摘要:

154 THE ANALYST. ANALYSTS’ REPORTS. Mr. J. Carter-Bell, Public Analyst for Cheshire, has reported to the Court of Quarter Sessione that during the past quarter he examined 148 samples. These were-62 of milk, 24 water, 18 bread, 15 flour, 9 whisky, 8 coffee, 4 gin, 2 brandy, 2 pickles, 1 rum, 1 vinegar, 1 oatmeal, and 1 chocolate. Of these 23 were adulterated, consisting of 15 milks, 5 whiskies, 1 brandy, 1 gin, and 1 coffee.The report also stated that in Cheshire, a county where the pasture was exceptionally good, and where excellent milk should be produced, the average of the samples taken was exceptionally bad, nearly one-third being below the ordinary standard of poor milk. In Salford, where the milk was very closely watched, it was dif3icult to find an adulterated sample.Mr. J. Carter-Bell, Public Analyst for Balford, in his report for the quarter ending 30th June, states that he examined 136 samples, consisting of 47 breads, 57 milks, 15 buns, 10 flours, 2 teething powders, 2 medicines, 1 butter, 1 cider cream, and 1 egg-powder. Of these 10 were adulterated, consisting of 6 milks, 2 buns, and 2 breads. The greatest amount of water in the milk was 15 per cent.One sample of bread contained as much as 45 grains of alum to the 4lb.-loaf. The cider cream, which he believes is chiefly sold to children, was composed of strong vinegar slightly flavoured with a little acetate of amyl. The teething powders were composed of metallic mercury, morphia, and chalk. At the end of the last and the beginning of this quarter the adulteration of bread with alum was prevalent, but owing to the increased vigilance of the inspector, not a sample of alumed bread could now be found.” Mr.J. Baynes, Public Analyst for the East Riding of Yorkshire, reports that during the past quartcr, 42 samples were submitted to him, viz. :-2 arrowroot, 1 bread, 3 butter, 1 baking powder, 7 coffee, 1 coooa, 2 ginger, 4 lard, 7 milk, 1 mustard, 8 nitre, 2 oatmeal and 2 pepper.Of these 5 samples of nitre were adulterated-4 were brought from grocers and 1 from a tailor. 3 coffees contained lG, 30, and 48 per cent of chicory respectively. 1 lard 15 per cent of water, 1 milk 10 per cent of water. Mr. Baynes also reports that as Analyst for Hull, he examined 2 samples during the quarter, viz. :- 1 water and 1 milk both of which were pure ; these were sent by the medical officer, owing to Soarlet Fever being prevalent. MR.CARTER-BELL writes to request us to draw attention to the fact that the tables in his paper on alum in flour and bread, published in the ANALYST for July, are calculated on the basis of 3-lb. of flour per 4-lb. loaf, an amount which is in excess of the quantity usually employed, and since adopted by him as a basis of calculation. 6 ‘ THE PREJUDICE QUEsTION.”-For the information of analysts who may possibly have to refer megistrates to the recent decision on this point in Hoyle, v. Hitchman, we may state that that case is now reported in Law Reports, 4 Q.B.D., 233 i 48 Law Jozcmal, M.C. 97 ; 40 LUW Tiine8, 252.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8790400154

