View report page

247
[1905
purpose of adulterating those other well known beverages. The practice has
been steadily on the increase during the last 10 years so that now it is almost
impossible to obtain pure whisky, whether Irish or Scotch, or rum in public
houses, but only a spirit which contain? a very large proportion of grain, maize,
or patent still-spirit.
As if this were not sufficient, so-called " blenders " procure a rough and
highly flavoured malt or pot still spirit for the purpose of the mixture, so that
a small quantity will give the characteristics of pot still whisky to their
compound.
As a result of the adulteration of whisky, 11 summonses were issued
against retail offenders in Islington.
These cases, however, had not been heard at the end of the year, and,
therefore, do not rightly come into a report of the year's work.
Nevertheless, as at the time the record of the year's proceedings is being
written, a Magistrate's (Mr. Fordham) decision had been obtained in favour
of the contention of the Borough Council that patent still spirit is not Scotch
or Irish Whiskey, but that decision has been appealed against and is at
present receiving consideration of the Chairman and Magistrates sitting at
the Clerkenwell Sessions.*
It may be convenient here to give Mr. Fordham's judgment delivered
February 26th, 1906, at the North London Police Court, in these cases.
JUDGMENT.
Mr. Fordham : These are two summonses for contravention of Section 6 of the Sale of
Food and Drugs Act, 1875, selected from a number of such summonses by arrangement
between the parties. It was agreed that they should be heard together.
The complaint against the Defendant, Thomas Samuel Wells, is that he sold, to the
prejudice of the purchaser who demanded Irish whiskey, something which was not of the
nature, substance and qualify of Irish whiskey, and against the defendant James Davidge
that he sold, to the prejudice of the purchaser who demanded Scotch whiskey, something
which was not of the nature, substance and quality of Scotch whiskey.
It was proved that on the 12th September, 1905, an agent of the Inspector of Nuisances
of the Islington Borough Council asked at the public house kept by the defendant Wells,
at 66, Hazelville Road, Islington, for a pint of Irish whiskey. A plain bottle containing a
pint of fluid was handed to the agent, who paid 2s. 4d. for it.
* Since this papagraph was written the case terminated without a decision being arrived at
owing to the Court being equally divided in opinion.