SANITARY CONTROL 
OF 
THE FOOD SUPPLY 
BY WILLIAM K. NEWTON, M. D„ 
HEALTH OFFICER OF PATERSON, N. J. 
\Read at the last meeting of the American Public Health Association. Published by 
permission of the author.] 
CONCORD, N. H.: 
PRIN'IEI) BY THE REPUBLICAN PRESS ASSOCIATION. 
1 884. SANITARY CONTROL 
OF 
THE FOOD SUPPLY. 
BY WILLIAM K. NEWTON, M. D., 
HEALTH OFFICER OF PATERSON, N. J. 
\Read at the last meeting of the American Public Health Association. Published by 
permission of the author.] 
CONCORD, N. H. : 
PRINTED BY THE REPUBLICAN PRESS ASSOCIATION. 
1 884. SANITARY CONTROL OF THE 
FOOD SUPPLY. 
There is no one subject more intimately connected with our 
every-day life, and about which so much has been written and 
published the past few years, as the condition of our food sup- 
ply. The columns of medical, sanitary, and chemical journals, 
and the reports of state and local boards of health, have been 
crowded with essays on food adulteration and plans for check- 
ing it; and the popular papers have teemed with the horrors of 
the subject, each trying to vie with the other in furnishing the 
latest meal of adulterated articles, till, if we believe the sensa- 
tional stories of these alarmists, we wonder why there are any 
people left to tell the tale. 
It may seem unnecessary, or even presumptuous, then, for me 
to offer any remarks on this topic, and a less hackneyed theme 
might appear to be more profitable ; but it is my aim to review 
the work that has been done in the way of investigating and 
regulating the food supply, and to draw attention to some novel 
phases of the question. 
My purpose is to look at the relations of boards of health to 
the food supply, and I shall endeavor to trace out just where 
these relations begin and end ; and I shall show, by the evidence 
so far offered, that a line may be closely drawn between harm- 
less adulterations and those which are injurious to the public 
health. Your attention will be called finally to a class of foods 4 
of animal origin which need constant supervision on the part of 
our sanitary authorities. 
It will be well at first to notice the regulations in force which 
aim to check adulteration, or to prevent the sale of injurious 
articles of food. 
In Germany, Austria, France, and other European countries, 
laws have long been in existence controlling the manufacture or 
sale of articles of food. These laws are either general, or are 
merely local police regulations. There is hardly a city or mu- 
nicipality on the continent which does not more or less efficiently 
look after the quality of foods, and endeavor to insure purity. 
It would extend the length of this article beyond reasonable 
limits to mention the custom in each country ; and the forms of 
government are so different from ours, that they would not be 
applicable here. We can derive more benefit by following the 
efforts made in English speaking countries. 
ENGLAND. 
The first attempt made in England in modern times to enact 
laws bearing on adulteration was in 1860 (23 and 24 Viet., c. 84), 
but a comprehensive law was not passed till 1872 (35 and 36 
Vict.,c. 74). The statute nowin force became a law in 1875 
(38 and 39 Viet., c. 63), and was further modified in 1879. It 
is upon these recent English laws that those now in force in the 
United States were based. 
The general plan followed in Great Britain is as follows : 
Public analysts are appointed by each parish, borough, or town 
government, and are required to analyze a number of samples as 
fixed upon each year, for which a stated sum of money is paid. 
Thus, an analyst in a certain rural district is required to analyze 
a stated number of samples of milk, bread, spices, and so on, 
and either a lump sum is paid for the work, or the price for each 
article is fixed upon. This plan limits the amount of work ex- 
pected of each man. 
Inspectors of nuisances, appointed in the same manner as the 
analysts, are required to collect the samples, and if the certifi- 
cate of the analyst states that they are adulterated or sold in 
violation of the food adulteration law, the inspectors shall make 
complaint before a magistrate, who tries the case. 5 
A portion of the sample is always reserved, and, in case of 
appeal from the decision of the analyst, is sent to chemists 
at Somerset House. 
