there are a considerable number of fruits from which a vinous liquor is
obtained. Of such, we have in this country the gooseberry, the currant,
the elderberry, the cherry, &c. which ferment well, and affords what are
called _home-made wines_.
They differ chiefly from foreign wines in containing a much larger
quantity of acid. Dr. Macculloch[42] has remarked that the acid in
home-made wines is principally the malic acid; while in grape wines it
is the tartaric acid.
The great deficiency in these wines, independent of the flavour, which
chiefly originates, not from the juice, but from the seeds and husks of
the fruits, is the excess of acid, which is but imperfectly concealed by
the addition of sugar. This is owing, chiefly, as Dr. Macculloch
remarks, to the tartaric acid existing in the grape juice in the state
of super-tartrate of potash, which is in part decomposed during the
fermentation, and the rest becomes gradually precipitated; whilst the
malic acid exists in the currant and gooseberry juice in the form of
malate of potash; which salt does not appear to suffer a decomposition
during the fermentation of the wine; and, by its greater solubility, is
retained in the wine. Hence Dr. Macculloch recommends the addition of
super-tartrate of potash, in the manufacture of British wines. They also
contain a much larger proportion of mucilage than wines made from
grapes. The juice of the gooseberry contains some portion of tartaric
acid; hence it is better suited for the production of what is called
_English Champagne_, than any other fruit of this country.
FOOTNOTES:
[27] Dried bilberries are imported from Germany, under the fallacious
name of _berry-dye_.
[28] The gypsum had the property of clarifying wines, was known to the
ancients. "The Greeks and Romans put gypsum in their new wines, stirred
it often round, then let it stand for some time; and when it had
settled, decanted the clear liquor. (_Geopon_, lib. vii. p. 483, 494.)
They knew that the wine acquired, by this addition, a certain sharpness,
which it afterwards lost; but that the good effects of the gypsum were
lasting."
[29] Sawdust for this purpose is chiefly supplied by the ship-builders,
and forms a regular article of commerce of the brewers' druggists.
[30] Tatler, vol. viii. p. 110, edit. 1797. 8vo.
[31] Dr. Reece's Gazette of Health, No. 7.
[32] Supplement to the Pharmacopoeias, p. 245.
[33] Chemical Essays, vol. viii. p. 369.
[34] Medical Trans. vol. ii. p. 80.
[35] This book, which has run through many editions, may be supposed to
have done some mischief.--In the Vintner's Guide, 4th edit. 1770, p. 67,
a lump of sugar of lead, of the size of a walnut, and a table-spoonful
of sal enixum, are directed to be added to a tierce (forty-two gallons)
of muddy wine, _to cure it of its muddiness_.
[36] Beckman's History of Inventions, vol. i. p. 398.
[37] Pliny, lib. xiv. cap. 20.
[38] Philosophical Magazine, 1819, No. 257, p. 229.
[39] Journ. Pharm. iv. 56 (Feb. 1818.) and Thomson's Annals, Sept. 1818,
p. 232.
[40] Of a Specific Gravity. 825.
[41] Philosophical Trans. 1811, p. 345; 1813, p. 87; Journal of Science
and the Arts, No. viii. p. 290.
[42] Macculloch on Wine. This is by far the best treatise published in
this country on the Manufacture of Home-made Wines.
_Adulteration of Bread._
This is one of the sophistications of the articles of food most commonly
practised in this metropolis, where the goodness of bread is estimated
entirely by its whiteness. It is therefore usual to add a certain
quantity of alum to the dough; this improves the look of the bread very
much, and renders it whiter and firmer. Good, white, and porous bread,
may certainly be manufactured from good wheaten flour alone; but to
produce the degree of whiteness rendered indispensable by the caprice of
the consumers in London, it is necessary (unless the very best flour is
employed,) that the dough should be _bleached_; and no substance has
hitherto been found to answer this purpose better than alum.
Without this salt it is impossible to make bread, from the kind of flour
usually employed by the London bakers, so white, as that which is
commonly sold in the metropolis.
If the alum be omitted, the bread has a slight yellowish grey hue--as
may be seen in the instance of what is called _home-made bread_, of
private families. Such bread remains longer moist than bread made with
alum; yet it is not so light, and full of eyes, or porous, and it has
also a different taste.
