View report page

107
an order for destruction should be made, the magistrate expressing
the opinion that the "blown" condition of a tin did not necessarily
mean that the contents were unfit for food. It appeared evident
that proceedings against the vendor of the goods would probably
be unsuccessful in that court, and no further action was taken.
In many instances it is not possible to prove by analysis or
by bacteriological examination that the contents of "blown" tins
are unfit for human consumption, the "blown" condition being
due to the evolution of hydrogen within the tin, considered to be
the result of chemical action between the tinned iron container
and the acid content of the food. The hydrogen does not affect
the food, which in many instances appears normal.
In the case in point, two of the tins were sent for examination,
one to the Royal Institute of Public Health and Hygiene and the
other to the Public Analysts. The Royal Institute of Public Health
and Hygiene reported that on bacteriological grounds no exception
could be taken to using the contents of the tin for human consumption,
but on chemical examination the Public Analysts found
that the contents contained 4 grains of tin and 2.7 grains of iron
per pound, the tin content being double that generally accepted,
as allowable in foods.
A high tin content in "blown" tins of this nature is by no
means a constant factor; in some cases the analyst can find no
abnormal content in the food, and it is in such cases that a doubtful
result of proceedings must be expected and for which preparation
should be made.
The principle that the contents of a "blown" tin should be
regarded as unfit for human consumption must be maintained so
far as sales to the public are concerned, as the "blown" condition
may be the result of putrefaction or of the growth of organisms
capable of causing food poisoning. In any case, such a condition
is abnormal and is the principal external indication of the probable
condition of the contents. Divergence from this principle would
deal a serious blow to tinned food inspection and would destroy the
confidence which the public has in tinned food genera I ly.
The findings of the analyst or the bacteriologist with regard to
sample "blown" tins from a consignment may be useful as in the
case mentioned above, but it would be dangerous to accept such
reports as conclusive evidence of the fitness for food of an entire
consignment.
A good deal of controversy exists as regards ' 'hydrogen swells,''
and it would be helpful to sanitary authorities, magistrates and
trade interests alike if it were settled by legislation.
Bakehoiises.—The action taken under Section 54 of the Factories
Act, 1937, in regard to the basement bakehouses in the Borough