It will be seen by this outline that the amount of work done 
depends altogether on the local government. If that body be 
penurious, or lacking in sympathy with the work, little can be 
accomplished. Hence a great drawback to this system lies in 
the method of regulating the amount of work required of the 
analyst. If that official was paid a stated salary, and should 
analyze all samples left with him, more headway would be made ; 
but for reasons of economy the other plan is followed. 
The appointment of an analyst is made obligatory on the local 
government; but while these appointments are made in every 
case, in many instances no work is given them to do. In 1882 
three counties and forty-two towns did no work under the act 
whatever. 
For these reasons the results obtained under the law, which 
will be noted further on, do not accurately represent the condi- 
tion of the food supply of all parts of Great Britain. 
Besides this food adulteration law, there are other acts of a 
very salutary character in force : among these may be mentioned 
the bake-house acts, slaughtering acts, and acts relating to dai- 
ries. 
CANADA. 
In Canada a law was enacted January 1, 1875, but work was 
not begun till 1876. As there are peculiar, and what appears 
to the writer desirable, features in this law, a somewhat detailed 
description will be given of the methods employed under it. 
The law is moulded after the English laws, but the machinery 
for its enforcement is different. The latter is under the charge 
of the Department of Inland Revenue, a branch of government 
analogous to our Internal Revenue Department. This depart- 
ment has the supervision of inspectors and analysts, and collects 
the revenue on liquors and other articles. The department has 
control not only over manufacturers and compounders of liquors, 
but is brought into intimate relations with all branches of trade. 
This is of great advantage, for, as will be seen later on, articles 
used for the purpose of adulteration are very rarely injurious to 
health, but are added to foods in order to cheapen or defraud ; 6 
hence the adulteration laws are trade and not public health 
measures, and should be under the charge of some department 
of government other than health boards. This opinion seems 
to obtain in Canada, for the law is treated as a commercial one, 
and is not considered from a sanitary stand-point. 
To return to the method of management: 
The governor appoints one or more analysts for each revenue 
district. At present there are six, one for each of the follow- 
ing cities and districts : Halifax, Montreal, Quebec, Toronto, 
St. John’s, and London. The officers of inland revenue, the 
inspectors of weights and measures, and the inspectors of food, 
are authorized to procure and submit to the analysts samples of 
food and drugs, and upon receiving a certificate from the latter 
official stating that the article in question is adulterated, the 
inspector is authorized to seize and destroy it. This latter pen- 
alty, however, is rarely enforced. The expenses of analyses in 
case of prosecution are added to the costs, and are paid by the 
convicted person ; but in case no prosecution is made, the costs 
are paid by the government. 
There have been very few prosecutions, the department de- 
pending on the publication of the name of the culprit as a form 
of punishment. 
The analysts are paid by a retaining fee of $200 per annum, 
an allowance for the first year for laboratory apparatus of a sum 
not exceeding $300, by an allowance of $100 for rent, and by 
payments of fees until the total amount shall have reached the 
sum of $2,000 per annum. The fees allowed are reasonable. 
The commissioner of inland revenue apportions each year the 
amount of work expected of each analyst. 
I ask you to bear this outline in mind, for we shall show that 
the results attained under this system have been very encour- 
aging. 
UNITED STATES. 
In our own country many states have had for many years 
scattered clauses in their statutes relating to the adulteration of 
foods, and prohibiting the sale of dangerous meats, etc. Thus, 
the older states of Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and 
others, had laws forbidding the sale of adulterated foods, milk, 
medicines, liquors, and unwholesome provisions. Nearly every 7 
state has a purely commercial system for inspection of flour, 
bacon, lard, salt, etc., but these restrictions apply only to weight 
and other trade qualities. 
It was not until 1879 that any attempt was made to propose 
a carefully prepared law applicable to each state. It had long 
been known to merchants that the frequent adulterations of food 
were not only injuring trade, but were damaging the credit of 
the dealers. Hence in that year a prize of $1,000 was offered 
by the National Board of Trade for the best essay on adultera- 
tion, and for the best form of a law prohibiting the same. As a 
result of this contest a law was drawn up by careful and com- 
petent men, and attempts were made to have it enacted in the 
various states. This has been successful in but three states. 
