Adulteration Of Pepper.
The Times, 1824-07-10T00:00:00

Hfenary Levi, a grocer and tea-dealer of Dake'splace, was proae- cuted for having on his premises a considerable quantity of adul- terated pepper. .Mr. SHEPHERD coindacted the prosecation, and went for the full penalty (1001.), not because the ofience was a mere violation of the Exeise laws, but becuuse it was calculated to do serious injury to the public health. The defence was conducted by Mr. PLATT. An officer stated, that he went on a certain day to the defendant's shop, and said he came to look at the stock. Defendant said he had not the least objection, and offered all possible facilities. The shop. man ( lMardyn) sgaid, " I know what you are come about, and I'll produce it.' fie then produced a quantity of pepper, which was alf and half adulterated. The defenaant said, it was a mixture ofinferior with otherpepper. Cross.examined._The shopman said to the defendant, when the seizute was mnade, " I had an idea of telling you what I had done, but I thought you would all laugh at mze." Mr. Hierbert, who analyzed the seizure, stated, that it was a mix- ture of real pepper with the husks of some seed. There was about 20 per cent. of thead trated stuffi the mixture. He produced powder and liquid samples of the seizure, and stated, that the dif- lerencc between the adulterated and the genuine was very great in- deed;* but he could not tell the diffirence fiom the appearance, and could only ascertain it from the process to which he had subjected it. The bottles containing the spurious stuff, which he had sepa- rated fromn the genWni, had already got into a state of putrefaction. Cross. xamined.-Judged it to be the same is that which was called P. D Air. PLATT wished the witness to state how he had ascertained the great amount of the extraneous matter. Mr. Herbert replied, that it he were to state the particulars of his analysis ingenuity wouldasoon counteract it. An ofliccr stated that P. D. was the refuse of mustard, and he had no doubt that the seizure was composed of it. A long examination of witnesses then. took place at the suggestion of hlr. PLA T, to account for the adulteration, by showtag that some inferior pepper was on thepremises, antd might haye been mixed, but it failed in proof. MIardyn, the defendaa's 8hooman, wras next examined. Ule said he had lived 14 months with- r. Levi. In Blarch Air. Levi gave him 421b. of pepper, and 421b. of P. ,, or mtatter to adulterate. i ttiiesiibi Lr i'adesf;re,h ixieA thein. Tihe P.`D. used to be i bronbeinto thie hotise,'for the purposes of adulterating, in quanti. ties-of 141b.; at-a time. C'rosa'.eximhied.-He neverbrotggit the V. D. into the hliise him- self.He could.qwep that it hadbeen broughtin by Diir. Levis porter, and also by eot from the manufactory.- He *as going to leave the defendant wheli the :Wiziuewas madei and had given him notic [He had applied 'to Zx.;Levi for the loan of bl., wyhich was reftised, and thenhie-redaced the vequest to l's..' which was also refused. He asked for the loan, ap he considered Mr. Levi under obligations to him, and he took those measures because he thought the refusal proved a very hard heat. Witness ditd not say " So help me God, 'll revenge myself upon him:and hiswhole. familv;" but he said, " If Ar. L'evi does notact as'heought, he may be sorry for it; and he might have eaid to Woed, that if' Mr. Levi would still act-as lie ought to act, the affair should etnid' He knew it was a violation of the- layr tonmix the pepper, but lie did so for his employer, as he knewi it was the practice of the-trade. Sidney. Ncson 6aid, he was presenit when Mlardyn asked the de- fendant for 51., which he refused. Upen whiich occasion Aardyn said Mlr. Levy would repent it, and that it was the worst day's work he ever did. Elizabeth Berkeley, cook to MIr. Levi, said she heard Mardvn say, " So help me God,-I'll be revenged on him." Another woman, in the service of the defendant, said she also lhesrd Mardyn.threaten. A broker, named Dias, said he heard AJardyn sav, that if Levi would behave like a ian, he would try to do away-witl the concern. The CoURT, without much hesitation, pronounced judgment. They considered the offence a most flagrant one, and most fully proved; that the most dangerous consequences might result from it to the public, and therefore they thought it necessary to give judg. | ment generally for the whole penalty, ADULTERATION OF PEPPER. I3OART Oip ExcISE. Jnv 9.