Charles Henry Lord deposed, that on the 26th of February, he found, at the shop of the defendant, nineteen pounds of a composition consisting of beans and pease ground, and prepared so as to imitate coffee. He also discovered two pounds and a half of a mixture of coffee and vegetable powder. On the same day he proceeded to another shop of the defendant, and he there found five pounds more of the same stuff.
Samples of the composition, in its mixed and unmixed state, were produced.
Mr. Lawes addressed the commissioners on behalf of the defendant, in mitigation of punishment; for he did not mean to deny the offence. His client was a very young man, and had been most unfortunate in business. He was not aware until lately of the existence of any law by which it could be punished.
The Commissioners observed, that they had a double duty to perform, namely, to protect the revenue from fraud, and to prevent the public from being imposed upon and injured by ingredients served to them instead of the food they intended to purchase. The fraud upon the revenue was, in the estimation of the court, the least part of the offence. Under all the circumstances, however, the court was inclined to be lenient to the defendant.
He was convicted in the penalty of 50l. for each quantity of sham-coffee.
Mr. Greely and Mr. William Dando were fined 20l. each; and Mr. Hirling and Mr. Terry were fined 90l. each for selling spurious coffee.
The adulteration of ground coffee, with pease and beans, is beyond the reach of chemical analysis; but it may, perhaps, not be amiss on this occasion to give to our readers a piece of advice given by a retired grocer to a friend, at no distant period:—"Never, my good fellow," he said, "purchase from a grocer any thing which passes through his mill. You know not what you get instead of the article you expect to receive—coffee, pepper, and all-spice, are all mixed with substances which detract from their own natural qualities."—Persons keeping mills of their own can at all times prevent these impositions.