510 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. VII. No. 172. 



in food laws are noticeable in all the dis- 

 cussions of this period, and doubtless they 

 had no small effect in delaying the passage 

 of an efficient food law. At the least they 

 furnished weapons for an open opposition 

 which drew its inspiration from the profits 

 of adulteration. 



In 1857 Dr. Hassell published a second 

 book entitled 'Adulterations Detected: or 

 Plain Instruction for the Discovery of 

 Frauds in Food and Medicine.' 



During this period of discussion and 

 waiting in England the French were deal- 

 ing with offenders under their national and 

 municipal laws forbidding the preparation 

 and sale of adulterated articles of merchan- 

 dise and the use of incorrect weights and 

 measures. The penalties under these laws 

 were publication, fine and imprisonment. 

 Dealers convicted under municipal laws 

 were compelled to post conspicuously in 

 their places of business large placards with 

 a confession, in detail, of their guilt. 



In 1860 Parliament passed the ' Adulter- 

 ation of Food and Drugs Act,' which made 

 it illegal, first, to sell any article of food or 

 drink with which, to the knowledge of the 

 seller, any article or ingredient injurious to 

 health had been mixed; second, to sell as 

 pure or unadulterated any article of food 

 which was adultei-ated or not pure. The 

 appointment of analysts was optional with 

 boards of health, church vestry and other 

 bodies. The prescribed fees, ranging from 

 a half crown to ten shillings, were hardly 

 sufficient to pay the cost of materials re- 

 quired for the analysis. 



The law was a beginning, but scarcely 

 more. The failure to establish standards 

 and provide for the certain appointment of 

 inspectors and analysts, and the provision 

 making proof of ' guilty knowledge' neces- 

 sary to conviction, insured the failure of the 

 law as a practical measure. Indeed, these 

 defects were plainly and persistently pointed 

 out before the passage of the act, and it is 



diificult to escape the conclusion that among 

 those who voted for its passage were some 

 who knew how to ' run with the hare and 

 hold with the hound.' With only a few 

 trained analysts, each of them jealous of 

 the others, and with no recognized stand- 

 ards, it seems the time had not come for a 

 more efficient food law in England than 

 that of 1860. 



The agitation was continued and in 1872 

 the Act of 1860 was re-enforced by the 

 ' Act for the Prevention of the Adulter- 

 ation of Food and Drinks and of Drugs,' 

 (35 and 36, Vic. C. 74). This act provided 

 for the appointment of inspectors, did not 

 require the proof of ' guilty knowledge ' for 

 conviction under the charge of selling adul- 

 terated foods, and was applicable to drugs 

 as well as foods. In correcting one of the 

 flaws in the Act of 1860 by not requiring 

 the proof of ' guilty knowledge,' a serious 

 mistake was made in affording no protection 

 to retail dealers, and much injustice re- 

 sulted. 



The dissatisfaction produced by the short- 

 comings of this act were called to the 

 attention of Parliament by numerous peti- 

 tions from all the larger cities. The result 

 was the appointment,, in 1874, of a second 

 Select Committee, which advised that the 

 act be amended. The committee also ex- 

 pressed the opinion that much of the in- 

 justice complained of was due, not to the 

 act itself, but " to the want of a clear under- 

 standing as to what does, and what does 

 not, constitute adulteration, and in some 

 cases to the conflicting decisions and in- 

 experience of the analysts." 



As the result of the investigation and re- 

 port of the Select Committee, legislation 

 was again attempted the following year. 



" An Act to repeal the Adulteration of 

 Food Acts and to make better provision for 

 the Sale of Food and Drugs in a pure 

 state " (38 and 39 Vic. C. 63, 11th Aug., 

 1875). 



