Mrs Carlill and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Reading Answers

Dec 27, 2022

Mrs Carlill and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Reading Answers contains a write up about the carbolic smoke ball and the flu that prevailed. Mrs Carlill and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Reading Answers comprising 13 different types of questions. Candidates in this IELTS Section will be shown various question types with clear instructions. Mrs Carlill and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Reading Answers comprises three types of questions: Matching heading, sentence completion, and Choose the correct option. For Matching heading in IELTS Reading passage, candidates need to thoroughly go through each passage. For sentence completion, candidates need to skim the passage for keywords and understand the concept. To choose the correct option, candidates must read the IELTS Reading passage and understand the statement provided. To gain proficiency, candidates can practice from IELTS reading practice test.

Check: Get 10 Free IELTS Sample Papers
Check: Register for IELTS Coaching - Join for Free Trial Class Now

Section 1

Read the Passage to Answer the Following Questions

Mrs Carlill and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Reading Answers

On 14 January 1892, Queen Victoria’s grandson Prince Albert Victor, second in line to the British throne, died from flu. He had succumbed to the third and most lethal wave of the Russian flu pandemic sweeping the world. The nation was shocked. The people mourned. Albert was relegated to a footnote in history.
Three days later, London housewife Louisa Carlill went down with the flu. She was shocked. For two months, she had inhaled thrice daily from a carbolic smoke ball, a preventive measure guaranteed to fend off flu - if you believed the advert. Which she did. And why shouldn’t she when the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company had promised to cough up £100 for any customer who fell ill? Unlike Albert, Louisa recovered, claimed her £100 and set in train events that would win her lasting fame.
It started in the spring of 1889. The first reports of a flu epidemic came from Russia. By the end of the year, the world was in the grip of the first truly global flu pandemic. The disease came in waves, once a year for the next four years, and each worse than the last.
Whole cities came to a standstill. London was especially hard-hit. As the flu reached each annual peak, normal life stopped. The postal service ground to a halt, trains stopped running, banks closed. Even courts stopped sitting for lack of judges. At the height of the third wave in 1892, 200 people were buried every day at just one London cemetery. This flu was far more lethal than previous epidemics, and those who recovered were left weak, depressed, and often unfit for work. It was a picture repeated across the continent.
Accurate figures for the number of the sick and dead were few and far between but Paris, Berlin and Vienna all reported a huge upsurge in deaths. The newspapers took an intense interest in the disease, not just because of the scale of it but because of who it attacked. Most epidemics carried off the poor and weak, the old and frail. This flu was cutting as great a swathe through the upper classes, dealing death to the rich and famous, and the young and fit.
The newspaper-reading public was fed a daily diet of celebrity victims. The flu had worked its way through the Russian imperial family and invaded the royal palaces of Europe. It carried off the Dowager Empress of Germany and the second son of the king of Italy, as well as England’s future king. Aristocrats and politicians, poets and opera singers, bishops and cardinals - none escaped the attention of the Russian flu.
The public grew increasingly fearful. The press might have been overdoing the doom and gloom, but their hysterical coverage had exposed one terrible fact.
The medical profession had no answer to the disease. This flu, which might not even have begun in Russia, was a mystery. What caused it and how did it spread? No one could agree on anything.
By now, the theory that microorganisms cause disease was gaining ground, but no one had identified an organism responsible for flu (and wouldn’t until 1933). In the absence of a germ, many clung to the old idea of bad airs, or miasmas, possibly stirred by some great physical force - earthquakes, perhaps, or electrical phenomena in the upper atmosphere, even a passing comet.
Doctors advised people to eat well avoiding “unnecessary assemblies”, and if they were really worried, to stuff cotton wool up their nostrils. If they fell ill, they should rest, keep warm and eat a nourishing diet of “milk, eggs and farinaceous puddings”. Alcohol figured prominently among the prescriptions: one eminent English doctor suggested champagne, although he conceded “brandy M in considerable quantities has sometimes been given with manifest advantages”. French doctors prescribed warm alcoholic drinks, arguing that they never saw an alcoholic with flu. Their prescription had immediate results: over a three-day period, 1,200 of the 1,500 drunks picked up on the streets of Paris claimed they were following doctor’s orders.
Some doctors gave drugs to ease symptoms - quinine for fever, salicin for headache, heroin for an “incessant cough”. But nothing in the pharmacy remotely resembled a cure. Not surprisingly, people looked elsewhere for help. Hoping to cash in while the pandemic lasted, purveyors of patent medicines competed for the public’s custom with ever more outrageous advertisements. One of the most successful was the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company.
The carbolic smoke ball was a hollow rubber ball, 5 centimeters across, with a nozzle covered by gauze. Inside was a powder treated with carbolic acid, or phenol. The idea was to clutch it close to the nose and squeeze gently, inhaling deeply from the emerging cloud of pungent powder. This, the company claimed, would disinfect the mucous membranes, curing any condition related to “taking cold”. In the summer of 1890, sales were steady at 300 smoke balls a month. In January 1891, the figure skyrocketed to 1,500.
Eager to exploit the public’s mounting panic, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company made increasingly extravagant claims. On 13 November 1892, its latest advert in the Pall Mall Gazette caught the eye of south London housewife Louisa Carlill. “Carbolic Smoke Ball,” it declared, “will positively cure colds, coughs, asthma, bronchitis, hoarseness, influenza, croup, whooping cough ...”. And the list went on. But it was the next part Mrs. Carlill found compelling. “A £100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person who contracts the increasing epidemic influenza, colds or any disease caused by taking cold, after having used the carbolic smoke ball according to the printed directions supplied with each ball. £1,000 is deposited with the Alliance bank, Regent Street, showing our sincerity in the matter.”
Mrs. Carlill hurried off to buy a smoke ball, priced at 10 shillings. After carefully reading the instructions, she diligently dosed herself thrice daily until 17 January - when she fell ill.
On 20 January, Louisa’s husband wrote to the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. Unfortunately for them, Mr. Carlill happened to be a solicitor. His wife, he wrote, had seen their advert and bought a smoke ball on the strength of it. She had followed the instructions to the letter, and yet now - as their doctor could confirm - she had the flu.
There was no reply. But £100 was not a sum to be sneezed at. Mr. Carlill persisted. The company resisted. Louisa recovered and sued. In June, Mr. Justice Hawkins found in Mrs. Carlill’s favor. The company’s main defense was that adverts were mere “puffery” and only an idiot would believe such extravagant claims. Judge Hawkins pointed out that adverts were not aimed at the wise and thoughtful, but at the credulous and weak. A vendor who made a promise “must not be surprised if occasionally he is held to his promise”.
Carbolic appealed. In December, three lord justices considered the case. Carbolic’s lawyers tried several lines of defense. But in the end, the case came down to a single matter: not whether the remedy was useless, or whether Carbolic had committed fraud, but whether its advert constituted a contract - which the company had broken. A contract required agreement between two parties, argued Carbolic’s lawyers. What agreement had Mrs. Carlill made?
There were times, the judges decided, when a contract could be one-sided. The advert had made a very specific offer to purchasers: protection from flu or £100. By using the smoke ball as instructed, Mrs. Carlill had accepted that offer. The company might just have wriggled out of if if it hadn’t added the bit about the £1,000 deposit. That, said the judges, gave buyers reason to believe Carbolic meant what it said. “It seems to me that if a person chooses to make extravagant promises of this kind, he probably does so because it pays him to make them, and, if he has made them, the extravagance of the promises is no reason in law why he should not be bound by them,” pronounced Lord Justice Bowen.
Louisa got her £100. The case established the principle of the unilateral contract and is frequently cited today.