The law recommended by the committee of the Board of Trade 
was adopted by the legislature of New Jersey on March 25,1881 ; 
by the New York legislature later in the same year; and was 
passed in Massachusetts, with slight modifications, in 1882. 
A copy of the law, changed so as to be applicable to the ter- 
ritories and other sections of the country under the charge of 
the general government, was presented to the last congress, but, 
not receiving the support it was entitled to, failed to pass. A 
law prohibiting the importation of damaged and adulterated tea 
was enacted, however, and much good has been accomplished 
under its provisions. 
A brief outline of the state law may be of interest, as parts 
of it are uniform in New Jersey, New York, and Massachu- 
setts. It begins by defining what is meant by adulteration in 
the case of food or drugs ; gives the state boards of health 
power to exempt from time to time certain articles, and also 
exempt certain mixtures or compounds recognized as ordinary 
articles of food, “ provided the same are not injurious to health.” 
The act further requires that the State Board of Health “ shall 
take cognizance of the interests of the public health as it relates 
to the sale of food and drugs and the adulteration of the same, 
and make all necessary investigations and inquiries thereto.” 
The board is also to appoint analysts and inspectors. 
Each state has adopted rules and methods of procedure pecul- 
iarly its own. These we shall now notice. 8 
NEW YORK. 
In New York $10,000 was appropriated in 1881 for the work 
of investigation. In 1883 $30,000 was voted by the legislature 
for the purposes of the law, but this was stricken from the 
budget by the governor ; hence the work of the board has been 
very much crippled. 
In 1881 nine analysts and four inspectors were appointed to 
carry out a system of investigation. An immense amount of 
work was done, and a series of exceedingly valuable reports 
was presented to the board by this corps. These reports will 
be referred to later on. 
As to the actual prosecution of dealers in adulterated foods, 
very little has been done. A few complaints have been made in 
cases of the sale of impure cream of tartar, and varying results 
obtained, some of the cases being taken to the higher courts. 
An important suit against importers of damaged and adulterated 
tea is now in the courts, and at present writing remains un- 
decided. 
NEW JERSEY. 
Ill New Jersey $600 was appropriated by the legislature in 
1881 for the purposes of the act. Six analysts were appointed 
by the State Board of Health, to report on the condition of the 
food supply in the state, which was done, and the results printed 
in the fifth annual report of that board. 
In 1882 the legislature failed to make any appropriation, and 
little or no work was done in that year. In 1883 the law was 
veiy much changed, and an annual fund of $1,000 provided for. 
Four analysts were then appointed, and are prepared to analyze 
all samples sent to them. 
The legal proceedings were altered to conform to the general 
public health law of the state, and to provide for summary trials 
without a jury. Authority was given to any analyst or inspector, 
or any officer of a local board of health, to inspect articles of 
food wherever exposed for sale ; and if, upon inspection, an 
article shall prove to be adulterated, the officer is empowered to 
prohibit the sale or disposal thereof till decision shall be given 
by the court before which the defendant may be brought. This 
provision has been adversely criticised, but the reason for its 9 
existence is patent to any person conversant with the principles 
of sanitary law. If an article is injurious to health, its sale 
should be prohibited, and the health officer should be empowered 
to prevent the use of such food ; for, if one has to await the 
results of a trial, in many cases very protracted, the very object 
of a public health measure is defeated, and the offender not 
punished until great harm has been done. This principle is up- 
held by another law in New Jersey (the milk adulteration law), 
which will be discussed further on. In that law the inspector is 
authorized to destroy impure milk wherever found, and thus 
prevent any harm to the public health by such a dangerous arti- 
cle of food. The only prosecutions under the food law in New 
Jersey were against dealers in impure milk at Newark, but as 
no decision has been given by the higher courts, little can be 
said as to its strength. 
MASSACHUSETTS. 