The quantity of alum requisite to produce the required whiteness and
porosity depends entirely upon the genuineness of the flour, and the
quality of the grain from which the flour is obtained. The mealman makes
different sorts of flour from the same kind of grain. The best flour is
mostly used by the biscuit bakers and pastry cooks, and the inferior
sorts in the making of bread. The bakers' flour is very often made of
the worst kinds of damaged foreign wheat, and other cereal grains mixed
with them in grinding the wheat into flour. In this capital, no fewer
than six distinct kinds of wheaten flour are brought into market. They
are called fine flour, seconds, middlings, fine middlings, coarse
middlings, and twenty-penny flour. Common garden beans, and pease, are
also frequently ground up among the London bread flour.
I have been assured by several bakers, on whose testimony I can rely,
that the small profit attached to the bakers' trade, and the bad
quality of the flour, induces the generality of the London bakers to use
alum in the making of their bread.
The smallest quantity of alum that can be employed with effect to
produce a white, light, and porous bread, from an inferior kind of
flour, I have my own baker's authority to state, is from three to four
ounces to a sack of flour, weighing 240 pounds. The alum is either mixed
well in the form of powder, with a quantity of flour previously made
into a liquid paste with water, and then incorporated with the dough; or
the alum is dissolved in the water employed for mixing up the whole
quantity of the flour for making the dough.
Let us suppose that the baker intends to convert five bushels, or a sack
of flour, into loaves with the least adulteration practised. He pours
the flour into the kneading trough, and sifts it through a fine wire
sieve, which makes it lie very light, and serves to separate any
impurities with which the flour may be mixed. Two ounces of alum are
then dissolved in about a quart of boiling water, and the solution
poured into _the seasoning-tub_. Four or five pounds of salt are
likewise put into the tub, and a pailful of hot-water. When this mixture
has cooled down to the temperature of about 84°, three or four pints of
yeast are added; the whole is mixed, strained through the seasoning
sieve, emptied into a hole in the flour, and mixed up with the requisite
portion of it to the consistence of a thick batter. Some dry flour is
then sprinkled over the top, and it is covered up with cloths.
In this situation it is left about three hours. It gradually swells and
breaks through the dry flour scattered on its surface. An additional
quantity of warm water, in which one ounce of alum is dissolved, is now
added, and the dough is made up into a paste as before; the whole is
then covered up. In this situation it is left for a few hours.
The whole is then intimately kneaded with more water for upwards of an
hour. The dough is cut into pieces with a knife, and penned to one side
of the trough; some dry flour is sprinkled over it, and it is left in
this state for about four hours. It is then kneaded again for
half-an-hour. The dough is now cut into pieces and weighed, in order to
furnish the requisite quantity for each loaf. The loaves are left in the
oven about two hours and a half. When taken out, they are carefully
covered up, to prevent as much as possible the loss of weight.[43]
The following account of making a sack, of five bushels of flour into
bread, is taken from Dr. P. Markham's Considerations on the Ingredients
used in the Adulteration of Bread Flour, and Bread, p. 21:
5 bushels of flour,
8 ounces of alum,[44]
4 lbs. of salt,
1/2 a gallon of yeast, mixed with about
3 gallons of water.
* * * * *
lbs.
The whole quantity of bread-flour obtained }
from the bushel of wheat, weighs } 48
lbs.
Fine pollard 4-1/4
Coarse pollard 4
Bran 2-3/4
------ 11
--
The whole together 59
To which add the loss of weight in }
manufacturing a bushel of wheat } 2
--
Produces the original weight 61
--
The theory of the bleaching property of alum, as manifested in the
panification of an inferior kind of flour, is by no means well
understood; and indeed it is really surprising that the effect should be
produced by so small a quantity of that substance, two or three ounces
of alum being sufficient for a sack of flour.
From experiments in which I have been employed, with the assistance of
skilful bakers, I am authorised to state, that without the addition of
alum, it does not appear possible to make white, light, and porous
bread, such as is used in this metropolis, unless the flour be of the
very best quality.