Section 2

Solution and Explanation
Question 1 to 4:
Do the following statements agree with the writer's claims in the Reading Passage?
In boxes 1-4 on your answer sheet write

TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this

Cities rather than rural areas were severely affected by the pandemic flu.
At the time of the flu pandemic, people didn’t know the link between microorganisms and illnesses.
People used to believe flu was caused by miasmas
Flu prescriptions often contained harmful ingredients

Q1. Cities rather than rural areas were severely affected by the pandemic flu.

Answer: Not Given
Supporting Sentence: Whole cities came to a standstill. London was especially hard-hit. As the flu reached each annual peak, normal life stopped. The postal service ground to a halt, trains stopped running, banks closed. Even courts stopped sitting for lack of judges.
Keywords: cities, standstill, flu, normal life
Keyword Location: Paragraph D, lines 1-3
Explanation: The passage does not include the given statement.

Q2. At the time of the flu pandemic, people didn’t know the link between microorganisms and illnesses.

Answer: False
Supporting Sentence: “The theory that microorganisms cause disease was gaining ground, but no one had identified an organism responsible for flu.”
Keywords: Flu, pandemic, microorganisms, disease
Keyword Location: Paragraph I, line 1 to 2
Explanation: The accompanying remark makes it apparent that although there existed a link between flu and germs at the time, the microorganism was not known.

Q3. People used to believe flu was caused by miasmas

Answer: True
Supporting Sentence: “In the absence of a germ, many clung to the old idea of bad airs, or miasmas, possibly stirred by some great physical force - earthquakes, perhaps, or electrical phenomena in the upper atmosphere, even a passing comet.”
Keywords: Germs, disease, absence, old
Keyword Location: Para I, line 2 to 3
Explanation: People were aware that the illness was brought on by Miamis, which is the subject of both the stated statement as well as the supporting statement.

