EXHIBIT NO. 3. [Senate Document No. 141, Fifty-sixth Congress, second session.] FEBRUARY 6, 1901.-Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor and ordered to be printed. The PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE presented the following LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION TRANSMITTING, IN COMPLIANCE WITH RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE OF DECEMBER 6, 1900, A REVIEW AND DIGEST OF THE TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE ADULTERATION OF FOOD PRODUCTS TAKEN BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON MANUFACTURES BETWEEN MARCH, 1899, AND FEBRUARY, 1900, TOGETHER WITH A SEPARATE DIGEST OF CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE RELATING TO BAKING POWDERS; ALSO A DIGEST OF THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES AND TERRITORIES RELATING TO THE ADULTERATION OF FOOD AND TO UNWHOLESOME FOOD. OFFICES OF UNITED STATES INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Washington, D. C., February 6, 1901. SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith on behalf of the Industrial Commission the review and digest of the testimony concerning the adulteration of food products taken before the Senate Committee on Manufactures between March, 1899, and February, 1900, together with a separate digest of certain additional evidence relating to baking powders; and also a digest of the laws of the United States and of the several States and Territories relating to the adulteration of food and to unwholesome food. These digests have been prepared in accordance with the following resolution adopted by the Senate December 6, 1900: Resolved, That the Industrial Commission is hereby directed to prepare and send to the Senate, as soon as possible, a digest of any testimony it may have taken on the subject of adulterating food and drink products, a digest of the so-called pure food and drug laws of the various States, and also a digest of the testimony recently taken before the Committee on Manufactures of the Senate on the same subject; and with the following resolution of the Senate adopted January 26, 1901: Resolved, That the Industrial Commission is hereby directed to prepare a digest of the testimony herewith submitted on alum baking powder and send the same to the Senate with its digest of the testimony recently taken before the Committee on Manufactures of the Senate on the adulteration of food and drink products, which was ordered by resolution of the Senate on December sixth, nineteen hundred. Respectfully, The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE. JAMES H. KYLE, Chairman. ADULTERATION OF FOOD PRODUCTS. REVIEW AND TOPICAL DIGEST OF THE EVIDENCE TAKEN TURES BETWEEN MARCH, 1899, AND TOGETHER WITH DIGEST OF THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THE PREPARED BY THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE OF DECEMBER 6, 1900. REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE. The Senate Committee on Manufactures was authorized by the Fifty-fifth Congress to investigate and ascertain what manufacturers adulterate foods and drinks, and which, if any, of such products are fraudulent. In accordance with this authorization, the committee held numerous sessions in Washington, Chicago, and New York between March, 1899, and February, 1900, inclusive, and heard the testimony of a large number of witnesses, including both professional chemists and physicians who had analyzed food products or observed their physiological effects, and persons practically engaged in the manufacture and sale of foods. Written statements were also received from a number of authorities who were not present in person. Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief Chemist of the United States Department of Agriculture, besides stating the results of some of his own investigations, met with the committee in some of its sessions and took part in the questioning of other witnesses. The testimony taken by the committee makes a printed pamphlet of more than 600 pages. (Senate Report No. 516, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session.) EXTENT OF ADULTERATION. There seems to be a general agreement that foods of American origin have improved in purity during recent years, except in certain particulars. Two witnesses call attention to the lack of pure American food products in former years and the consequent general use of foreign goods, but agree that American manufacturers are now producing even better goods than can be imported. Two explanations are given for the improvement—an advance in national character and the discovery that honesty is the best policy. It is sugested that more money is to be made out of pure foods honestly labeled than out of adulterated products.1 Dr. Wiley has stated that probably 95 per cent of all food products have been adulterated at some time in some country; but he estimates that scarcely 5 per cent of the food products bought at random, other than spices and ground coffee, would now be found to be adulterated. Moreover, the adulteration which is injurious to health is much less extensive than that which is merely more fraudulent. Other witnesses who have analyzed foods have found very little injurious or poisonous adulteration. On the other hand, it is said to be impossible to distinguish injurious adulterations from those which are merely frauds, food which is wholesome for one man being unwholesome for another.4 Lead poisoning.