Another substance employed by fraudulent bakers, is subcarbonate of
ammonia. With this salt, they realise the important consideration of
producing light and porous bread, from spoiled, or what is technically
called _sour flour_. This salt which becomes wholly converted into a
gaseous state during the operation of baking, causes the dough to swell
up into air bubbles, which carry before them the stiff dough, and thus
it renders the dough porous; the salt itself is, at the same time,
totally volatilised during the operation of baking. Thus not a vestige
of carbonate of ammonia remains in the bread. This salt is also largely
employed by the biscuit and ginger-bread bakers.
Potatoes are likewise largely, and perhaps constantly, used by
fraudulent bakers, as a cheap ingredient, to enhance their profit. The
potatoes being boiled, are triturated, passed through a sieve, and
incorporated with the dough by kneading. This adulteration does not
materially injure the bread. The bakers assert, that the bad quality of
the flour renders the addition of potatoes advantageous as well to the
baker as to the purchaser, and that without this admixture in the
manufacture of bread, it would be impossible to carry on the trade of a
baker. But the grievance is, that the same price is taken for a potatoe
loaf, as for a loaf of genuine bread, though it must cost the baker
less.
I have witness, that five bushels of flour, three ounces of alum, six
pounds of salt, one bushel of potatoes boiled into a stiff paste, and
three quarts of yeast, with the requisite quantity of water, produce a
white, light, and highly palatable bread.
Such are the artifices practised in the preparation of bread,[45] and it
must be allowed, on contrasting them with those sophistications
practised by manufacturers of other articles of food, that they are
comparatively unimportant. However, some medical men have no hesitation
in attributing many diseases incidental to children to the use of eating
adulterated bread; others again will not admit these allegations: they
persuade themselves that the small quantity of alum added to the bread
(perhaps upon an average, from eight to ten grains to a quartern loaf,)
is absolutely harmless.
Dr. Edmund Davy, Professor of Chemistry, at the Cork Institution, has
communicated the following important facts to the public concerning the
manufacture of bread.
"The carbonate of magnesia of the shops, when well mixed with flour, in
the proportion of from twenty to forty grains to a pound of flour,
materially improves it for the purpose of making bread.
"Loaves made with the addition of carbonate of magnesia, rise well in
the oven; and after being baked, the bread is light and spongy, has a
good taste, and keeps well. In cases when the new flour is of an
indifferent quality, from twenty to thirty grains of carbonate of
magnesia to a pound of the flour will considerably improve the bread.
When the flour is of the worst quality, forty grains to a pound of flour
seem necessary to produce the same effect.
"As the improvement in the bread from new flour depends upon the
carbonate of magnesia, it is necessary that care should be taken to mix
it intimately with the flour, previous to the making of the dough.
"Mr. Davy made a great number of comparative experiments with other
substances, mixed in different proportions with new bread flour. The
fixed alkalies, both in their pure and carbonated state, when used in
small quantity, to a certain extent were found to improve the bread made
from new flour; but no substance was so efficacious in this respect as
carbonate of magnesia.
"The greater number of his experiments were performed on the worst new
_seconds_ flour Mr. Davy could procure. He also made some trials on
_seconds_ and _firsts_ of different quality. In some cases the results
were more striking and satisfactory than in others; but in every
instance the improvement of the bread, by carbonate of magnesia, was
obvious.
"Mr. Davy observes, that a pound of carbonate of magnesia would be
sufficient to mix with two hundred and fifty-six pounds of new flour, or
at the rate of thirty grains to the pound. And supposing a pound of
carbonate of magnesia to cost half-a-crown, the additional expense would
be only half a farthing in the pound of flour.
"Mr. Davy conceives that not the slightest danger can be apprehended
from the use of such an innocent substance, as the carbonate of
magnesia, in such small proportion as is necessary to improve bread from
new flour."
METHOD OF DETECTING THE PRESENCE OF ALUM IN BREAD.
Pour upon two ounces of the suspected bread, half a pint of boiling
distilled water; boil the mixture for a few minutes, and filter it
through unsized paper. Evaporate the fluid, to about one fourth of its
original bulk, and let gradually fall into the clear fluid a solution of
muriate of barytes. If a _copious_ white precipitate ensues, which does
not disappear by the addition of _pure_ nitric acid, the presence of
alum may be suspected. Bread, made without alum, produces, when assayed
in this manner, merely a very slight precipitate, which originates from
a minute portion of sulphate of magnesia contained in all common salt of
commerce; and bread made with salt freed from sulphate of magnesia,
produces an infusion with water, which does not become disturbed by the
barytic test.