Q4. Flu prescriptions often contained harmful ingredients

Answer: Not Given
Supporting Sentence: Alcohol figured prominently among the prescriptions: one eminent English doctor suggested champagne, although he conceded “brandy M in considerable quantities has sometimes been given with manifest advantages”.
Keywords: Alcohol, prominently, prescriptions
Keyword Location: Paragraph J, lines 3 to 5
Explanation:The provided subject is not covered in the passage.

Question 5 to 8:
Complete the diagram below.
Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.
Write your answers in boxes 5-8 on your answer sheet.

Q5. __________

Answer: Gauze
Supporting Sentence: “The carbolic smoke ballThe carbolic smoke ball was a hollow rubber ball, 5 centimeters across, with a nozzle covered by gauze.”
Keywords: Smokeball, disinfect
Keyword Location: Paragraph L, Line 1 to 2
Explanation: The smoke ball has a gauze covering on top to prevent the powder from escaping.

Q6. ________

Answer: Nozzle
Supporting Sentence: “The carbolic smoke ball was a hollow rubber ball, 5 centimeters across, with a nozzle covered by gauze.”
Keywords: Smokeball, nozzle, disinfect
Keyword Location: Paragraph L, Line 1 to 2
Explanation:A lengthy metal tube known as the nozzle connects the smokeball's top to its rubber bottom.

Q7. _______

Answer: Powder
Supporting Sentence: “Inside was a powder treated with carbolic acid or phenol.”
Keywords: Powder, chemical, inside, treated
Keyword Location: Paragraph L Line 1 to 3
Explanation: A little amount of powder that has been treated with carbolic acid or, occasionally, phenol is introduced to the inside of the smokeball, where it ignites to produce smoke.

Q8. _________

Answer: Rubber ball
Supporting Sentence: “The carbolic smoke ball was a hollow rubber ball, 5 centimeters across, with a nozzle covered by gauze.”
Keywords: Smokeball, constituents, parts
Keyword Location: Paragraph L, Line 1 to 2
Explanation: Overall, the smokeball's bottom is a hollow rubber ball with area for powder.

Question 9 to 12:
Look at the following people and the list of statements. Match each person with the correct statement.
Write the correct letter A-F in boxes 9-12 on your answer sheet.

List of Statements:

Filed a complaint which was never responded to
Broke the contract made with Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
Initiated a legal case
Described the audience of an advertisement
Claimed that most advertisements are fraudulent
Treated advertisement as a type of contract

Q9. Mrs. Carlill

Answer: C-Initiated a legal case
Supporting Sentence: “There was no reply. But £100 was not a sum to be sneezed at. Mr. Carlill persisted. Louisa recovered and sued.”
Keywords: Reply, insisted, case, persisted, sued
Keyword Location: Para 16 (Line 1 to 4)
Explanation: Mrs. Carlill filed a lawsuit against the corporation because it didn't respond. Consequently, a case was started.

Q10. Mrs. Carlill’s husband

Answer: A-Filed a complaint which was never responded to
Supporting Sentence: “On 20 January, Louisa’s husband wrote to the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. There was no reply”
Keywords: Company, complaint, instruction
Keyword Location: Para 15 (Line 2 to 3)
Explanation: It is stated in the paragraph that Mr. Carlill complained to the corporation but received no response.

Q11. Judge Hawkins

Answer: D- Described the audience of an advertisement
Supporting Sentence: “Judge Hawkins pointed out that adverts were not aimed at the wise and thoughtful but at the credulous and weak.”
Keywords: Judge, advert, credulous, surprised
Keyword Location: Para 16 (Line 3 to 4)
Explanation: Judge Hawkins was the one who made the observation that the advertisement was targeted at the credulous and frail.

Q12. Lord Justice Bowen

Answer: F-Treated advertisement as a type of contract
Supporting Sentence: “It seems to me that if a person chooses to make extravagant promises of this kind, he probably does so because it pays him to make them.”
Keywords: Promises, extravagant, advertisement, contract
Keyword Location: Para 12 (Line 1 to 4)
Explanation: As he stated, "if a person decides to make extravagant promises of this kind, he presumably does so because it pays him to do them." Lord Justice Bowen used it to treat advertisements as a type of agreement. The supporting assertion clearly states this.

Question 13:
Choose the correct letter A, B,C, or D

Why is Mrs. Carlill’s case often cited in present-day court trials?

It proved the untrustworthiness of advertisements.
It established the validity of the one-sided contract.
It explained the nature of the contract.
It defended the rights of consumers.

Answer: B- It established the validity of the one-sided contract.
Supporting Sentence: “The case established the principle of the unilateral and is frequently cited today..”
Keywords: Case, trial, court, contract
Keyword Location: Para 19 (Line 1)
Explanation: The case of Mrs. Carlill was exceptional because it created the notion of a unilateral or one-sided agreement, which is still commonly mentioned, as the accompanying statement shows.

Read More IELTS Reading Related Samples