confirmation of Mr. Allen's certificate; but we think it would have been more satisfactory if the Somerset House chemists had stated how much alum they believed to be present, instead of giving the absolute minimum amount, without mention of the maximum.

Our versatile contemporary, the Grocer, having completed its review of the German reproduction of the researches of English Public Analysts on the Analysis of Tea has been treating its readers to their periodical dose of diluted science. That our contemporary should take a special and fatherly interest in, and do its best to circulate, productions remarkable for being largely diluted, is only natural; but the article entitled "Ridiculous Adulteration," which appears in the number for March 6th, is unapproached in absurdity even by the numerous attempts in that direction with which our contemporary's pages have rendered us so familiar. In the article in question, the Grocer takes Mr. Allen to task for asserting that alum is used to improve the quality of flour, especially in bad seasons. "When they tell us openly, deliberately, and under oath that theth part of alum is added by millers or flour merchants for the purpose of improving inferior flour, and enabling them to palm it upon their customers as a superior article, what] must be the mental condition of analysts ?" "We should like to know how it operates on the buyer, in order to deceive him, when he examines the sample." "If Mr. Allen had found 4 or 5 per cent., or anything like a commercial quantity, of alum or alumina in the flour, it would be mere hair-splitting and special pleading to talk about dust at all." "We are bound to protest, in the name of common sense, against the assumption that vendors of flour defraud their customers by mixing with the genuine article such a quantity as nd part of its bulk of alum crystals, the which crystals alter the quality, or apparent quality, of the flour, and deceive the purchaser by merely lying amidst the particles of flour, without undergoing any chemical change whatever."

“In the name of common sense," why did not the Grocer have a talk with a miller before publishing such a tissue of false arguments. Any miller would have told the writer that the addition of a quarter of a pound of alum to the sack of flour would raise the selling value of that flour by about 1d. per stone, and hence there is ample inducement to adulterate. lb. of alum to the sack is 28 grains to 4 lbs., roboth part by weight, or both part by measure. This quantity is therefore but slightly in excess of the amount found by Mr. Allen in the Eckington flour. In the Retford case, reported on another the miller was in the habit of using "three handfuls of alum in every page, sack of flour." Here we have a larger, but still very small, proportion of alum. Four or 5 per cent.-the "commercial quantity" suggested by the article in the Grocer-would be 10 or 12 lbs. to the sack! Seeing, therefore, that the quantity found was stated in the certificate to be somewhat less than the proportion usually employed, and was clearly" anything like a commercial quantity," common justice ought to cause the insertion in the Grocer of an apology for having, in ignorance of the subject, created an erroneous impression.

A somewhat amusing scene is reported in a paper which has been sent to us, as · having occurred between Dr. Tidy (who, it will be remembered, was one of the defence witnesses in the Alum in Baking Powder case) and the West Ham Local Board. The

learned doctor, it seems, had received a number of samples, but had not thought proper to give certificates until too late to prosecute. In excuse for this, he alleged, inter alia, that there were many things a man in large practice had to do, and that he was not aware of the 28 days' limitation in the Act, but at the same time he offered to resign. It is, we think, a great pity that he did not resign and have done with it, because a man in such large general practice as to forbid his even making himself master of the requirements of the Act, to work which he is appointed, is surely wrong in continuing to pretend to carry out the duties of his office. The retaining of the post of Public Analyst by anyone who does not give his immediate and careful attention to every sample he receives, and who neglects to report thereon "with all reasonable speed" is a farce, which had better cease, both in the interests of the analyst himself and the public.

During the discussion, Dr. Tidy is also reported to have said, "It is not my wish to be troublesome; but there is one thing I shall set myself against, and that is, mere prosecutions for the sake of prosecution. I abominate the thing, and if ever I was thought to pass over samples, it was because I saw that action would be merely harassing to trade." To this, Mr. Helmore, a member of the Board, very neatly and appropriately replied that "the Board expected to receive a correct analysis from him, leaving it to the Board to judge as to whether it is a case to prosecute or not." We commend Mr. Helmore's advice to the learned doctor, and advise him in future to do what a good cobbler should, viz., stick to his last, and not invite articles in trade journals, discrediting the whole body of Public Analysts by arrogating functions which the Act does not give him.

