On 17 March 1883, Bradford, West Riding of Yorkshire, was the scene of a serious foodborne poisoning incident involving adulterated sweets sold in local shops. Multiple contemporary newspaper accounts and later public health summaries describe that customers—many of them children—became ill after eating boiled sweets and lozenges that had been locally manufactured and distributed. Symptoms reported included vomiting, abdominal pain, dizziness and in some cases collapse; there were several hospital admissions and at least one reported death in the immediate aftermath. The incident attracted public attention because it implicated commercially produced confectionery at a time when rapid urbanization and industrial food production were outpacing regulatory oversight. Investigations by local authorities and medical officers sought to identify the cause. Tests of remaining samples indicated the presence of copper sulphate and possibly arsenical compounds used, or accidentally introduced, during manufacturing or storage. Copper sulphate was sometimes used historically as an antiseptic or dye, and arsenic compounds could appear through contaminated materials or deliberate adulteration; exact attribution—whether accidental contamination, improper use of chemicals, or intentional poisoning—remains disputed in contemporary reports. The Bradford case fed into a broader Victorian-era debate about food adulteration. In the late 19th century Britain, numerous food items were routinely adulterated with cheaper or more visually appealing substances—chalk in flour, copper salts to brighten greens, and various chemicals to preserve or color foods. Public health reformers and journalists campaigned for clearer laws and stronger enforcement. High-profile incidents such as the Bradford sweets poisoning helped prompt legislative and administrative responses, including stricter local inspection regimes and, eventually, national reform culminating in successive Food and Drug Acts and the improvement of public health infrastructure. Contemporary sources vary on scale and cause, and some details remain uncertain. Newspaper reports of the period sometimes conflated separate local incidents or relied on preliminary medical opinions; laboratory methods in 1883 were less precise than modern analysis. Modern historians and public health scholars treat the Bradford event as an important early documented example of mass poisoning via commercially sold food, notable for illustrating the risks posed by unregulated ingredients and manufacturing processes in the late 19th century. While the Bradford sweets incident did not alone produce immediate nationwide reform, it is cited in historical surveys of food safety as part of the accumulation of public concern that eventually led to stronger consumer protections. The episode also underscores how industrialization, limited scientific knowledge, and patchy local regulation could combine to produce hazardous outcomes in everyday products. Because primary sources from 1883 include varying accounts and because laboratory confirmation standards were limited at the time, some specifics—such as the precise chemical agent in every contaminated batch or whether contamination was intentional—cannot be stated with certainty. Nonetheless, the Bradford case remains an early and instructive example of mass poisoning tied to commercially produced foodstuffs, contributing to the longer arc of food-safety reform in Britain.