出版商:RSC    

年代:1879

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 155 LAW REPORTS. EImw FINE FOR BuTTERrNE.-At the Sittingbourne Petty Sessions, Mr. garnuel Wood, grocer, of Milton-next-Sittingbourne, was summoned for selling as butter, an article not of the nature, quality, and substance of the article of food demanded by the purchaser, a policeman named Kelway. Police-superin- tcndent Mayne produced the certificate of Mr. M. Adams, Analyst for Eent, which was to the effect that the article was not butter at all, but was a substance made to resemble butter, and that it contained nothing nmvholesome. Mr.Wood stated that the article was butterine, and was intended for cookery purposes, and was so labelled in his shop, but his assistant in his absence omitted to tell the purchaser that the article was butterine on his asking for butter.The Bench imposed a fine of 3 5 and 15s. costs. “ NORNANDY ROLL BUTTER.”-Mr. William Nettleton, grocer and provision dealer, Northgate, Huddersfield, and who has a stall in the Market Hall, appeared before the Borough Magistrates to answer a charge of having sold a pound of some article as butter which was not of the nature, substance and quality as demanded by the purchaser. The evidence for the prosecution showed that the defendant’s assistant at his stall in the Market Hall sold to a youth nanied Liversedge, who had been sent by Mr.E. G. Kirk, the Saaitnry Inspector, a pound of roll butter, which was taken from aquantity labelled “ Normandy roll,” telling him, however, that he could not guarantee that it was all butter. Mr. Jarmain, the Borough Analyst, found that the sample subiiiitted to him was mainly composed of foreign fat, and was really an article known as “ butterine.” The question vas whether the article usually lrnowii in the trade and by the public as “ Norniandy roll” was a pure butter.Evidence mas given by sewrid provision merchants that there w s a pure butter known by that name. The defendant called a witness, who said he had been in the provision trade twenty-seven years, and did not knov till three years ago that there was a butter called ‘‘ Normandy roll.” The Bench ordered the defendant to pay a fine of 10s.and costs, adding, however, that they did not think the defendant had wilfully offended against the lam. ADULTERATED MILrc.-Joseph Smith, Braunston, was charged at the Daventry Petty Sessions, with selling adulterated milk.Inspector Phenix said he called at the defendant’s house on the 6th of May. He saw defendant’s wife, and asked her if she sold milk. She replied, ‘‘ Yes.” He said, “ Then I’ll have half a pint of new.” Shc gave him some, and said, ‘‘ This is what we sell for new.” He said, “ I am purchasing under the Act, and want it for analysis.” She said, “ This has been skimined once, but you can have that that has not if you choose.” He said he would rather have that, and she fetched him a fresh lot.He then divided it into three parts. One he left with Jfrs. Smith, one he retained, and the other, numbered 32, he took to Dr. Emmerson on the 8th, and now produced the certificate of the analysis, which stated there was 10 per cent.of water. The defendant said he JVLS not R milk seller, and called his wife to state the case for him. Mary Ann Smith said the inspector asked for some new milk, which she does not sell, but she thought lic wanted some to drink, and she told him the milk had been set some time, and should not be disturbed, but to oblige him she would let hiin have some.She put no water to it except the swillings of the buckets, which they always did to make the cream rise. There was about a pint and a half to between three and four gallons of milk. The Bench did not consider this to be a case of deliberate fraud on the public. If parties wish to set the inilk for making butter, it should be kept apart from milk to be sold. The fine would only be 1s.and costs 10s. 6d. The defendant and others should be warned. John Goode, was charged before the Bigglesmade (Beds) Bench, with having sold a quart of adulterated milk to Supt. Bedlow, the Inspector under the Act. The defendant failed to prove the purity of the milk, although he sought the analysis of a medical man as against that of the County Analyst, who said that the milk contained 24 per cent.of water. A fine of 25 and costs was inflicted. BUTTERINE AND MILK.