Abstract
A CASE recently decided at the London Guild hall by Alderman Sir George Woodman, in which a larg'e part of both the evidence and the arguments turned on the question of the true meaning of the word “sardine,” has excited considerable interest. On one side it was contended that sardines were the young of the pilchard (Clupea pilchardus) preserved in a particular way in oil and put up in tins, according to the methods employed on the west coast of France. On the other side, an attempt was made to show that the name “sardine” had in practice been extended, so that it included any small fish preserved in oil and put up in tins. Although the defendant, who was being prosecuted for selling Norwegian sprats or brisling put up in oil in tins as “sardines,” won his case (without costs) on the ground that he had acted innocently, the decision on the question of the meaning of the name “sardine” followed closely the evidence given by the majority of the scientific experts. The Alderman's decision on this point was:—
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saridnes . Nature 89, 194–195 (1912). https://doi.org/10.1038/089194a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/089194a0