EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 
271 
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.— April 12. 
(Before Mr. Justice Williams.) 
Thomas Spencer , a fishmonger, at Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, sur¬ 
rendered to take his trial for misdemeanour, in having - unlawfully sent 
a quantity of diseased meat to Newgate Market for sale as human food. 
Mr. Sleigh conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Corporation 
of London. Mr. Cooper was counsel for the defendant. 
It was proved that, on the 16th of February, a hamper, containing a 
quantity of meat in a very diseased state, was consigned to Mr. Greatorex, 
a highly respectable meat-salesman in Newgate Market, who, upon 
opening the hamper, at once saw that the meat was not fit for human 
food, and he gave notice to Mr. Fisher, one of the inspectors of the 
market, who seized the meat, and it was ordered to be destroyed. The 
hamper of meat appeared to have been consigned to London by the de¬ 
fendant, and Mr. Fisher went down to Hitchin and saw him upon the 
subject, and he said that he had merely killed and dressed the animal at 
the request of a person named Peck, a farmer and publican, residing 
near Hitchin, and that he had nothing more to do with the matter. The 
same defence was now set up on his behalf, and an endeavour was also 
made to show that the animal was not in a diseased state at the time it 
was slaughtered, and Peck, the owner, and a butcher named Taylor were 
called as witnesses for that purpose, and they swore that the cow had 
nothing the matter with her except a broken rib, caused by being 
trampled upon in the railway truck, and that the meat was in good con¬ 
dition at the time it was sent away. Upon being cross-examined, how¬ 
ever, it appeared that the animal was purchased for £4 5s, as a sort of 
speculation, and that she was unable to get up at the time she was 
slaughtered; and it was evident from the inode adopted to send the 
carcass to market that the parties knew pretty well that there was some¬ 
thing wrong in the transaction. 
The jury, after some deliberation, returned a verdict of guilty against 
the defendant, but at the same time strongly recommended him to mercy 
on the ground that he had been made a tool of by Peck, who, they thought, 
ought to have been placed in the dock with him. 
Mr. Sleigh said that he agreed in the opinion that had been expressed 
by the jury, and had stated so to the City Solicitor, by whom the pro¬ 
secution was conducted. 
Sentences. 
The prisoners Thomas Spencer and Morgan Blandford, who had also 
been convicted of sending diseased meat to Newgate Market for sale, 
were placed at the bar. 
His lordship , in passing sentence, said that the case of the prisoner 
Spencer was very different to the other one, and he agreed with the jury 
that it was very probable that he had been made a dupe by the man 
Peck. The sentence upon him, therefore, would be imprisonment for a 
fortnight in the gaol of Newgate. With regard to the other prisoner 
the case was very different. He had been guilty of the same act before, 
and had been cautioned ; but, notwithstanding that caution, it appeared 
that, for the sake of putting money in his pocket, he persisted in sending 
this diseased meat to market, regardless of the evil and mischief that 
might be occasioned to the poorer classes, who a.one were likelv to 
purchase such poisonous matter. He then sentenced this prisoner to 
six months’ imprisonment in Newgate. 
