View report page

59
legislative interference to ensure more purity in the fluid
itself. If we are to attach any importance to the recent
analyses of Dr. Frankland, made so late as the end of
March of the present year (1872), it would seem that the
supply of water to the District, in respect to freedom from
organic impurity, &c., is scarcely what it ought to be—at
all events a comparison of the London waters gives to that
of the Southwark and Lambeth Companies, in the tables of
Dr. Frankland, degrees of turbidness surpassing all the
others referred to. Dr. Frankland says (Report March,
1872):—"The waters supplied were perfectly clear, except
those sent out by the Southwark and Vauxhall and
Lambeth Companies, the waters of each of these two Companies
were slightly turbid, and that of the latter contained
moving organisms,"
Adulteration of Food.—It is to be hoped the Legislature
will, concurrently with the promised sanitary reforms
now before Parliament, be able to accomplish something
towards the real protection of the public against adulterations
of all kinds. The existing laws bearing upon this
all important matter having been pronounced by the responsible
Minister to be worthless, it may be reasonably
expected the repeal of these imperfect measures will not
be much longer delayed, but will be speedily made to give
place to more stringent enactments, and to such as admit
of neither compromise nor evasion.*
*An " Act to amend the law for the Prevention of Adulteration of Food
and Drink and Drugs" has, since the above was written, received the
sanction of Parliament. Whether the new Act will deliver the public from
the widely-extended evils of adulteration may be a question, but the measure
is unquestionably in the right direction, and calculated in a great measure to
meet the public requirements. Clause 1 is directed against manufacturers
who "wilfully admix with any article of food or drink any injurious or
poisonous ingredient or material to adulterate the same for sale." For the
first offence a penalty of fifty pounds is imposed, imprisonment with hard
labour for the second. The next clause deals with the retailers of such
injuriously-adulterated articles, and imposes a penalty of twenty pounds for
the first offence, and for after offences there is to be inflicted the additional
penalty of the offender's name, place of abode, and offence being published
in newspapers, or in such other manner as the convicting justices may think
desirable. This last is a most excellent provision, and will probably have
a very deterrent effect on evildoers.