We have received letters complaining of the conduct of one of the members of our Society, who calls himself a "Public Analyst," although he holds at the moment no appointment. Such a course is clearly wrong, and the gentleman in question will doubtless see this, and substitute "Member of the Society of Public Analysts" for the bare words" Public Analyst" on his printed headings until he obtains office.

Mr. W. Johnstone, F.C.S., has been appointed Public Analyst for King's Lynn, vice Mr. W. M. Hamlet, resigned.

RECENT CHEMICAL PATENTS.

The following specifications have been recently published, and can be obtained from the Great Seal Office, Cursitor Street, Chancery Lane, London.

3195 W. L. Wise.. 3196 S. T. Thomas 3200 G. H. Ogston

Softening Water and obtaining Fertilizing Compounds 2d.

BOOKS, &c., RECEIVED.

The Chemist and Druggist; The Brewers' Guardian; The British Medical Journal; The Medical Press; The Pharmaceutical Journal; The Sanitary Record; The Miller; Journal of Applied Science ; The Boston Journal of Chemistry; The Provisioner; The Practitioner; New Remedies; Proceedings of the American Chemical Society: Le Practioner; The Inventors' Record; New York Public Health: ' Philadelphia Printers' Circular: The Scientific American; The American Traveller; Society of Arts Journal.

91

THE ANALYST.

MAY, 1880.

SOCIETY OF PUBLIC ANALYSTS.

An Ordinary Meeting of this Society was held on Wednesday evening, the 14th April, at Burlington House, Piccadilly. In the absence of the President, Dr. Dupré, F.R.S., took the chair.

The Scrutineers having examined the voting papers, reported that the following gentlemen had been duly elected as Members :

F. A. Bond, M.B., &c., Brincklow, Coventry.

J. Napier, Public Analyst for West Suffolk, &c.

H. S. Carpenter, Analytical Chemist, Holborn Viaduct.

Mr. J. J. Eastick, Analyst to Fieldgate Sugar Refinery was proposed as a Member, and will be balloted for at the next Meeting.

The following papers were then read and discussed :

"Some Results of the Analysis of various Tinned Food Products," by G. W. Wigner, F.C.S., and Mr. Wigner also gave some further particulars as to the "Work Done during 1879 under the Sale of Food and Drugs' Act."

"Note on a Fibrous Substance found in the Intestine of a Sheep," by Bernard Dyer, F.C.S.

"Notes on Cream of Tartar," by A. H. Allen, F.C.S.

"On the Manufacture of Citric Acid," by J. Carter Bell, F.C.S.

The next Meeting will be held at Burlington House, on Wednesday, 2nd June next.

ON THE WORK DONE BY PUBLIC ANALYSTS DURING 1879 UNDER THE SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS' ACT.

BY G. W. WIGNER, F.C.S.

Read before the Society of Public Analysts, on 17th March, 1880. THE returns which have been furnished, in response to the application of the Proprietors of THE ANALYST, by Members of our Society and by a few other Public Analysts who are not members, but who take an interest in this annual statement, enable me this year to lay before you much fuller statistics as to the amount of work which has been done under the Sale of Food and Drugs' Act during 1879, than has been possible in any previous year. These detailed results are shown in the annexed table.

In 1877 we received returns from 127 districts; in 1878 from 168 districts; while this year we have returns from 212 districts. There is an apparent increase in the number of samples analysed during 1879 of about 2,5C samples, but this is, probably, mainly due

to the fact that there are so many more returns.

It is rather unsatisfactory to note that the general average shows a slight increase in the proportion of adulterated samples, the percentages shown by the returns of various years being as follows:

I cannot trace out any special cause for this increase, and it will, therefore, be well to consider it first in reference to the different classes of samples. The total number of samples examined in these 212 districts has been 17,574. Omitting Somersetshire, as to which we have received no details, these samples have been divided as follows:—

The next point of interest, is to notice how the various classes stand as regards the percentages of adulteration, as compared with those which were shown by the same classes of goods in the previous years, the percentage in each class being calculated on its own class total, and not on the general total of samples analysed.