The State Board of Health in this state has appointed two 
analysts,—one at a salary of $1,500, and the other at $1,000 
per annum. The first has charge of the investigation of articles 
of food, the latter of drugs. No provision has been made for 
inspectors, but the analysts have to obtain the samples them- 
selves. The analysts are not only to investigate the condition 
of the food supply, but are to designate such articles as shall be 
exempt from the action of the law, and also to fix standards of 
purity for future use. No reports of the investigations have 
been so far published.* 
As to the value of these laws, and whether they will with- 
stand the assaults of acute lawyers retained by rich defendants, 
little can be said, for no real test has been had ; for only a few 
cases have been tried in the petty courts of New York and New 
Jersey, and the law points have not been argued before the 
higher courts. 
As to the form of the laws, it is held by so eminent an author- 
ity as Dr. E. R. Squibb, that in “ aiming to be concise, com- 
pact, and brief, they are too general and too loose for any very 
clear comprehension by the adulterators, to whom they are 
really addressed. The law seems to address itself to the ana- 
* Since this was written, prosecution has been begun, in Boston, in cases of milk adul- 
teration. 10 
lysts, lawyers, and courts, and generalities leave too much room 
for pi'otracted legal proceedings and technicalities, all of which 
involve well known chances of escape for defendants.”* 
Another point: This law, on its very face, bears the stamp 
of being a trade measure ; and it is not until we reach the clause 
where it states that state boards of health “ shall take cogni- 
zance of the public health in so much as relates to injurious 
foods,” that we know the sanitary bearings of the statute. In 
truth, if health boards are to take cognizance of adulteration 
only when it affects public health, the problem would be very 
easy of solution, and sanitary authorities would be rid of many 
duties that are thrust upon them, and not properly belonging to 
their sphere. But as interesting as this discussion is, we must 
leave it for the present. 
SPECIAL LAWS. 
A few states have special laws bearing on this subject. Thus, 
New York has a law intended to compel dealers to sell oleomar- 
garine and lard cheese for what they really are, but it has 
never been enforced. Massachusetts has a statute authorizing 
cities and towns to appoint milk inspectors, and prohibiting the 
adulteration of milk. Boston is the only city working under it, 
and more or less efficient work has been done. 
Last year, 1882, the vinegar makers of that state came to the 
conclusion that their trade needed protection from adulterators, 
so they were presented with a law regulating the sale of vine- 
gar, forbidding the addition of any foreign acid, and authoriz- 
ing the appointment of inspectors of vinegar. The inspector of 
vinegar for Boston has been working up the subject, and regrets 
the “deficiently drawn statute.” He has done much to enlighten 
us as to what vinegar is, and what are its adulterants. 
Rhode Island also impowers cities to appoint milk inspectors, 
and forbids the sale of impure or impoverished milk. The city 
of Providence has done excellent work under this law, and has 
reduced the sale of impure milk to a minimum. 
New Jersey has given her people protection against adulter- 
ated honey, lard, liquors, and milk, but no one ever knew a per- 
son to be prosecuted for selling either of the three first men- 
* Epliemeris, No. 1, p. 24. 11 
tioned articles. An active warfare has been waged, however, 
for the past four years, under the milk law, and as it has some 
novel features it will bear review. This law was originally 
drawn up as a purely commercial measure, for the purpose of 
enabling honest farmers and dealers to sell a pure article, and 
also to protect them from the evil practices of creameries and 
other adulterators. Provision was made in this law for the ap- 
pointment of an inspector of milk for the whole state, but the 
honest farmers did not know whom to trust with the appoint- 
ment. They could not depend on the politicians, for the office 
would then become one of the spoils of party ; so in their adver- 
sity they bethought them of the State Board of Health, when, 
presto, the commercial law was transformed into a public health 
measure, and the bantling was turned over to the care of that 
board. And it has proved a public health measure in fact, and 
clearly defines what pure milk is. 
