possibly come to the conclusion that the quantity was less, but if they thought he had stolen any at all they could, of course, find him guilty.The circum- stances of the case were rather peculiar and very important, both from a public point of view and also so far as the prosecutor wds concerned. He resided a t Middlesborough, but had agencies in Hull and several other large towns for the sale of the produce of his dairies.He also obtained good milk wherever he could, and, therefore, the case was important because it was necessary that the prosecutor should maintain his reputation for selling good milk. It appeared that he received several complaints as to the quality of milk sold in Bull, and he sent down an individual to find out who was practising the deception. The result of the investigation was that the police were communicated with, and on the 26th February the prisoner was watched after receiving the milk a t the railway-station.He went home, and there he was seen to empty liquid of some kind into his can, and subsequently he added more, Samples were obtained after each adultera- tion, and on analysis were each found to contain a large proportion of water.The prisoner received pure milk, and returned a quantity adulterated with water, and it was the difference between what was received and returned that he was charged with stealing.-Mr. James Baynes, Jun., borough analjst, deposed to analysing the three samples of milk produced. The first sample taken at the railway-station only just came within the lowest limits of pure milk, and there was propably three or four per cent. of added water ; No. 2 contained an additional 8& parts; and No. 3 284 parts of water.-There was really no defence, the prisoner acknowledging that he had adulterated the milk with water. The jury found the prisoner guilty, The prosecutor strongly recommending him to the merciful consideration of the Court.-Four months’ hard labour.-Eastena Homing ~Yews.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300261

