Letters to the Editor.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 761, 1 October 1886, Page 19

Letters to the Editor.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAIL.

Sir, —The case of William Ward, in my opinion, is one which will powerfully force upon people the question, Is charitable aid charitably dispensed ? I have heard quite enough to convince me that it is not;, that many loafers have been allowed to sponge on the Society goes without saying ;. that many deserving people would apply for relief if they had not to pass the bull-dog on the path is a fact not too well known. I have had people call at my place honest enough to stand out against accenting anything but dry bread and water, though their appearance showed plainly they wanted something more nourishing. And these people, in answer to questions, have stated that they would rather perish than go through the ordeal of a second attempt to get assistance from the Relieving Officer; it is the sturdy beggar who knows how to go through that ordeal. A'great and successful outcry was made against the late Mr Pilmer, but I don’t see that matters have improved at all. Mr Johnson is satisfied to take every well-payed billet that may be thrown at himq but the sooner he is relieved of that of Relieving Officer for this city the better it will be for the needy and deserving poor.—l’am, &c., H. Bodley. September 22.

THE HOME FOR THE AGEDNEEDY. TOTHE EDITOR OE THE NEW ZEALAND MAIL Sir, —I see the Government have reduced the area of the land granted for the Home for the Aged Needy from five acres to something under four acres ; and the brick kiln, which was to have been taken down, is to be continued in use for five years. Query—Will not the kiln be a great nuisance to both Home and Hospital ; and if so, is there no way of getting rid of it? —I am, &c., A Subscriber to both Institutions; ADULTERATION ACTS; TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAIL Sir, Adulteration Acts are proverbially inoperative. I can hardly hope that any of my present audience have read one ; I will give them a specimen from memory. If you think your coffee is adulterated, you are (by New Zealand law) to buy some more ; tell your grocer your purpose ;• divide it into three portions; give him back one portion ; an( j Why, what does anyone suppose the grocer would be about during this hocus-pocus 1 He would wring your neck. What we want is a professor of technology, charged with the duty of advising the Government on all questions connected with manufactures, and of giving general superintendence to an analytical laboratory, where analyses would be conducted and fees charged. If the public care two straws about pure coffee, let them send a sample to above professor, and show his report to their grocer. That would do the business." I will say now, that I am myself a grocer, and sell also oils, paints, and heaps of other things. I have no interest in selling adulterated stuff. The common “ pound tins of coffee ” contain only twelve ounces, and of this 12 about seven are coffee, the rest being chicory and a substance (probably bread raspings) which I have not determined. Once put it in my power to get an official report to this effect, and instead of being told my coffee is bad (which is true) I could sell pure coffee with say 20 per cent of chicory. I cannot do that at present, because the public do not realise what muck is in these tins. If I kept pure coffee they would call it too dear. I think the “ pound tin ” costs me Is Id. If it contained a net pound of pnre coffee it would cost more, because a medium quality raw is worth Is 2d lb, and it loses J 5 per cent, in roasting, and the tin is worth 2d. I gain nothing by the adulteration, because competition forces me to sell the tins at a price that scarcely pays. I could not gain less on pure coffee, if I could sell it at all. Just the same reasoning applies to kerosene, white lead, salad oil, mustard and a heap of things. You might say that I ought to analyse all these things myself. Well, white lead and mustard I have, but then nobody believes my analysis, and it is not privileged ; that is, if I publish it to the detriment of the man who sells me mustard I may be fined. The official analysis of a Government Department would be privileged, and people would believe them. At present my kerosene is under suspicion. This is not a question of analysis, but a double physical determination of flashingpoint and candle power. In a properly equipped labaratory five minutes would suffice to settle this matter, and then I could say with authority to my customers that the kerosene was good, or if it was bad I could return it to the merchant who supplied it and get better. If I had to charge more than other grocers I should be able to show the official analysis, and I should get my price. To sum the whole matter up, we grocers are not such robbers as people think. If the State will assist us we will keep pure stuff, and so no more from

Chemicaster