Other means of detecting all the constituent parts of alum, namely, the
alumine, sulphuric acid, and potash, so as to render the presence of the
alum unequivocal, will readily suggest itself to those who are familiar
with analytical chemistry; namely: one of the readiest means is, to
decompose the vegetable matter of the bread, by the action of chlorate
of potash, in a platina crucible, at a red heat, and then to assay the
residuary mass--by means of muriate of barytes, for sulphuric acid; by
ammonia, for alumine; and by muriate of platina, for potash[46]. The
above method of detecting the presence of alum, must therefore be taken
with some limitation.
There is no unequivocal test for detecting in a _ready manner_ the
presence of alum in bread, on account of the impurity of the common salt
used in the making of bread. If we could, in the ordinary way of bread
making, employ common salt, absolutely free from foreign saline
substances, the mode of detecting the presence of alum, or at least one
of its constituent parts, namely, the sulphuric acid, would be very
easy. Some conjecture may, nevertheless, be formed of the presence, or
absence, of alum, by assaying the infusion of bread in the manner
stated, p. 109, and comparing the assay with the results afforded by an
infusion of home-made or household bread, known to be genuine, and
actually assayed in a similar manner.
EASY METHOD OF JUDGING OF THE GOODNESS OF BREAD CORN, AND BREAD-FLOUR.
Millers judge of the goodness of bread corn by the quantity of bran
which the grain produces.
Such grains as are full and plump, that have a bright and shining
appearance, without any shrivelling and shrinking in the covering of
the skin, are the best; for wrinkled grains have a greater quantity of
skin, or bran, than such as are sound or plump.
Pastry-cooks and bakers judge of the goodness of flour in the manner in
which it comports itself in kneading. The best kind of wheaten flour
assumes, at the instant it is formed into paste by the addition of
water, a very gluey, ductile, and elastic paste, easy to be kneaded, and
which may be elongated, flattened, and drawn in every direction, without
breaking.
For the following fact we are indebted to Mr. Hatchet.
"Grain which has been heated or burnt in the stack, may in the following
manner be rendered fit for being made into bread:
"The wheat must be put into a vessel capable of holding at least three
times the quantity, and the vessel filled with boiling water; the grain
should then be occasionally stirred, and the hollow decayed grains,
which float, may be removed. When the water has become cold, or in about
half an hour, it is drawn off. Then rince the corn with cold water, and,
having completely drained it, spread it thinly on the floor of a kiln,
and thus thoroughly dry it, stirring and turning it frequently during
this part of the process."[47]
FOOTNOTES:
[43] The sack of marketable flour is by law obliged to weigh 240 pounds,
which is the produce of five bushels of wheat, and is upon an average
supposed to make eighty quartern loaves of bread; and consequently
sixteen of such loaves are made from each bushel of good wheat. It is
admitted, however, that two or three loaves more than the above quantity
can be made from the sack of flour, when it is the _genuine produce_ of
_good wheat_; that is, in the proportion of about sixteen and a half
loaves from each bushel of sound grain, and, it may be presumed, sixteen
from a bushel of medium corn. The expense, in London, of making the sack
of flour into bread, and disposing of it, is about nine shillings.
A bushel of wheat, upon an average, weighs sixty-one pounds; when
ground, the meal weighs 60-3/4 lbs.; which, on being dressed, produces
46-3/4 lbs. of flour, of the sort called _seconds_; which alone is used
for the making of bread in London and throughout the greater part of
this country; and of pollard and bran 12-3/4 lbs., which quantity, when
bolted, produces 3 lbs. of fine flour, this, when sifted, produces in
good second flour 1-1/4 lb.
[44] Whilst correcting this sheet for the press, the printer transmits
to me the following lines:
"On Saturday last, George Wood, a baker, was convicted before T. Evance,
Esq. Union Hall, of having in his possession a quantity of alum for the
adulteration of bread, and fined in the penalty of 5_l._ and costs,
under 55 Geo. III. c. 99."--_The Times_, Oct. 1819.
[45] There are instances of convictions on record, of bakers having used
gypsum, chalk, and pipe clay, in the manufacture of bread.