-Jenkins Jones, cowkeeper, of 3, Teesdale-street, Hacliney, and Henry Kennedy, dairyman, of 189, Cassland-road, South Hackney, appeared at Worship-street, to summonses, taken out by the sanitary authorities of South Hackney, charging them with selling milk adulterated with water. Jones was fined 10s.and costs, and Kennedy 20s. and costs. Joseph Coon, of 2, Fashion-street, Spitalfields, shopkeeper, was fined 60s. and 2s. costs, on the coinplaint of the sanitary authorities of Christ Church, Spitalfields, for selling as butter an article containing 70 per cent. of “ foreign ” fat, the certificate also stating that it was doubtful if there was any real butter in the composition. At the Wolverhampton Police-court, John Lilley, grocer, and also a member of the Wolverhampton Corimration, was summoned for selling a quantity of coffee mixed with chicory.Mr. Underhill, Town Clerk, prosecuted on behalf of the Corporation, and Mr. Stirk defended. Mr. Underhill, in opening the case for the prosecution, said it was an extremely simple one, Mr, Dawson, the Inspector for the156 THE ANALYST.Corporation, sent a person named Williams into the defendant’s shop on the 17th April to purchase half a pound of coffee. Dawson was standing outside the shop window at the time, and saw Williams supplied with a half-pound tin of coffee, which he brought to Dawson, who told him that was not what he wanted, and he required some to bc meighd up.Williams returned to the counter and told the assistant what he required, and he mas then served with. another lot, and when about to leave, hlr. Dawson joined him, and told the assistant that he .was going to have the coffee analysed. The assistant replied that what had been supplied to Williams was genuine coffee. Mr. Dawson then divided thc coffee into three lots, leaving one with the assistant, taking one to Mr.Jones, the County Analyst, and retaining the third portion himself. Mr. Jones, in his certificate, stated that the sample of ooffee contained 20 per cent. of chicory. Mr. Lilley was entitled to sell coffee mixed with chicory, but he must put a label to that effect on the paper in which it was wrapped. Mr. Jones, the analyst, stated that 20 per cent.\.vas not a large adulteration ; thc sum of 10d. was, however, a large price for half a pound of coffee. For the defence, Mr. Stirk said he could, if he chose, raise a technical objection which would completely upset the prosecution ; bnt at his client’s request he mould not do so, but meet the case fairly and straightformwdly. Mr. Lilley was engaged in a large wholesale business in addition to having two retail shops.For thc sale of ground coffee he kept a canister, divided into four compartments. Each of these compartments mas uscd for various qualities of coffee, and a porter he kept mas instructed to fill up these conipsrtments as coffec was sold from them. In filling up these compartments, the porter might make a mistake, and put the genuine coffee into a compartment intended for a mixture of coffee and chicory, and put the mixed coffee and chicory into the compartment set apart for genuine coffee.Mr. Lilley was then called, and, in answer to the Bench, he said the mistake had been made by his porter. After briefly consultiiig together, the Mayor said the Bench were unanimous in their decision. They considered that Mr.Lilley’s arrangements in his shop mere not go satisfactory as they might be, and they suggested that he should improve them in some way. Defendant would lime to pay a finc of $5 and costs. ADULTERATED BUTTER.-& Marlborough Street, Mrs. Elizabeth Treleaven, provision dealer, Moor Street, was summoned before IIr. Mansfield by Mr. Angels Crisp, Inspector of Nuisances for the Strand District Board of Works, for selling adulterated butter.The butter having been proved to be largely adulterated, MY. Mansfield, in fining the Defendant 10s. and costs, remarked that the persons who supplied small tradcsnien with adulterated butter were the persons who should be proceeded against, as they made the largest profits by these imposilions. This makes the fourth case of a similar character within abont a week.The plaintiff clainied 213 for miik supplied. The Pon of plaintiff, a wholesale milk-dealer, of Vassal1 Road, Brixton, proved the delivery of the milk. Mr. Cosedge, who appeared for the defence, said his client took a sample of the milk to the sanitary authority of the Lambeth Vestry, by whom it was handed over to Dr. Muter, for analysis, and he certified that the ‘‘ milk ” was adulterated with 20 per cent.of water. But for the reasons which the doctor stated in his report, he did not advise proceedings to be taken until another sample of the milk had been analysed. In answer to his Honour, Mr. Cosedge admitted that his client had not paid for the last week’s supply, which formed the ground of the present action, and his Hononr gave judgment for the plaintiff, with costs and bhort order.ADULTERATED CoFFEE.