From these figures it will be seen that wines and spirits, which occupied the worst place in 1877, with 47 per cent., and fell in 1878 to 29.3 per cent, now shows the worst place of all, 28.3 per cent. being adulterated. Of course this includes, as before, those samples of spirits which were returned as watered, but as a limit has been laid down by The Sale of Food and Drugs' Amendment Act, which is lower than had been previously customary in many districts, I think we must come to the conclusion that the degree to which the spirits were adulterated was probably considerably greater during 1879 than in 1878.

Next on the list come drugs, showing 26.66 per cent. adulterated, as against 35.77 in the previous year. The difference is very great, but it must be borne in mind that this year comparatively few samples of violet powder are included, and the result is, therefore, probably a more near approach to a fair average. Of course by this I do not mean a fair average of all the drugs sold, because the inspectors naturally purchase most frequently those kinds which are more likely to be inferior or impure. The most noticeable remark in the returns, as to drugs, is one relating to so-called quinine wine, which contained no quinine at all. This was in the County of Antrim.

Milk shows a considerably increased percentage of adulteration-3-68 per cent.

more than in 1878. It is difficult to trace this increase to any other cause than the extremely low fines which are generally thought sufficient in cases of milk adulteration. It really is a serious matter that more than 22 per cent. of the samples of milk purchased by inspectors, who are in almost every case well known and recognised, should turn out to be adulterated, even when judged by the low limit adopted by the Society. Two cases which have been reported appear of some special interest here. In one case at Margate, Mr. Harvey tells us that the defendant pleaded that the milk was taken from a particularly poor cow, and the case was adjourned in order that the inspector might procure a sample from this cow. This was done and the sample was analysed, with the result of solids not fat 9.46; fat 2.75, and the defendant was, in consequence, heavily fined, as he deserved.

In another case, Mr. Carter Bell refers to a defendant pleading that, owing to the deficiency of grass, &c., his cow had been fed entirely upon hay, and the plea was so far successful that the magistrates acquitted him; whereupon the next defendant, determined not to be outdone, pleaded that his cows had been fed entirely upon straw, and, in consequence, he also was acquitted. Mr. Bell thinks this case suitable for investigation by the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Butter appears to show a continued increase of adulteration, the percentages for 1877, 1878, and 1879, respectively being 12:48, 18.23, 13.93, or an increase of almost exactly 7 per cent. per year. It is, perhaps, hardly fair to attribute this to greater accuracy in butter analysis, because even in 1877 the methods were sufficiently well understood to make it certain that few adulterated samples would be passed as genuine; while on the other hand, it is a notorious fact that the make of butterine has greatly increased during the past two years, and the figures point to the opinion that the sale of butterine under the name of butter has become more common. The number of samples examined during 1879-nearly 1,000, is sufficient to prevent any idea of an unfair average being drawn.

Groceries show a decided improvement on the two previous years, the reduction in the amounts of adulteration being 1.16 per cent., but still the present figure is far too high. Doubtless a large proportion is due to the sale of chicory and coffee under the name of coffee, and other similar practices, but even shutting out those samples, which are probably from this cause returned as adulterated, the remaining percentage is much greater than it should be.

Bread and flour again show a change for the worse; in this particular case the increase may be more apparent than real, and is due partly to the improved method of analysis devised by Dr. Dupré, which, although it has unquestionably proved some samples to be genuine, in reference to which considerable doubt would otherwise have been felt, yet has on the other hand enabled the presence of alum in flour to be detected in some cases with absolute certainty where, without this process, suspicion only could have been entertained.

This year our correspondents have, at some trouble to themselves, separated the samples of water from the sundries. As we have so often pointed out before, water does not really belong to the work done under the Act by the Public Analyst, and should in no case be undertaken by him except for a separate and special fee or a larger salary than would otherwise be accepted, nor should he even then issue certificates on the forms provided for in the Schedule to the Act. It is, of course, quite right that the water analyses of the district for sanitary purposes should be done by the Public Analyst, but it is