-Attention is called to the danger of getting soluble salts of lead and tin from the accidental dropping of solder into canned vegetables and from the use of a large proportion of lead in the tin of which the cans are made. The excess of lead causes what is known as painters' colic. Another source of lead poisoning is the use of lead in siphons used for mineral waters." MIXED FLOUR. A kind of terra alba known as mineraline, produced in a North Carolina factory, is said to have been used in an adulteration of flour. It is absolutely insoluble in the stomach, and serves as a mechanical impediment, loading up the stomach with a dead weight. Sulphate of lime or gypsum, ground to a white powder, has also been used as an adulterant of flour." It is not denied that before the passage of the mixed-flour law it was a common practice to adulterate flour with corn starch, corn flour, and, in some cases, with mineral substances; but the law is thought to have been effective in stopping nearly all the mixing of flour except in the case of such preparations as pancake flour, which are expected to be mixed.8 The increased confidence in American flour abroad resulting from the passage of the mixed-flour law is shown to have produced a decided increase in the exports of that commodity,' and the law is generally considered satisfactory, minor amendments only being suggested.10 BAKING POWDER. The consideration of the relative merits of baking powder made with cream of tartar and that containing alum gives rise to a number of unsettled questions. Two witnesses claim that the popular prejudice against alum baking powder is kept alive by advertising or reading matter paid for by the manufacturers of cream of tartar baking powder, elsewhere referred to as the baking-powder trust." Great stress is laid upon the relative cheapness of alum baking powder; but, on the other hand, it is shown that it is much inferior in leavening power to that made with cream of tartar,13 and also that while it is sold at wholesale at very 1 Hanney, pp. 63, 64; Furbay, pp. 60, 62, 63. 2 Wiley, pp. 41, 585. 3 Frear, p. 481; Jenkins, p. 449. 4 Vaughan, p. 202; Prescott, pp. 197, 198. 6 Wiley, p. 42. 6 Edwards, p. 238. Wiley, pp. 31, 32. 8 Gallagher, pp. 3,4 5, 135, 136; Eckert, pp. 26, 27, 28; Wiley, p. 21. 10 Gallagher, pp. 2,3; Eckert, p. 27; Furbay, p. 62. 11 Rew, pp. 87-89; Austen, pp. 531, 532; see also Delafontaine, p. 230. 12 Austen, pp. 542, 543. 18 Weber, p. 605; Withers, p. 617; McMurtrie, p. 600. 12 low prices it frequently reaches the consumers at prices as high as those of creamof-tartar baking powders.' Cream of tartar as used in bread making is generally considered uninjurious or even beneficial,' while the charge is brought against alum that aluminum compounds do not occur in either the vegetable or the animal matters which form the natural foods of man.3 Cream of tartar.-There is practically no denial of the wholesomeness of creamof-tartar baking powder, though one or two witnesses mention that it would be poisonous or injurious in very large doses, and Professor Munroe considers bakingpowder bread in general less wholesome than that made by the process of fermentation. The chief question concerning cream of tartar is as to its purity. The consulting chemist for three of the principal baking-powder companies says the material used by those companies does not vary appreciably from a purity of 100 per cent; but other chemists have found the purity of commercial cream of tartar to vary greatly, and some samples bought for cream of tartar to contain no cream of tartar at all." Alum in baking powder.―There are several questions concerning alum baking powder as to which great difference of opinion exists. The more important of these questions are (1) whether the alum is completely decomposed in the baking of bread, as it is intended to be, or whether some portion of it remains in the bread as alum; (2) whether the residuum is soluble in the digestive juices, and (3) whether it is injurious in the quantities in which it occurs in bread. The residuum left in the bread by alum baking powder consists of hydrate of aluminum and sulphate of sodium, and, in the case of an alum and phosphate powder, phosphates of calcium and sodium. It is claimed on behalf of the alum baking powders that no alum can be left in the food; that the use of too much alum in baking powder would increase the expense, and is sure to be avoided for commercial reasons. On the other hand, it is believed by several authorities that alum may sometimes occur in the bread,' and one witness says there are good authorities who believe that the decomposition of the alum is never complete, and that some unchanged alum always remains in the bread. 10 One chemist, who is an officer of a baking-powder company, denies that aluminum hydrate is soluble in the digestive juices, on the authority of an English analyst whose conclusion was based upon experiments on living animals." Two authorities consider the solubility of aluminum hydrate doubtful," and several others regard its solubility as established by experiments or otherwise.1 Two manufacturers and three apparently disinterested chemists consider the use of alum baking powder harmless, and one of the chemists even goes so far as to say that it is really the most perfect baking powder, because its residuum is smaller than that of any other, and because it generates gas only very slowly before it is heated, enabling the baker to do his kneading more thoroughly and thus produce a more wholesome bread than when it is necessary to hurry the dough into the oven.14 Several other authorities consider the wholesomeness of 1 Mitchell, p. 107. *Prescott, p. 200; Vaughan, p. 206. 3 Weber, p. 605; McMurtrie, p. 599; Munroe, p. 608. Delafontaine, p. 232. 6 P. 608. McMurtrie, p. 594. "Wiley, p. 584; Mitchell, p. 117; Frear, p. 529. Rew, pp. 87-89; Austen, pp. 532, 533. "Mallet, pp. 551, 552, 559; Mott, 635; Crampton, 623; Mitchell, 108; Vaughan, 205; Woodward, 610. 10 McMurtrie, p. 596. 11 Rew, pp. 88, 104. 12 Mew, p. 612; Mott, p. 635. 13 Prescott, pp. 196, 197; Mitchell, p. 108; Weber, p. 606; McMurtrie, pp. 596-598; Munroe, p. 638; Fairhurst, p. 620; Crampton, p. 624. 14 Rew, pp. 87-89; Murray, p. 67; Austen, pp. 535, 541; Delafontaine, p. 230; Petraens, pp. 292, 293. |