-At the South Staff ordshire Stipendiary’s Court, Joseph Meddings, grocer, Bilston, was summoned for selling adulterated coffee. Mr. Vaughan appeared for the defendant. sjanluel Toy, assistant to Mr. Horder, stated that on May 27th he visited the defendant’s shop and I)urchased a quarter of a pound of coffee, and informed the servant who supplied him that he \\.as going to have it analysed.In answer to the Bench, witness said he paid 4d. for the coffee. Jvitness, continuing, said the servant spoke to Mrs. Rleddings, and the latter then said the article was a lllixture of chicory and coffee. In reply to lfr. Vaughan, nitness said that by Mrs. Medclings’ directions, after he had told the servant his purchase had becn made for analysis, the servant wrapped the coffee in a paper 011 which was a printed intimation that the contents included a quantity of chicory.Mr. Harder submitted the certificate of the County Analyst, which stated that the coffee was adulterated with 85 per cent. of chicory. Blr. Horder added that pure coffee could be supplied at 1s. 4d.per pbund, mhilst chicory was about 51. per pound. 31r. Vanghan contended that the charge ought not to have been bronght into court, inasmuch as the defendant mas shielded against the charge by the coffee being wrapped in the printed paper. The wife of the defendant shted thzt immediately Toy asked for the coffee slie told the girl in the shop to reach a paper niarlred “ chicory and coffee,” and tho coffee was wrapped in one of these, witness again reminding Toy of the fact when he said the coffee would be At the LamEeth Connty Court, recently, the case of Styles v.Baker was heard.THE ANALYST. 167 analysed. The Deputy Stipendiary remarked that he should think the coffez at lid. for two ounces was a11 chicory. He, however, felt a difficulty in deciding the qucstion which was raised by the defence set up, and he mould therefore postpone his judgment.At the adjourned hearing, held on the 18th July, Mr. Dallow appeared on behalf of the county authorities for the prosecution, and Mr. Vaughan for the defendant. Mr. Dallow obtained permission to make some observations on a question of law as to whether the sample was sold to the prejudice of the purchaser.He called attention to the fact that this was a sample of chicory adulterated with coffee instead of othcrwise, and was sold at the rate of pure coffee. If a person bought a mixture at a high price he was entitled to a fair mixture, which was not so in the present case. In reply, Mr. Vaughan said the defendant took the precaution to put the word “ chicory ” before the word.I‘ coffee” on his label. It mas sold as n mixture, but if too much money was paid for it that was the fault of the purchaser. In giving his decision, Mr. Haden Corser (the Deputy Stipendiary) said it appeared that Mr. Horder’s assistant knew at the time he bought the sample that it was a mixture. He had not to inquire into the proportions of the mixture, because it mas not for him to state what trade profits should be realised.If people chose to deal with those who made large profits, that was their own fault. After giving the case his most eareinl consideration he had come to the conclusion that he must dismiss the summons. Mr. Dallow made an application for the case to be argued in a superior court, and the magistrate granted the request.ADULTERATED BUTTER.-& the Bow Street Police Court, Thomas Dodd, 27, Duke Street, Blooms- bury, was fined 40s. and 4s. Gd. costs for selling adulterated butter. The article was purchased at Is. 4d. per lb. by an excise officer, who stated afterwards that it mould be analysed. The shopkeeper then exhibited a printed intimation of the fact that it was sold as a ‘‘ compound,” but it was in such small type that Mr.Vaughan considered it an evasion rather than a compliance with the Act, for it almost needed a microscope to read it ; besides which the fact should have been stated at the time the purchase was being made. ADULTERATED BUTTER.-At the Gosport (Hants) Police Court, John Petman, grocer, of High Street, was sunimoned for selling to Police-sergeant Abraham, to his prejudice, an article which was not of the nature, substance, and quality demanded.Mr. George Feltham defended. The police-sergeant pur- chased three-quarters of a pound of (so-called) butter at defendant’s shop, and the article was analysed by the County Analyst, Mr. Angell, who certified that it consisted of 98 per cent. of fat other than butter fat.Mr. Feltham said he had submitted some of the butter to the analysis of Dr. Turner, analyst of the Borough of Portsmouth, and his testimony was the same as the County Analyst, so he must plead guilty to the offence. His client, however, who had been in business many years, was perfectly innocent in the matter, having purchased the butter in the ordinary way of business from a merchant in Portsmouth, who hail obtained it from the shippers in France.If the Bench would allow his client to have the butter whieh was left out of the purchase, he would bring an action against the merchants. The Bench said it was perfectly competent for the defendant to have taken a warranty with the butter, and Mr. Felthani rep1ie.l that his client had unfortunately omitted to do,that. The magistrates, taking all the facts into consideration, imposed a fine of 10s.and 18s. Gd. costs. ‘‘ FRAUDULENTLY INCREASING Eum.”