I will mention a few of the principal points in the law : Milk 
from which the cream has been removed can only be sold from 
cans marked in letters two inches high “ Skimmed Milk.” The 
sale of adulterated, impure, or unwholesome milk, or the milk 
from cows kept in a crowded or unwholesome condition, or dis- 
eased, or fed on unwholesome food, or upon distillery waste or 
other rotten substance, is forbidden. The addition of water or 
an}7 other substance is declared an adulteration. Milk which 
has been exposed to or is contaminated b}7 the exhalation from 
any person sick with any contagious disease shall not be sold. 
For the purposes of this act, milk shall be considered as adul- 
terated when it shall contain less than 12 per cent, of milk solids. 
Cases of violation are tried before a court in a summary way. 
without a jury, and a certificate of an analyst that the milk did 
not conform to the state standard is sufficient evidence. Under 
this act, the State Board of Health appoints annually a state 
inspector of milk, who has power to appoint assistants, and 
also to inspect milk wherever found, and if it is adulterated or 
impure he is authorized to destroy it. The state has expended 
from $1,000 to $1,500 a year on this special work. 
Besides these general and special laws, there are many local 
ordinances or sanitary codes which govern and provide for the 
work of inspection in the larger cities. Nearly all of our cities 12 
make some provision for market inspection, but in most instances 
the very flagrant violations of law, such as the sale of bad meat 
and stale vegetables, only are dealt with. In some cities,— 
New York, Brooklyn, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and others,—the 
milk inspection is carried on in a very vigorous manner. Thus, 
in New York city, the warfare carried on during the past few 
years against impure milk has done incalculable good. 
It will be interesting now to review these laws, and note the 
method of enforcement employed. 
In France, the work appears to be done by the police officers 
of the various cities. 
In England, the parish, town, or municipal boards have con- 
trol, and appoint the officers. These boards are not comparable 
with our boards of health, as is sometimes supposed, but they 
are analogous to our borough, town, or village governing bodies. 
They not only have charge of sanitary matters, but care for the 
paupers, disburse alms, lay out streets, etc. 
Canada places the control of the adulteration laws in the 
hands of the Inland Revenue Department, a branch of govern- 
ment brought into intimate relations with trade, and hence in a 
position to know the rules and requirements of trade. 
In the United States we have departed from all beaten tracks, 
and have turned over to state and local boards of health all 
adulteration laws so far enacted. This has been done for two 
reasons,—first, because there is no other department of govern- 
ment to which these laws could very well be directed ; and, sec- 
ondly, because a few articles of food are so adulterated as to be 
injurious to health or life, it is argued that all sophistications 
are dangerous. This assignment of a duty not distinctively and 
positively applicable to health boards is unfortunate, for these 
boards have even more than they can do now, with the things 
which properly belong to them. And from a multiplicity of du- 
ties thrust on us, we are apt to neglect some matters of greater 
importance to the public health and weal. 
I will not deny that there are articles of food which need the 
constant watch-care of sanitary officials, but they are few in 
number, and are mostly of animal origin. Of these I shall 
speak later on. 
I am again tempted to quote from Dr. E. R. Squibb. He has 13 
devoted years of his life to the fight against adulteration in all 
its forms, and his mature opinion is well worthy of our consid- 
eration. 
He says that the objects of the adulteration laws are as fol- 
lows : “ I'irst, to deter persons from practices of adulteration ; 
second, to detect such practices ; and, third, to punish them. 
All these combine to prevent adulterations. But the first is by 
far the most important element, and that which requires greatest 
emphasis, because it is the most radical in its influence and 
most economical in its effects. The motive power of all adul- 
teration is pecuniary profit or gain, and not to endanger or dam- 
age health at all. And that adulterations do endanger health 
is a mere accident, that most adulterators strive to avoid by ren- 
dering their adulterations as harmless as possible. Therefore it 
is that all adulterations are mere dilutions and substitutions in 
the interest of pecuniary profit or gain, and if they are ever pos- 
itively hurtful, it is by accident and not by design ; and hence 
adulterations are simply frauds, cheats, or deceptions to make 
money by, and they are studied out and designed in this one 
single interest before they are put into practice. Now, when a 
law can come in effectively between the motive and the act, to 
deter from the act, it is then nearly perfect, since there is noth- 
ing then to detect or punish, nor any work for the analysts or 
the courts at all, no expense to the governments, and therefore 
no taxes upon the people for enforcing the law, to say nothing 
of the moral effects of restraining from vicious practices.” He 
then says that if the law is to be operative between the motive 
and the design, it should be drawn in full and plain language. 
