London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972
View report page
Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
City of London 1913
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London, City of ]
This page requires JavaScript
118
In no case in which butter had been purchased at a shop has it been found to be
adulterated, all the five cases of substitution having occurred when bread and butter has
been asked for. In four cases, slices of bread and butter were demanded, and in one
case a roll and butter were purchased. Four of the Vendors were Coffee Housekeepers,
and one, a Restaurant proprietor.
One sample was found to contain 90 per cent. of margarine. The vendor of this
sample having been punished before for a similar offence, was fined £8 and 21s. 6d.
costs. In another case where 66 per cent. admixture of margarine was supplied, the
vendor was fined 10s. and 17s. 6d. costs. In another case in which the sample
consisted wholly of margarine, the offender was fined 7s. 6d. and 17s. 6d. costs.
90 per cent. margarine mixture supplied with a roll, resulted in the defendant
being fined 40s. and 21s. 6d. costs, and in another case where 100 per cent. margarine
substitution had taken place, the vendor was fined 40s. and 17s. 6d. costs.
Three of the above offenders were new comers, and in each instance the sample
was the first that had been taken at each establishment.
The substitution of margarine for butter where bread and butter has been asked for, is
a particularly mean form of fraud, and one, it is satisfactory to note, is gradually
being stamped out in the City. It is obvious that the Coffee House keeper who
commits this offence is in unfair competition with his fellow traders who supply their
customers with the more costly article which is expected. Should any person carrying
on this, or a similar business, desire to supply margarine, he is not prevented from doing
so providing the fact is satisfactorily made known to his customers.
The following Table shows the figures of adulteration of butter samples when bread and butter has been demanded: —
| Date. | Samples taken. | Cases of Substitution. | Percentage Substituted Samples. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1903 | 71 | 19 | 267 |
| 1904 | 101 | 12 | 11.8 |
| 1905 | 16 | Nil. | Nil. |
| 1906 | 87 | 12 | 13.8 |
| 1907 | 184 | 8 | 4.3 |
| 1908 | 112 | 1 | 0.9 |
| 1909 | 115 | 1 | 0.9 |
| 1910 | 110 | 5 | 4.5 |
| 1911 | 144 | 6 | 4.1 |
| 1912 | 250 | 9 | 3.6 |
| 1913 | 256 | 5 | 1.9 |
MARGARINE.
Four samples of margarine were submitted to the Public Analyst. Of these, two
were sold contrary to the provisions of the Act, being delivered to the purchaser in
unmarked wrappers and taken from bulk which did not bear the word " Margarine." In
the other two cases the requirements were observed.