-At Faringdon Petty Sessions, Mr. George Liddiard, grocer, of Faringdon, was charged with having sold to Stephen Sheppard half a pound of coffee which was not of the nature, substance, and quality of the article demanded. Mr.Haines appeared for the defendant. I t was shown that Sheppard, a constable at Rending, acting under the instructions of the Chief Constable, went to the defendant’s shop in plain clothes, and asked for half a pound of coffee. The coffee was weighed out, wrapped up in paper, and delivered to him across the counter. The constable then requested the assistant who had served him to call his employer, the defendant, which he did, when the constable inforincd him that he had purchased the article with the intention of submitting it for analysis, and offered to divide it into three portions, and give the defendant back one portion, so as to allow him an opportuaity of having that portion analysed on his own behalf.This the defendant did not require him to do, and he then called the purchaser’s attention to a printed label affixed to the outeidc of the package, bearing the words, ‘‘ This is sold as a mixture of coffee and chicory.” The constable rcplied that he did not ask for coffee and chicory, but for coffee only.The article was aftcmards submitted to the county analyst, Mr. Donkin, who certified it to *contain forty parts of cllicory with sixty parts of coffee.Mr. Haines, for thc defendant, submitted to the magistrates that as a printed label had been delivered to the purchaser with thc coffec, stating that it was sold as a mixture, the case against the defendant must be dismissed, as he had complied with the requirements of the Act, which provided that no person should be convicted of the offence charged, if at the time of sale he They sold some coffee at lgd.for two ounces.158 THE ANALYST. delivered with the article a label describing it to be mixed. The magistrates retired to consider their chision, and theii stated that considering the extent to which the coffee was mixed with chicory-40 per cent.-md that the price-paid for it was the usual price for unadulterated coffee, they mere of opinion that the article was mixed with intent fraudulently to increase its bulk within the meaning of the Act of Parliament, which took the case out of the protection afforded to the seller by the section referred to by Mr.Haines, and they convicted thc defendant in the penalty of 5.5, and $1 0s. Gd. costs. The defendant paid the amount, but Rlr. Haines applied for a, case for the opinion of a superior court.The niagistrates said they could liave no hesitation in granting this. ADULTEIUTED hfvs.rAnD.-At the Wantagc Yctty Sessions, on July 16, before Rev J. F. Collins (Chairman), T. L. Goodlake, and E. H. Morland, Esqs., Mr. E. Radbone, of Oxford, the proprietor of the “ King Alfred’s Grocery Warehouse’’ in Wantage, was charged with selling to Police-constable Sheppard, and to his prejudice, a quarter of a pound of mustard, which was not of the nature, sub- stance, and quality demanded. Mr.L. Jotcham prosecuted ; Mr. Radbone conducted his own defence. Stephen Sheppard stated that acting under orders from Colonel Blandy, the Chief Constable of thc county, he went to defendant’s shop on May 23rd and asked for some muslard. Rlr.Blades (defendant’s manager) served him, and inquired what sort he would have, naming the prices ; he said he mould haw quarter of a pound of that at Is., the lowcst of the prices named by Blades. I t was wrapped up in a coloured wrapper, on which, among numerous other printed matter, were these words : ‘‘ In the prepnra- tion of this condiment no injurious ingredient has been used.” Wicn he had paid for the mustard he told him for what it was wanted, and divided it into three parts, gicing Bfr.Blades one, and handing the remaining two to the superintendent of police. Mr. Blades did not say anything about it being a condi- ment when weighing it up. superintendent O’Neill proved sending one of the samples to the County Analyst, and produced that gentleman’s certificate that the mustard was adulterated with 40 per cent.of flour and turmcric. Mr. Radbone admitted that it was