“ If the penalty be sufficient, and sufficiently sure to make the 
risk of punishment greater than the profit will warrant, the 
design to adulterate will be abandoned, and the law will have 
its natural and wholesome success.”* 
Whether the laws that we have reviewed will come up to Dr. 
Squibb’s standard I leave you to judge. 
I am afraid that we place too much trust in laws themselves. 
Some people with whom I have talked on this subject seem to 
labor under the delusion that the moment a law is placed on the 
statute-books a moral revolution takes place, and that the end 
* Ephemeris, No. 1, p. 24. 14 
sought for would be attaiued without more trouble. I once had 
great faith in laws myself, and believed that because a certain 
law, calculated to do great good, and in itself a beneficent 
measure, said so, and so must be the case, that all the courts 
and lawyers would bow to its dictum. But one hour on the wit- 
ness stand, and two hours of talk from the lawyer on the other 
side of the case, dispelled the delusion, and I came to the con- 
clusion that there was no such a thing as justice an}? more. 
With this experience in mind, I would say that the only way 
to prove the value of our food laws is to enforce them vigorously, 
and if they come out of the fiery ordeal of the courts unscathed 
we shall be extremely fortunate. 
We will agree that there is a necessity for laws such as these 
to forbid adulteration, and whether trade or public health is 
paramount they should be enforced without fear or favor ; and 
if it is deemed the duty of health boards to execute them, let us 
bow to the demand, and do the best we can. 
RESULTS OBTAINED. 
Now that we have glanced at the various laws, and the ma- 
chinery employed to enforce them, let us see what has been ac- 
complished by investigation and prosecution. Let us look over 
the field, and see if we can discover what articles are adulterated, 
and what is the character of the adulteration. Has the vast ex- 
penditure of money and time revealed anything, or has it all 
been spent for naught? If it be proved that our food supply is 
not harmfully adulterated, or if we can draw the line between 
sophistications which touch only the pocket and those which 
endanger health and life, we must acknowledge that the thou- 
sands of dollars spent in the work have not been wasted, but 
have given us ample returns for the investment. The amount 
of evidence bearing on food adulteration at our command to-day 
is enormous : the great difficulty with which we have to contend 
is to properly use it. But we shall endeavor to present it un- 
biased and unprejudiced. 
First, let us see what is the prevalence and what the propor- 
tion of adulterated food, and then note the effect of prosecution 
and investigation thereon. 
As to continental Europe we can say but little, for the records 15 
are so scattered and the laws so multifarious that we have but a 
trifle to offer. In France, to judge from the published reports, 
chemists note articles as good, bad, passable, not injurious, 
and injurious. Thus, in March, 1883, out of 1,118 articles ex- 
amined at the Paris laboratory, 271 were returned as good, 231 
as passable, 616 as bad, 545 of which are “ not injurious,” and 
71 “ injurious.” It is difficult to tell just what is meant by 
these terms, and as we are not informed which are pure and 
which adulterated, no opinion can be formed. Wines form by 
far the largest number of articles examined, and from the report 
we judge that the Parisian gets very little pure wine. Of 257 
samples of milk, 26 are returned as good, 116 as passable, and 
115 as bad, but not injurious. 
GREAT BRITAIN. 
Year. 
Number analyzed. 
Per cent, adulterated. 
