Search results

The Standing Committee of the House of Commons on Trade, presided over by LORD E. FITZMAURICE, met again on July 16th and proceeded with the Sale of Adulterated Butter Bill.

In discussing the merits and demerits of infants' foods, it is impossible to avoid reference to the physiological problems connected with infantile digestion, because, of course, the whole question of suitability or otherwise turns upon the degree of digestibility of the preparations. Appearance and flavour, although of great importance in the case of adults generally, and invalids in particular, here play only a minor part.

Chocolate and cocoa are made from the “beans” or seeds of several small trees, natives of tropical America, of which Theobroma cacao (L.) is by far the most important. Cocoa beans were highly esteemed by the aborigines, especially the Aztecs of Mexico and Peru, who prepared from them beverages and foods. They were brought to the notice of Europeans by Cortez and other explorers, but were not extensively imported into Europe until the seventeenth century, about the time tea and coffee were introduced from the East. At present the world's supply comes chiefly from Venezuela, Guiana, Ecuador, Brazil, Trinidad, Cuba, Mexico, and other regions bordering on the Gulf of Mexico, being gathered in these regions from trees both wild and cultivated; and also to some extent from Java, Ceylon, Africa, and other parts of the Old World, where the tree has been successfully cultivated.

It is apparently becoming the fashion among certain types of self‐sufficient persons in this country to endeavour to bring discredit upon the scientific expert, and—whenever the practice can be indulged in with impunity—to snub and to insult him as far as possible. While this course of procedure is particularly to be observed when the expert is called upon to give evidence in a Court of Law, or to explain technical points before some highly inexpert body, it is not only in these circumstances that he is subjected to misrepresentation, discourtesy, and downright insult. Whenever a case occurs which appears to afford pabulum capable of being twisted into shape for the purpose, certain newspapers— generally, we are glad to say, of the lower class—are invariably ready to publish cheap sneers at science and scientific men, frequently accompanied by insulting suggestions. Other journals of a better class do not indulge in abuse and insulting suggestions, but confine themselves to lecturing the expert or experts with all that assurance which is characteristic of blatant ignorance. Accusations of incompetence and of culpable negligence are common in the gutter Press and in some so‐called Courts of Justice. Even suggestions of bad faith and of failure to honourably discharge duties undertaken are sometimes to be met with. It cannot be supposed that the reason for all this is to be found in the conduct of some very few persons who, in the eyes of all right‐thinking people, have brought discredit on themselves by appearing as “ advocate‐witnesses ” to defend the indefensible. At any rate, the conduct of such individuals affords no justification for tarring everybody with the same brush. The hostile, acidly‐cantankerous, and frequently grossly insolent attitude adopted by certain persons and in certain quarters towards those experts whose duties are of a public character and connected with legal or semi‐legal proceedings, is due to a reason which is not far to seek. It is due, in the first place, to the disgraceful ignorance in regard to scientific matters, even of the most elementary kind, which unhappily pervades all classes of the community;' and, secondly, to that form of jealousy peculiar to the small and mean mind which detests and kicks at anything and everything beyond its power of comprehension. When apparently contradictory evidence is given by scientific witnesses—appearing on opposite sides in a case—it is obviously far more easy and satisfactory to shriek about the “ differing of doctors ” than to admit that one's own miserable ignorance prevents one from seeing the points and from ascertaining whether there is any real contradiction or not. It is far more convenient to suggest that the public analyst, for instance, does not know what he is about, has made some absurd mistake, or has been guilty of scandalous negligence, than to admit that one does not understand his certificate owing to one's own defective education or inferior intellectual capacity.