ndulteratcd, but contended that it was sold as a condiment, and that that fact, together with it being labelled, protected him. Hc then callcd Alfred Blades, who deposed that when he was wrapping up the mustard the police-constable said to him, ‘‘ Do you sell this as mustard?” He said, ‘‘ No ; I sell it as a condinlent, which information you will find 011 the wrapper.” Cross-examined by Mr.Jotcham : Cantell, another assistant, was in the shop, and heard all that passed. The policeman asked for tea and mustard. The mustard was takcn from the bulk in a drawer. Any customer who wnted a small quantity of mustard would have it supplied in the yellow paper.The printed part of the p8per wonld be outside the mustard when wrappcd up. Cantell, who had not heard any of the evidence, was then sent for, and corroborated thc evidence of Mr. Blades as to his having informed thc policeman it was a condiment when weighing it up. When the policeman was asked what mustard he would have, he said the cheap. Cross-cxamined : He was busy serving other customers, and did not take a lot of noticc of what was going on.Customers were continually coming in and out. He did not know what made him listen on this occasion. I t was nothing unusual for a man to purchase a quarter of a pound of mustard. By Mr. Goodlake : I t was the policeman’s tone in asking whether it was pure mustard that attracted his attention.The policeman was recalled, and stated that there were two weighings, and it was 0x1 the second weighing, to divide the mustard into thrce lots (after Mr. Blades knew what the mustard was wanted for), that he was informed it was a condiment. Cantell was also recalled, and said he thought it was at the second weighing ; but Mr. Blades mas positive as to having told the constable it w s a, condinient before it mas purchased. FORTY PER CENT.OF ARSENIC IN FRENCH CHALR.-O~~ July 9th, Mr. Hill, Deputy-Coroner for Huddersfield, held an inquest on the body of Hetty Blackburn, aged 31 years, the wife of William Blackburn, of Marsh. The evidence showed that the deceased was pregnant, and as she suffered from heartburn her husband mat on June 28th to the shop of Rfr.T. N. Swift, chemist, Cross Church Street, and ask for some prepared chalk. Nr, Swift did not ask what it was required for, but thinking it ~ T L S for a similar purpose to that for which chalk is used by shoemakers, supplied French chalk froni a box containing a portion of a large quantity which he purchased from tbe Ultramarine Company, of Manohester, two years ago. The deceased took some of the chalk, and was subsequently seized with vomiting.On June 30th, Mr. D. Wilson, surgeon, of Paddock, mas called to see the deccased, and found her in labour and vomiting, and she was delivered of II child, which was born alive about 3.5 minutes after his arrival, As Mr. Wilson suspected poisoning, the police took possession of thc box from which Mr. Swift supplied the chalk, and i t JVUS found by Rlr.Jarmnin, borough analyst, to contain 10 per cent. of arsenic. By direction of the coroncr, after tho inquest had been opened last Friday night, Mr. Wibon, surgeon, made a post-ntorterrr The transaction lasted about five minutes. ‘Ihe Bench dismissed the case. On Tuesday she seemed easier, but on Wednesday she died.THE ANALYST. 159 examination of the body of the deceased, in the presence of Mr. Jarmain and Mr. Knaggs, surgeon, and the medical men came to the conclusion that death mas thc result of arsenical poisoning. Mr. Jarmain examined the contents of the deceased's stomach and found arsenic. Mr. Swift now stated that had lie known the chalk contained arsenic he should not have sold it at all, and that as it was, had he known Blackburii required the clialk for inedicinal purposes he should have sold him another article altogether. The jury returned a verdict that the deceased died by misadventure, but recommended hfr. Swift to be more particular in future in selling exactly what mas asked for, and that the question should be askccl of the purchaser what the particular article was intended for, because although French chalk might iiot be poisonous, it would not be altogether wholesome. The deputy coroncr trusted tliat Mr. Ward, the chief constable, would inquire furllier into it. Mr. Ward said he would do so at once. Mr. Swift snid he should be happy to supply nny quantityof the powder he had left, and stated that he had tried to get some analysed by the Chemists' Society at Birmingham, but they had sent the sample back, saying thc cocietg did not undertake to appear in police cases. The deputy coroner said the jury did not think there was anything criminal or negligent in the case sufficient to justify criminal proceedings.

