The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-01-02
BEWARE or GREEN TEA.


In looking through the last doth volume
OF " English Reports" cAue upon "A case which
Is interssting to those who are gwen To the bev-
eraee of green tea, II they are at all curious to
know what nuXtuus mixture they may imhibo,
whlln innocently supposing they are quafing
the Juice OF the favorlte herb, pure anu un4dul-
terated.
The case is that OF Roberts. appellant. and
EdRerton, respondent, aud seems to have been
prosecution originally commenced and tried be-
fore two Justices, for a violation of the En-. lish
statute prohibiting aud punlsning the sale OF
adulterated articles OF food, &c. The Justices
found the appellant guilty, and, pursuant to the
provisions OF another statute, the case WAS ser
Queens Bench on all the facts.
Tue proofs were that one Mlllington pur-
chased from the appellant two ounces Of green
tea for 54d. Appellant was snopman, and at
the time Of the purchase Wilmington notified hi n
that his purpose was to submit the tea to the
Public Analyst to be tested - to It's purify,
whereupon appellant ropli, d that he was author
ICED by his employers To guarantee all their green
teas Of the value of IS. per pound ana upwsrd,
the tea bought TO the Public Analyst, j. c. Brown,
who analyzed 1t; and, as tne result. gave Ger.
ton, which closed IA follows
And further certify that such sample tsaid teal Is
aduterateG by thlek hcing VI mineral master and
frusslAn Dlue.
1t was proved that the facing or painting was
a mixture OF gypsum and Prussian blue, used TO
give the tea its color; but that the article was
sold by the appellant In the same state IN which
II came from abroad, and he In no way caused II
to he faced or painted. II was also proved IN Al
the tea, which Is Imported from China, as green
tea and generally known as such IN the trade,
is painted and faced IN the manner and for the
purpose - above described, and tn Il this fact
though known TO dealers In the trade IL not
known to the public or consumers. Further
more, II was proved tnat there Is pure green
tea though not generally known rs green tea In
the trade, which Is not painted OF laced, and Ia
imported from japan.
Several legal questions were raised and dis
cussed 10y counsel before the judges, which
would be Of no special interest to the general
reader. The opinion OF the court wHs delivered
oy Chief Justice Cockburn, VINO, among other
things, said;
The Arst question is, is what the appellant sod an
adulterated articleP think It II. The dnd- that
Is imported from Japun, which without the p,aster
lng ana painting introduced by tue Chinese. There liz
But then Il IL slated (nroyed in thc case that il il
Known IN the trade, that Is, bv wholesale and retail
aNays undergo this process ~ painting and facing
but II also tound intorcntnly IN the case that TIL,
era II follows Therefore tnat this tea sold Dy The Sp
pelant was adulterated
After discussing other points, the learned
Judge concludes:
II Ia true he (sppel4nD sold tho tea in the state In
which It came IRON abroad nut he Is the traGe aud
business and IL is fund that Ia The tradc Tic fact oi
Chinese tea being aduerat Is known. Therefore,
90 not thi9S ne appellant could ,et up that he wal
On the whole, SIN of opinion that this tea a NJ
have mi TO-. me wSen ,se by sle t e
very much disposed TO think that II the puzzle were tQt
ton OF g, psun aud Prnssian blue they would take I,
| bnck tea Instead The conviction must be affirmed.
Blackburn and Archib I'D, Justices, delivered
| ooncurrng opinions, while Justice Quian dis
sented, but upon grounds affOrning small con
! tort to green tea drinkers. His theory SCENE,
| 20 be that practically all green tea was thu
painted and faced that the pure article trou
Japan was not known In trade AS green tea, an.
| that when a customer called for green tea, I
must he taken that no called for the aTtic
| IA ~ hal ia m "A