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

262 THE ANALYST. NOTES OF THE MONTH. It is a trite saying that in the best regulated families accidents mill occur, but we wish for the credit of analysts generally that such mistakes in weighing as that t o which Dr. Swete, of Worcester, has fallen a victim, were impossible. One great error seems to have been permitting a visitor to amist in his laboratory with official samples. We haye always held that in such a laboratory no person should ever be permitted to be present in the room devoted to official work, except the analjst himself and his properly-paid and qualified assistants.I n another part we print the report of DI*. Saete, extracted from the Worcestershz’re Chronicle, so that analysts may have the opportunity of fully considering his defence. There is one point which we confess we do not exactly understand, and we suggest that in his own interest Dr.Swete should give some further explanations. He is reported to say:-“The old plan was to use platinum dishes, and to measure, not weigh, the milk. Finding that this plan gave a disadvantage t o the vendors of milk, I adopted that of weighing the milk, and using porcelain dishes.’’ How it is possible that such a disadvantage could occur we freely confess that we are not chemists enough to see, as it appears to be all the other way so far as the measuring is concerned.If a man takes, say 10 C.C. of milk as being 10 grammes, he really uses 10 X 1’030 = 10.3 grammee of milk, and therefore his resulting solids must be in proportion too high, and con- sequently in direct fayour of the vendor ; so in giying up measuring for weighing he apparently does exactly the contrary of what he intends.Again, the uge of porcelain instead of platinum may be a measure of economy, but it certainly is not one of increased accuracy. Surely on this point the report has been incorrectly reported, or else specific gravity is not very clearly understood in some parts of the realm.What a dreadfully benighted county Dorset must be, seeing that, according to a statement at the Quarter Session, it contains no analytical chemist, qualified, according t o the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, to accept the ofice of analyst for the county ! What a glorious chance for some of the ‘‘ Peers of the chemical realm” who have been engaged in hatching the Institute, or some of the young lambs who have been secretly chosen iuto that happy fold.But tell it not in Gath, an awful idea is abroad that unfortunately the Local Government Board does not yet accept membership of the Institute as a qualification ! Whether telephones sometimes get a “ little too much” when attending a dinner or not is as yet an undecided point, but the private one belonging to the Chrnist and Druggist is a most amusing piece of apparatus.We reprint one of its reports for the entertainment of our readers, as being, perhaps, the nicest little piece of fun that the chebical world has had the chance of enjoying for some time. The poor Institute has had to stand a good deal, but to laugh at it in such a manner is really too bad, seeing that everybody has a right to make himself as ridiculous as he likes in this free country, even to the extent of dubbing himself and his friends chemists by limited liability.THE ANALYST.263 Talking about, the Institute, we were struck by a very deep allusion to parafins in a letter by Dr. Attfield to a contemporary. There was evidently some awful meaning underlying it, and people have been going about and wondering mightily. Would it be too much to ask the learned Professor to explain the meaning, and so relieve the minds of those who, like ourselres, sit humbly a t his feet ready to pick up and devour the crumbs from his iutellectual table.We are, however, quite ready to agree with him that there are certainly chemists and cheniists; and, furthermore, we say that the true sign of a really eminent chemist is an absence of jealousy, and a desire to keep in the back- ground until forced forward, in spite of himself, by the greatness of his scientific work, The great event of last month has been the election of Council a t the Chemical Society. The scene a t the meeting, when the alternative list was denounced was one of the most exciting that has been witnessed in the Society.We must say candidly that the issue of the alternative list was a great mistake. If any member or members desired to object to the nominetion of the Council, they should have headed snd printed their list, so as to distinctly show that it was in opposi- tion, and accompanied it with a circular stating their views. Even had no fault been committed in this respect the opposition was ill-judged, because the Chemical Society includes specially votaries of every branch of the science, and there can be no question of Mr.Carteighe’s eminence in the particular line of pharmaceutical chemistry which ho has chosen. We are the more entitled to unhesitatingly state this view, as we objected to his being on the Council of the Institute on the ground that if such an association was required it should be purely composed of analytical as distinguished from pharmaceutical chemists. Our opposition was theoretical and not personal, and we are pleased to see the right man when in the right place.The latest piece of dirt is thus thrown by an obscurs trade organ apropos of gin adulteration. “Recent decisions show that we ought to have the thing more clearly defined.At present the game seems beiog kept alive by an arrangement between the informer and the analyst, the latter of whom appears to get his fees whether the defendant is guilty or not.” Suppose, for an instant, that the analyst only got fees when he bad given a certificate under which a man was found guilty, what would the trade journals then s ~ y about a direct premium for prosecution? Having a bad case ant1 abusing the opposing attorney is a very old affair, but if the libuse is to have any weight it must be something less senseless and absurd than the above. Surely the organ in question cannot have a very exalted opinion of the intellectual and reasoning powers of those whose interests (P) it professes to guard. Dr.W. Norgan, Public Analyst for Swansea, has been appointed Public Analyst for Brecon. THE ADULTERATION OF ‘VIOLET POWDER WITH ARSERIC. CORBESPONDENTS in the Lancet having called attention to this somewhat extraordinary mode of adulteration, we have thought it our duty to institute a full inquiry into the matter; samples of violet powder have been obtained from various parts of the country, and we shall publish the results of our analjses in our next number.264 THE AQRALYST.ORGANIC MATERIA MEDICA.” As the above book is the work of one of the Editors of this Journal, it would be obviously unbecoming in us to insert any review of it. We therefore content ourselves with saying that it has been entirely rewritten, and is carefully and completely indexed.As to all other points we must leave our readers to form their opinions, either from reviews in other journals or from the book itself. RECENT CHEMICAL PATENTS. The following specifications have been published during the past month, and can be obtained from the Great Seal Office, Cursitor Street, Chancery Lane, London. 1876. Xame of Patentee. Title of Patent.Price. XO. 1877. 4553 H. Augustin (8ohering’a Patent) ... Manufacture of Salicilic Acid . . . . . . . . . 8d. 3159 J. H. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . Converting Hydrocarbons into Gas . . . . . . . . fid. 3229 D. Machnie and W. Gentles . . . . . . Manufacture of Sulphuric Acid . . . . . . . . 2d. 3331 H. Garth and J. Ostler,.. . . . . . . Extracting Alcohol and Acetic Acid from Locu4 3323 C.Humfrey . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating Phosphates for the Elimination of Alumina therefrom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4d. Beans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4d. 3387 E. P. Alexander . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Sulphate of Alumina . . . . . . 2d. 3396 B. B. Standen . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating Sewage, &c . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Bd. 3129 M. J. Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . Lubricating Machinery . . . . . . . . . . . . fid. 3439 J. H. and T. Butterfield . . . . . . Steam Engine Lubricators . . . . . . . . . . . . 6d. 3145 F. J. Evans and \V. T. Sngg . . . . . . JInnufircture of Coal Gas . . . . . . . . . . . 6d. 3160 J. A. Ditch . . . . . . . . . . . Composition for Coating Substanccs to be used in lieu of Slate .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2d. 3547 J. H. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . Manufacture of Chloride ofLime . . . . . . . . . 2d. 3571 J. Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Treating and Utilizing Sewage, &c. . . . . . . 4d. 3980 J. Von Quaglio . . . . . . . . . . . . Purifying Coal Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4d. 1878. 182 W. R. Lake . . . . . . . . . .. . Producing and Applying Magneto Electricity ... 6d. VANTED, AN ANALYST.-It was stated a t the ])orset Quarter Sessions lately that it had been ascer- tained there was no analytical chemist in the county, qualified according to the Sale of Food Act, and who was willing to accept the office of analyst for the county. The committee appointed on the subject reported that any further search for an analyst be postponed until the October Quarter Sessions, because the appointment is to vest in the new County Government Board, as proposed by the Blll now before Parliament, and by that time the Court will be better informed on the matter.The report was adopted,- Grocer. A t the moment of going to press we deeply regret t o learn that, on the 29th inst., Mr. William Baker, of Sheffield, fell over the banisters of his club and sustained very serious injuries. His forehead was fractured and the brain protruded ; the bones of his nose were broken, and he was otherwise badly injured. He is in a very critical condition, but we are glad to hear there is a ray of hope of his recovery. BOOKS, &c., RECEIVED. The Chemist and Druggist; The Brewers’ Guardian; The British Medical Journal; The Medical Examiner ; The Medical Times and Gazette ; The Pharmaceutical Journal ; The Sanitary Record ; The Medical Record ; The Miller; The Anti-Adulteration Reviev ; Jcurnal of Applied Soience ; The Country Brewers’ Gazette; Sanitary Reform, by Kenneth Maclcod; A Manual of Microscopic Mounting, by J. H. Martin. * Second E d i t i o n . - S ~ ! d ~ ~ i ~ & ~IAHSHALL, Stationer’e Hall Court, London.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8780300262

出版商:RSC    

年代:1878

数据来源: RSC