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8790400155

出版商:RSC    

年代:1879

数据来源: RSC

摘要:

THE ANALYST. 159 NOTES OF THE MONTII. We call the nttcntion of our readers to the very interesting communication from Dr. Blake White, tlie Inspector of Milk, of New York, giving tlze results of the analpie of the milk of COWS undo~zbtedly placed in a most unsanitary locality, aid fed on the most undesirable materials. This letter is the more interesting to us, as Public Analysts, because it proves that the limit of solids not fat (9 per cent.), fiscci by our Society as tlie lowest valuation of any saivple of rnisecl milk, holds good even when sucli extreme tests of bad food and unhealthy lodgings are applied.The lowest point reaclieci by these cows is 9.01 solids not fat, and yet we hear every iiow and then of the limit of 8.5 being applied, because in one or two isolated cases single cows have given milk said to be as low as that.It is cz certainty that, for one sample of genuine mixed milk, mliicli falls even so low as 9, there are hundreds wliich mark at least 9-3 ; and it is, therefore, a painful but certain fact that, judging by the 8.5 limit, every milk vendor in tlie kingdom can, with perfect impunity, put in 10 per cent. of water, and often more, and yet the analysts, constrained by those in authority, are compelled to oertify the article as genuine, when they wellhow to the contrary.Of course no milk can be honestly judged by the solids not fat alone in cases mliere there is excess of fat ; but our remarks apply to ordinary well-balanced samples, and we hold that, in such cases, the limit should be 9 per cent., as giving quite sufficient margin to any honest cow-keeper.I t is almost t-i pity that, in fixing a limit for spirits, the legislature did not also enquire into the inillr question, when we are satisfied the great mass of scientists, who make R speciality of food, woulci have supported our Society’s limit, and made it illegal to sell milk under 0 solids not fat, without declaring it at the time of purchase.Some wonderful instructions for the quantitative anelysis of milk have lately been published in tlie Dairyinan, which, by the way, is now known as the Proz.isionci*. Here is that authority’s receipt for making Fehliiig’s solution- ‘‘ The standard copper solution is prepared by dissolving 34.GG grnins of crystals of cupric sulphate in 200 C.C.of water. To this solution is added a solution made by dissolving 173 grnins of .potnssio- sodic tartrate (Rochelle Salts) in 480 C.C. of soclic hydrate of speci5c gravity 1.14. The whole is diluted till it occupies the volume of one litre. The stnidsrcl solution, so prepared, is of sucli a strcngth that 10 C.C. are equivalent to 0.067 grains of milk sugar (dry at looo C).” The mixture of the English and metrical systems of weight and measure coiitaiiied in tlie above is at once startling and amusing.160 THE ANALYST.We are indebted to the Pimmnaceii,t.icnZ Jozci*??nl for the following :-“ If. Cnrles recently called the attention of the Bordeaux Plmrmacentical Society to the presence in commerce of quinine containing an exaggerated quantity of water.A sample examined lost 17 per cent. of water wlmi dried at looo c., or 5 per cent. in excess of the normal quantity. The same sample was found to contain a quantity of quinidine. M. Dambier said that he liad recogniscd tlie sczmc fact several times in sulpliate of quinine obtained from good houses.” RECENT CHEMICAL PATENTS . 