The first series of colours experimented upon was the high‐grade Kohnstamm colours, which have been physiologically tested and prepared especially for use in colouring food products. The results recorded below are not the results of a single determination, but the experiments were repeated until we were satisfied, working with the chemicals we used, and by the methods employed, that the results were uniform and reliable. The results with the Kohnstamm dyes are as follows : —

The final report of the Butter Regulations Committee has now been published and it is earnestly to be hoped that Regulations based on the Committee's Recommendations will at once be framed and issued by the Board of Agriculture. It will be remembered that in an Interim Report the Committee recommended the adoption of a limit of 16 per cent. for the proportion of water in butter, and that, acting on this recommendation, the Board of Agriculture drew up and issued the “Sale of Butter Regulations, 1902,” under the powers conferred on the Board by Section 4 of the Food Act of 1899. In the present Report the Committee deal with the other matters referred to them, namely, as to what Regulations, if any, might with advantage be made for determining what deficiency in any of the normal constituents of butter, or what addition of extraneous matter other than water, should raise a presumption until the contrary is proved that the butter is not “genuine.” The Committee are to be congratulated on the result of their labours—labours which have obviously been both arduous and lengthy. The questions which have had to be dealt with are intricate and difficult, and they are, moreover, of a highly technical nature. The Committee have evidently worked with the earnest desire to arrive at conclusions which, when applied, would afford as great a measure of protection—as it is possible to give by means of legislative enactments—to the consumer and to the honest producer. The thorough investigation which has been made could result only in the conclusions at which the Committee have arrived, namely, that, in regard to the administration of the Food Acts, (1) an analytical limit should be imposed which limit should determine what degree of deficiency in those constituents which specially characterise butter should raise a presumption that the butter is not “genuine”; (2) that the use of 10 per cent. of a chemically‐recognisable oil in the manufacture of margarine be made compulsory; (3) that steps should be taken to obtain international co‐operation; and finally, that the System of Control, as explained by various witnesses, commends itself to the Committee.

In a volume of the Cornhill Magazine published in the year 1860 we have discovered an article entitled “Adulteration and its Remedy” which well deserves the attention of those persons who imagine that we have made “wonderful progress” during the past half century and that the trade morality of to‐day is infinitely superior to the trade morality of the past. The unknown author of this article must have had a very clear appreciation of the nature of the gigantic evil upon which he wrote and of the character and probable effectiveness of the remedies to be applied. The adulteration of the period is described by him as a “strange, disgusting and poisonous demon” and while it is true that at the time, as shown by the revelations of the “Lancet Sanitary Commission,” there existed many forms of gross, disgusting and poisonous adulteration which are but rarely detected nowadays, our author's somewhat hyperbolic definition may still be regarded as applicable. For many of the grosser forms of adulteration prevalent fifty years ago were largely due to the ignorance of the adulterator. His prototype of the present day is no more troubled with moral scruples than he was. The dissemination and absorption of knowledge has not been accompanied, as some rabid “educationalists’ would have us believe, by any improvements in morality and virtue. The “faker ” of to‐day is merely a more skilful “faker” than his predecessor. He knows the value and makes full use of “expert” assistance, both scientific and legal, for the purpose of facilitating his escape—easy enough in any case—from what grip there is in that cranky and lumbering legislative machinery which is innocently supposed by the majority of people in this country to act as a sufficiently effective deterrent and repressant.

Some misconception appears to have been caused in certain districts by the issue of a circular by the Local Government Board, dated December 12, 1905, and addressed to the Clerks and Town Clerks of counties and boroughs. In many cases the letter in question has been forwarded to the Public Analysts, who, seeing it for the first time, naturally imagine that it imposes fresh duties on them, and that the Public Analyst is to collect and tabulate the details with regard to prosecutions and fines.

It is a matter of common knowledge that beer, in its several varieties, is by no means the same thing to‐day as it was a generation or less ago; the progress of chemical and biological knowledge on the one hand, and the keenness of competition on the other, have led to great alterations both in the materials used in its production and the methods by which it is produced. Exact or reliable knowledge about this, however, is far from being common; vehement assertions are made that all or almost all the changes are for the better, and also that beer is now a manufactured chemical product of deleterious nature, in which little or nothing of genuine material is used. Such statements are rendered unacceptable by the existence of self‐interest on one side and prejudice on the other. A short account of some of the facts concerned may, therefore, be of service.

At a recent inquest upon the body of a woman who was alleged to have died as the result of taking certain drugs for an improper purpose, one of the witnesses described himself as “an analyst and manufacturing chemist,” but when asked by the coroner what qualifications he had, he replied : “I have no qualifications whatever. What I know I learned from my father, who was a well‐known ‘F.C.S.’” Comment on the “F.C.S.” is needless.