1875-6 
15,989 
18.10 
1877 
11,943 
17.70 
1878 
15,107 
16.58 
1879 
17,574 
17.25 
1880 
17,919 
17.47 
1881 
17,868 
16.56 
1882 
14,900 
16.50 
These totals do not represent foods exclusively, for drugs, 
wines, spirits, and beer are included ; nor do they indicate the 
state of the food for the whole of Great Britain, for, as before 
stated, in many parts of the country no work is done under the 
act. 
It will be seen, by glancing at the figures, that five years’ 
work, from 1877 to 1882, has only reduced the amount of adul- 
teration 1.2 per cent. When it is remembered that a vigorous 
prosecution has been kept up, we are compelled to acknowledge 
that the results are not very encouraging. 
Selecting a few articles from the list for purposes of compar- 
ison, we find that of the samples of milk analyzed the per cent, 
adulterated varied from 26 in 1877 to 20.35 in 1882 ; butter, 
including oleomargarine sold for butter, 12 to 15 per cent. ; gro- 
ceries, 13 to 10 per cent. ; bread and flour, 6.84 to 4.32 per cent. 16 
CANADA. 
Canada shows by far the best results obtained by any coun- 
try, and the reduction in the amount of adulteration has been 
made by but little prosecution. The only form of punishment 
indulged in is the publication of the names of the dealers in im- 
pure articles. In 1876, when the work was begun, 51.66 per 
cent, of the articles examined were adulterated. In 1882 this 
figure is reduced to 25.66, showing an improvement of a little 
over 25 per cent. 
UNITED STATES. 
As there has been little or no prosecution in the United States 
under the food laws, but little has been done in the way of a 
reduction of the percentage of adulteration. In New York and 
other cities, and in New Jersey, the sale of impure milk has 
been reduced markedly ; but there is still much work to do. 
If we look over the reports of the analysts of New York, New 
Jersey, Massachusetts, Michigan, and other states, we obtain a 
fair idea of the prevalence of sophistication in this country. 
We find that the staple articles, such as are found in the aver- 
age household, suffer adulteration about as follows : Spices and 
condiments, 66 per cent. ; ground coffee, 45 per cent. ; tea, 48 
per cent. ; sugar, the higher grades rarely, the lower grades 20 
per cent. ; syrup, 50 per cent. ; milk, when not inspected, 50 
per cent. ; flour, none ; bread, about 2 per cent. ; cream of tar- 
tar and baking powders, 44 per cent. ; butter, 40 per cent, 
(other fats substituted) ; vinegar, rarely adulterated, but rarely 
cider vinegar ; olive oil, 60 per cent. 
CHARACTER OF ADULTERANTS EMPLOYED. 
Spices and condiments, adulterated with exhausted spices, 
ground cereals, flour, buckwheat hulls. 
Coffee, with chicory, rye, and other cereals. 
Tea, with exhausted leaves, leaves of other plants, damaged 
teas, coated to improve looks. 
Sugar, with grape sugar. 
Syrup, with grape sugar—in many cases all glucose. 
Milk, with water, alkaline salts to neutralize-aciditv, preserv- 
atives, and is often skimmed. 17 
Bread, alum added to increase whiteness,—rarely used in this 
country. 
Cream of tartar and baking powders, gvpsum, starches, and 
“ fillers,” to increase bulk. 
Butter, other fats substituted for it or adulterated with for- 
eign fats. 
Vinegar, rarely adulterated, but often not fruit vinegar. 
Olive oil, peanut and cotton-seed oil. 
It will be noted, after glancing over this list, that the staple 
articles in every-day use are never adulterated with injurious 
substances ; and the evidence thus far offered indorses the state- 
ment made in the first part of this paper, that adulteration is a 
sin against the pocket, and extremely rarely against health. 
A group of substances which may be classed together, and, 
strictly speaking, not adulterations, but which are often used 
for the purpose of sophistication, will now be considered. 
It is difficult to say whether this may be put in the category 
of articles to be placed under the watch-care of sanitary officers. 
Some have held that there is danger of animal parasites or dis- 
eases being introduced into the economy by the use of this arti- 
cle, but the best authorities deny this statement. Personally, I 
am of the opinion that it should be classed with the commercial 
frauds, but that its manufacture should be watched carefully by 
health officers. You are so familiar with the process of manu- 
facture that it does not seem necessary for me to go into detail. 
