198 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE VICTORIA INSTITUTE. 
In none of the cases I have mentioned does the Government 
of a country particularly interfere with the ordinary law of con- 
tract between buyer and seller. It is only in connection with 
Food Adulteration that special laws are enacted. And the 
reason for this is not far to seek. The question of Food Adul- 
teration is so intimately connected with the health of the com 
munity, and this in its turn with national prosperity and pro- 
gress, that the Governments of all civilised countries have found 
it necessary to take steps for the prevention of practices fraught 
with consequences so serious and certain. After careful enquiry, 
it was established, that many articles of food were so tampered 
with as to be injurious to health, and it was resolved that 
nothing short of active Government interference could secure for 
the public that protection which was necessary for their health 
and prosperity. Food Adulteration was regarded as a national 
enemy to be subdued by imperial forces. But the Governments 
did not confine their operations to adulterations injurious to 
health, they decided also to protect the public against fraudulent 
adulterations. 
For these two classes of adulteration they provided different 
kinds of punishment. Deleterious adulterations were punished 
by imprisonment, without the option of a fine for second 
offences ; fraudulent adulterations were punishable by fines only. 
And the result of the severe punishment in the one case is, that 
adulterations injurious to health are now comparatively rare and 
harmless. 
Fines for fraudulent adulterations have not proved a 
sufficient deterrent] and they never will so long as the profits 
are greater than the fines. 
Having said so much by way of introduction, I think I may 
with advantage say a few words on the early history of adul- 
TP ration. J 
The first case of which we have any record 
two and a half centuries before Glirici- i i ; i.-’ 
