Search results

The Sanitary Committee of a certain County Council, strong with the strength of recent creation, have lately been animated by a desire to distinguish themselves in some way, and, proceeding along the lines of least resistance, they appear to have selected the Public Analyst as the most suitable object for attack. The charge against this unfortunate official was not that he is incompetent, or that he had been in any way negligent of his duties as prescribed by Act of Parliament, but simply and solely that he has the temerity to reside in London, which city is distant by a certain number of miles from the much favoured district controlled by the County Council aforesaid. The committee were favoured in their deliberations by the assistance of no less an authority than the “Principal” of a local “Technical School”;—and who could be more capable than he to express an opinion upon so simple a matter? This eminent exponent of scientific truths, after due and proper consideration, is reported to have delivered himself of the opinion that “scientifically it would be desirable that the analyst should reside in the district, as the delay occasioned by the sending of samples of water to London is liable to produce a misleading effect upon an analysis.” Apparently appalled by the contemplation of such possibilities, and strengthened by another expression of opinion to the effect that there were as “good men” in the district as in London, the committee resolved to recommend the County Council to determine the existing arrangement with the Public Analyst, and to appoint a “local analyst for all purposes.” Thus, the only objection which could be urged to the employment of a Public Analyst resident in London was the ridiculous one that the composition of a sample of water was likely to seriously alter during the period of its transit to London, and this contention becomes still more absurd when it is remembered that the examination of water samples is no part of the official duty of a Public Analyst. The employment of local scientific talent may be very proper when the object to be attained is simply the more or less imperfect instruction of the rising generation in the rudiments of what passes in this country for “technical education”; but the work of the Public Analyst is serious and responsible, and cannot be lightly undertaken by every person who may be acquainted with some of the uses of a test‐tube. The worthy members of this committee may find to their cost, as other committees have found before them, that persons possessing the requisite knowledge and experience are not necessarily indigenous to their district. Supposing that the County Council adopts the recommendation, the aspirations of the committee may even then be strangled in their infancy, as the Local Government Board will want to know all about the matter, and the committee will have to give serious and valid reasons in support of their case.

If additional evidence were needed of the connection between food supply and the spread of infectious disease, it would be found in a report recently presented to the Finsbury Borough Council by its Medical Officer of Health, Dr. GEORGE NEWMAN. It appears that in the early part of May a number of cases of scarlet fever were notified to Dr. NEWMAN, and upon inquiry being made it was ascertained that nearly the whole of these cases had partaken of milk from a particular dairy. A most pains‐taking investigation was at once instituted, and the source of the supply was traced to a farm in the Midlands, where two or three persons were found recovering from scarlet fever. The wholesale man in London, to whom the milk was consigned, at first denied that any of this particular supply had been sent to shops in the Finsbury district, but it was eventually discovered that one, or possibly two, churns had been delivered one morning, with the result that a number of persons contracted the disease. One of the most interesting points in Dr. NEWMAN'S report is that three of these cases, occurring in one family, received milk from a person who was not a customer of the wholesale dealer mentioned above. It transpired on the examination of this last retailer's servants that on the particular morning on which the infected churn of milk had been sent into Finsbury, one of them, running short, had borrowed a quart from another milkman, and had immediately delivered it at the house in which these three cases subsequently developed. The quantity he happened to borrow was a portion of the contents of the infected churn.

We observe with pleasure that the French Analytical Control, which is known as the Controle Chimique Permanent Français, continues to make satisfactory progress. The value and importance of the system of Control cannot fail to meet with appreciation in France—as it cannot fail to meet with appreciation elsewhere—so soon as its objects and method of working have been understood and have become sufficiently well known. From the reports which appear from time to time in l'Hygiène Moderne, the organ of the French Control, it is obvious that a number of French firms of the highest standing have grasped the fact that to place their products on the market with a permanent and authoritative scientific guarantee as to their nature and quality, is to meet a growing public demand, and must therefore become a commercial necessity. An ample assurance that the Controle Chimique Permanent Français is a solid and stable undertaking is afforded by the facts that it is under the general direction of so distinguished an expert as M. Ferdinand Jean and that he is assisted by several well‐known French scientists in carrying out the very varied technical work required.

The following report was brought up by Dr. P. Brouardel, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine of Paris, President of the Commission, and was submitted for the approval of the Congress:

In connection with the suggestion recently made in the BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL to the effect that a National Pure Food Association should be established it is of importance to call attention to the fact that a society describing itself as the “League for the Defence of Human Life” has been recently formed in Paris with the object of preventing the frauds practised by dishonest traders upon their customers. One of the obligations entered into by the members of the League is to discover and prosecute persons engaged in the sale of adulterated or injurious articles of food and drink. Judging from the recent reports of the proceedings of certain Parisian tradesmen it would appear that a society of this description has much scope for its operations in the French Metropolis, and, as we have suggested, a society with similar objects might with advantage be formed in this country, with branches in all the principal cities and towns. With the legal machinery placed at the disposal of local authorities, cumbrous, inadequate and weak as it is, much more might be done in the way of repression if only the responsible authorities could be brought better to appreciate their duty.