RESEARCH BUREAU |
| DIRECTOR Myles Na Gopaleen |
ABOUT
ADULTERATION OF BEER.
To the Editor of the Chemical News. Sir,—As disputed cases of Public Analysts under the.new Act will have to be referred to Somerset House, the result of the first reference of such a kind, so far as I am aware, may be interesting to some of your readers.
Some time ago, I gave a certificate of a beer being slightly adulterated by containing a small excess of common salt. The case was defended by the brewers (a Manchester firm). An adjournment was asked for, with the desire that the remaining poition of the sample should be submitted to Somerset House. This wish was complied with ; the sample was despatched, and in clue course the Somerset House authorities reported that it contained 58-20 grs. of salt per gallon, as against 59/05 grs., the amount given on my certificate—of course, to me, a very satisfactory result. The case has since been withdrawn, as explained by the enclosed cutting from the Midland Counties Express of the 14th inst. —I am, &c,
E. W. T. Jones,
Public Analyst for South Staffordshire and the Borough of Wolverhampton. Public Analysts' Laboratory, 10, Victoria Street, Wolverhampton, August 17, 1875.
"the New Adulteration Act.—Mr. Underhill brought under the notice of the learned Stipendiary (J. Spooner, Esq.) a case which was heard some weeks ago at Wednesbury, involving a charge against a publican named Shaw, living at Great Bridge, of selling adulterated ale. The certificate of the county analyst, he said, was to the effect that the ale contained nearly 59 grains of salt to the, gallon ; and the analyst at Somerset House, to whom a sample had been sent for inspection, gave practically the same figures as Mr. Jones. The brewers, who were really defending the case, were desirous of having the question judiciously settled as to whether a hard and fast line must be drawn at 50 grains to the gallon, but a new Act of Parliament affecting the point would come into operation on the 1st of October next, and £ny decision which was arrived at now might be altered at that time. He had, therefore, had a conversation with Mr. Horder, the inspector under the Adulteration Act, and suggested to him that the ends of justice would be met by the withdrawal of the case on the defendant paying all the costs.