[46] See a Practical Treatise on the Use and Application of Chemical
Tests, illustrated by experiments, 3d edit. p. 270, 231, 177, & 196.
[47] Phil. Trans. for 1817, part i.
_Adulteration of Beer._
Malt liquors, and particularly porter, the favourite beverage of the
inhabitants of London, and of other large towns, is amongst those
articles, in the manufacture of which the greatest frauds are frequently
committed.
The statute prohibits the brewer from using any ingredients in his
brewings, except malt and hops; but it too often happens that those who
suppose they are drinking a nutritious beverage, made of these
ingredients only, are entirely deceived. The beverage may, in fact, be
neither more nor less than a compound of the most deleterious
substances; and it is also clear that all ranks of society are alike
exposed to the nefarious fraud. The proofs of this statement will be
shewn hereafter.[48]
The author[49] of a Practical Treatise on Brewing, which has run
through eleven editions, after having stated the various ingredients for
brewing porter, observes, "that however much they may surprise, however
pernicious or disagreeable they may appear, he has always found them
requisite in the brewing of porter, and he thinks they must invariably
be used by those who wish to continue the taste, flavour, and appearance
of the beer.[50] And though several Acts of Parliament have been passed
to prevent porter brewers from using many of them, yet the author can
affirm, from experience, he could never produce the present flavoured
porter without them.[51] The intoxicating qualities of porter are to be
ascribed to the various drugs intermixed with it. It is evident some
porter is more heady than other, and it arises from the greater or less
quantity of stupifying ingredients. Malt, to produce intoxication, must
be used in such large quantities as would very much diminish, if not
totally exclude, the brewer's profit."
The practice of adulterating beer appears to be of early date. By an
Act so long ago as Queen Anne, the brewers are prohibited from mixing
_cocculus indicus_, or any unwholesome ingredients, in their beer, under
severe penalties: but few instances of convictions under this act are to
be met with in the public records for nearly a century. To shew that
they have augmented in our own days, we shall exhibit an abstract from
documents laid lately before Parliament.[52]
These will not only amply prove, that unwholesome ingredients are used
by fraudulent brewers, and that very deleterious substances are also
vended both to brewers and publicans for adulterating beer, but that the
ingredients mixed up in the brewer's enchanting cauldron are placed
above all competition, even with the potent charms of Macbeth's witches:
"Root of hemlock, digg'd i' the dark,
+ + + + +
+ + + + +
For a charm of pow'rful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble;
Double, double, toil and trouble,
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble."
The fraud of imparting to porter and ale an intoxicating quality by
narcotic substances, appears to have flourished during the period of the
late French war; for, if we examine the importation lists of drugs, it
will be noticed that the quantities of cocculus indicus imported in a
given time prior to that period, will bear no comparison with the
quantity imported in the same space of time during the war, although an
additional duty was laid upon this commodity. Such has been the amount
brought into this country in five years, that it far exceeds the
quantity imported during twelve years anterior to the above epoch. The
price of this drug has risen within these ten years from two shillings
to seven shillings the pound.
It was at the period to which we have alluded, that the preparation of
an extract of cocculus indicus first appeared, as a new saleable
commodity, in the price-currents of _brewers'-druggists_. It was at the
same time, also, that a Mr. Jackson, of notorious memory, fell upon the
idea of brewing beer from various drugs, without any malt and hops. This
chemist did not turn brewer himself; but he struck out the more
profitable trade of teaching his mystery to the brewers for a handsome
fee. From that time forwards, written directions, and recipe-books for
using the chemical preparations to be substituted for malt and hops,
were respectively sold; and many adepts soon afterwards appeared every
where, to instruct brewers in the nefarious practice, first pointed out
by Mr. Jackson. From that time, also, the fraternity of
brewers'-chemists took its rise. They made it their chief business to
send travellers all over the country with lists and samples exhibiting
the price and quality of the articles manufactured by them for the use
of brewers only. Their trade spread far and wide, but it was amongst the
country brewers chiefly that they found the most customers; and it is
amongst them, up to the present day, as I am assured by some of these
operators, on whose veracity I can rely, that the greatest quantities of
unlawful ingredients are sold.
The Act of Parliament[53] prohibits chemists, grocers, and druggists,
from supplying illegal ingredients to brewers under a heavy penalty, as
is obvious from the following abstract of the Act.