920 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[May IT, 1873. 
James Wilson, a baker, of West Pields, Barnes, was 
summoned for a similar offence. 
Por the defence a report in a newspaper was read, in 
which it was stated that flour was impregnated with alum 
which came out of the stones used in grinding corn. 
Mr. Ingham said some stones might have a certain 
portion of alum in them, but to yield sufficient to be in 
jurious to health a millstone would be required to be worn 
away. When a man carried on the business of a baker 
he must know whether his bread contained alum or not. 
He held that where a man carried on a trade which re¬ 
quired skill he must have a knowledge of it. 
The defendant was then fined 20s. and 23s. costs. 
The Sale of Annatto.—Alleged Imitation of Label. 
In the Vice-Chancellor’s Court, on Monday, May 5th, 
the case of Fullwood v. Fullwood was heard. It was a 
motion to restrain the defendant from selling annatto in 
bottles bearing labels similar to the plaintiff’s. The 
plaintiff, Richard Jackson Fullwood, of 24, Somerset 
Place, Hoxton, is a manufacturer of annatto. The plain¬ 
tiff’s trade mark was a stag with an olive branch, and his 
bottles were of different sizes, bearing labels of a light 
brown or grey colour, having under the trade mark the 
title—“ To Farmers and Dairymen. R. J. Fullwood and 
Co.’s Highly Approved Fluid Extract of Annatto for 
Colouring Cheese and Butter.” The defendant, Henry 
Fullwood, is a nephew of the plaintiff, and a manufacturer 
of annatto under the firm of “Henry Fullwood and Co.” 
The plaintiff alleged that the defendant, who had formerly 
carried on his business at Kingsland, had recently removed 
to No. 1, Somerset Place, Hoxton, a few doors from the 
plaintiff’s premises, and had adopted labels and bottles 
similar to his. The defendant’s labels bore at the top 
the device of the Royal Arms, and the following title:— 
“For Colouring Cheese and Butter. H. Fullwood and 
Co.’s Concentrated Liquid Extract of Annatto for Farmers 
and Dairymen.” The plaintiff accordingly now moved 
for an injunction as above mentioned. 
The Vice-Chancellor said that the Fullwood family had, 
it appeared, been annatto manufacturers since the year 
1785. The defendant had in 1870 set up in business in 
Kingsland. When he began business he called himself 
“ H. Fullwood and Co.,” the object of which, if it was a 
right object, was not altogether clear. When a man 
starting a business by himself added “ and Company” to 
his name when he intended to trade alone, his so doing 
was a badge, to say the least, of unfairness. It was not 
quite a proper thing to do. The defendant’s whole con¬ 
duct showed a desire to become known as connected with 
the plaintiff’s old-established firm of “ Fullwood and Co.” 
To complete the matter, in the spring of 1872 the de¬ 
fendant moved into the very street in which the plaintiff 
carried on his business. There was no shadow of a doubt 
that Ins object was to become known as Fullwood and 
Co., of Somerset Place. The public would not notice the 
difference between No. 1 and No. 24. His conduct was 
unfair and fraudulent, and such as the Court could not 
allow. If the defendant had kept away from Somerset 
Place, he might have carried on his business with im¬ 
punity. But his Honour was satisfied that when the 
defendant removed his business into this street, so close 
to his uncle, he did so with the hope that the public 
might be led to confound the two businesses, and to further 
his object he had adopted bottles of the same shape as 
those used by his uncle, and labels very similar in appear¬ 
ance. Therefore, under all the circumstances of the case, 
he was of opinion that the plaintiff was entitled to an in¬ 
junction .—Grocery News. 
A Druggist Fined under the Vaccination Act. 
At the Preston Police Court, Mr. Edward Foster, 
chemist and druggist, of Friargate, Preston, was sum¬ 
moned, for the twenty-fifth time, for the non-vaccination 
of his child. The defendant appeared, by proxy, his 
representative being Dr. Duprd, of Manchester. Dr. 
Duprd contended that vaccination was impossible. They 
punished Mr. Foster now for the twenty-fifth time for 
refusing to do that which he could not do. The Lyons 
Society of Medical Sciences had appointed a committee, 
of which MM. Chanveau and Viennois were prominent 
members, to experiment upon the transmission of small¬ 
pox and cow-pox. From ample data they concluded that 
these diseases were perfectly distinct, the one from the 
other, and could never be transmuted the one into the 
other. The fact was that the vaccination movement was 
a’money-getting swindle, and many persons connected with 
the Local Government Board made a fine thing out of it. 
The Mayor said that the summons required the appear¬ 
ance of the child. It had not been brought, and the case 
would be adjourned for a week for its production. 
Hospital Inquiry. 
In the course of an inquiry by a committee of the 
Guardians of the Wandsworth and Clapham Union re¬ 
specting two deaths that had taken place in the workhouse, 
it was incidentally stated by a nurse that she administered 
once two tablespoonfuls of ammonia and ether to one of 
the patients. In their report the committee state their 
opinion that the “ lax and dangerous system of allowing a 
nurse to administer on her own judgment and responsi¬ 
bility ammonia and ether, or any other drug, cannot be 
too strongly condemned,” and suggest that such a course 
might have been fatal in the case under inquiry. Ulti¬ 
mately it was decided to bring the facts of the case under 
the notice of the Local Government Board .—From the 
Wandsworth and Battersea District Times. 
On the 8th of May, Mr. David Edwards, Pharmaceu¬ 
tical Chemist, died at his home, Glanmyddyfi, near Llan- 
dilo, South Wales. Mr. Edwards was a student in the 
Pharmaceutical Laboratory during the Session of 1871-2, 
where he was much esteemed by his tutors and fellow- 
students. He passed his Minor examination with honours 
in July, and his Major with honours in December, 1872. 
It is thought probable that his early death was in a great 
measure the effect of privations which he suffered in Paris 
during the siege and the civil war. 
Cflrapttaa. 
“ Inquirer .”—We think the assumption of the modified 
title you mention would be merely an evasion of the Phar¬ 
macy Acts, 1852 and 1868. According to section 12 of the 
former, any person unlawfully styling himself “pharmaceu¬ 
tical chemist” or “pharmaceutist” is liable to a penalty of 
£6 ; and the latter, clause 15, still more explicitly provides 
that any one who shall improperly use the title “pharma¬ 
ceutical chemist, pharmaceutist, or pharmacist,” shall be 
similarly liable. We think, therefore, you will clearly see 
that your informant must be grievously mistaken. 
“ How to Kill Beetles .”—Our correspondent is thanked 
for his communication, but inasmuch as we reprinted a 
paragraph recommending borax for the destruction of 
beetles just two years since, and its merits were then dis¬ 
cussed by several correspondents (see Vol. I. p. 982, 1001, 
etc.), we think the proposed remedy is neither a novelty 
nor yet sufficiently forgotten to be brought forward as one. 
“A Subscriber to the Fund .”—We have received your 
letter, but inasmuch as Mr. Clark has now virtually aban¬ 
doned the ground which he first took in criticizing the ad¬ 
ministration of the Benevolent Fund, we think it unde¬ 
sirable to prolong this discussion. 
*** We are compelled by press of matter to defer the 
publication of several communications, answers to corre- 
spondents, etc. 
Communications, Letters, etc., have been received from 
Messrs. Pocklington, Sturton, J. Abraham, G. Brown, 
Wilkinson, Matthias, Learoyd, “A Cumbrian,” “An On¬ 
looker,” “Boz,” “Reader,” “Ignoramus,” “Live and Let 
Live,” “Olirn Juvenis,” “Isca,” G. C., H. G.R., R. T. C. D. 