1878 . No . 4595 4626 4645 4662 4762 4671 4693 4703 4705 4737 47 62 4771 4814 4813 4813 4831 4862 4955 4960 4988 G O 1 1 5014 5053 5067 5152 5159 5165 5183 5197 4847 Name of Patentee .C . F . Heinrichs . . . . . . St . G . L . Fox . . . . . . J . S . Sellond and W . Ladd . . . . J . T . Sprague . . . . . . Ditto . . . . . . . . . . W . L . Scott A . Reimensclmeider and F . S . . . . . . . . . The following specificatioiis have been published during the past month.and can be obtained from the Great Seal Office. Cnrsitor Street. Chancery Lane. Loadon . TitIe of Patent . Price . Apparatus for Generating Electric Currents . . . . 10d . Electric Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . 8d . Obtaining Electric Light . . . . . . . . 6d . Producing Electric Light . . . . . . . . Gd . Apparatus for Generating Electric Currents .. . . 8d . 6d . Production. &c., of Electric and Electric Calcic Lights Christensen . . . . A . Miller . . . . . . F . J . Cheeseborough . . . . Ditto . . . . . . . . A . Cahen . . . . . . L . L . Pulvcrinncher . . . . Ditto . . . . . . . . F . W . Vogel . . . . . . G . Scarlett and C . Hayward R. . Saline . . . . . . E . Johnson and L . Robertson A . V . Newton . . . .. . S . P . and \V . P . Thompson .. 8 . Cohnb . . . . . . J . H . Johnson . . . . Ditto . . . . . . . . C . D . Abel (3 . Whyte . . . . . . H .. V . Tuson A . M . Clark W . R . Lake H . Wilde . . . . . . A . Ashby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Apparatus for Dividing Electric Light . . .. . . 4d . Manufacture of Illuminating Gas . . . . . . 6d . Distributing Electric Currents for Lighting. &c . . . IS . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . 8d . Manufacture of Salts of Soda . . . . . . . . 6d . Producing Light by Electricity . . . . . . . . Dynamo Electric Machine for producing Electric Currents . . . . . . . . . . . . Machinery for Generating Electricity .. . . . . Electric Magnetic Engines . . . . . . . . Electric Lamps or Regulators . . . . . . . . Softening Water . . . . . . . . . . . . Apparatus for Generating Chlorine Gas Apparatus for producing Electric Light . . . . . . . . Production of Electric Light . . . . . . . . . Electric Candle . . . . . . . . . . . . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . Apparatus for Lighting by Electricity .. . . . . lfanufacture of Pyroxyline . . . . . . . . Electric Lamps or Lights . . . . . . . . Preparation of Sulphurous Acid Gas . . . . . . Electric Lamps . . . . . . . . . . . . Electric Lighting Apparatus . . . . . . . . Ditto ditto . . . . . . . . Ga . Gd . 2d. 2d. 2d. 4d. 2d. 10d. 2d. 2d. 2d. 6d. Gd . 2d. 4d. 8d. 2d. 2a. BOOKS. &c., RECEIVED . The Chemist and Druggist ; The Brewers’ GutLrdian ; The British Medical Journal ; The Medical Press ; The Pharmaceutical Journal ; The Sanitary Record ; The Miller ; Journal of Applied Science ; The Boston Journal of Chemistry ; The Provisioner ; The American Dairyman; The Practitioner ; American New Remedies ; Proceedings of the American Chemical Society ; Le Praticien ; The Inventors’ Record ; New York Public Health ; Philadelphia Printers’ Circular ; Annual Announcement of the Faculty of Medicine of McGill University. Montreal ; Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution. New York ; Ammonia Liquor Tests. by F . W . Hartley .

ISSN:0003-2654    

DOI:10.1039/AN8790400159

出版商:RSC    

年代:1879

数据来源: RSC