Suffice it to say, that as the aim of the maker is to produce a 
sweet and merchantable commodity, any rancidity would inter- 
fere with its sale. This fact insures the public against any 
putrid or ill-smelling fat being used. 
The quantity of this material sold and used as food in the 
United States is enormous. We may form an idea of the extent 
of the business when we know that three factories in New York 
state turn out not less than 4,500 tons a year, and there are 
some five or six more factories in the country. I venture to 
assert that a very small portion of this is sold to the consumer 
for what it really is. 
We must recognize the necessity of some legal control over 
OLEOMARGARINE. 18 
this trade, and dealers should be compelled to sell the article on 
its merits, and not fraudulently. The enforcement of such a 
law does not belong to health boards, however. 
“lard cheese” and “lardine.” 
An ingenious New Yorker has discovered that he can take 
milk robbed of its cream, and by the introduction of a foreign 
fat produce a cheese equal to an honest cream cheese. Lard 
and oleomargarine oil have been used in this process, and the 
resulting material is known as “ lard cheese.” 
“ Lardine ” is an artificial butter made in nearly the same 
way. 
Now if these articles were sold to the public on their true 
merits, no one would complain ; but such is rarely the case, 
and if persons will insist on being thus defrauded, it may be 
argued that legal protection to the innocent purchaser is de- 
manded. 
It is estimated that ten pounds of glucose per capita is made 
and sold each year in the United Stales ; and we naturally ask, 
What becomes of it? No one ever heard of a person asking for 
the substance at a grocery store ; yet it is sold and consumed 
somewhere. We can account for a large percentage of the sub- 
stance in the syrups, strained honey, confections, and in the 
lower grades of sugar. 
Attempts have been made to check or prohibit the sale of 
this article, which, as Dr. Squibb has it, “marks the progress 
of the age.” The legislators of New Jersey passed a law in 
1881 requiring that the manufacturers of sugar and syrup, who 
shall mix therewith any glucose or grape sugar, must mark the 
package with the word “adulterated,” under a penalty of $500. 
This law came before Governor Ludlow for his signature, which 
he refused to affix. His veto message will bear quoting here, 
for it answers the question as to whether the substance shall be 
considered injurious or not. He says,—“ The manufacture of 
glucose, or corn-sugar, is an enterprise yet in its infancy ; it 
will, if successful, result in the utilization of.the corn crop of 
the country, the increase of the sugar supply, and the conse- 
GLUCOSE. GRAPE SUGAR. 19 
quent employment of a large amount of capital and labor. Sci- 
entists of acknowledged ability and integrity have declared it to 
be a healthful article of food, and there is no reason why the 
result of its mixture with cane sugar should be marked ‘ adul- 
terated,’ as if it were a debasement or pollution.” The legisla- 
ture was satisfied with the governor’s explanation, and did not 
enact the law. 
Frequent statements have been made that sulphuric acid has 
been found in large and poisonous quantities in the glucose 
syrups. This is either a perversion of facts, or an exaggera- 
tion. It is true that sulphuric acid is employed in the conver- 
sion of starch into grape sugar, but the acid is afterwards neu- 
tralized by means of milk of lime. If any acid exists in the 
syrup, it is either in combination with the lime, or free and in 
very small quantities,—a condition strenuously avoided by the 
manufacturers. 
It may be said, without fear of contradiction, that glucose 
may be considered a harmless article of food. As to the use of 
this article as an adulterant, I hold that it does not come under 
the jurisdiction of health officers. 
CANNED FOODS. 
There is sufficient evidence to warrant ns in asserting that 
fruits, vegetables, and meats preserved in tin need our atten- 
tion. Many cases of acute poisoning, of greater or less sever- 
ity, have been reported by competent observers. 
It has been proved that some fruits and vegetables act upon 
the tin or lead, and enough of these metals is dissolved to cause 
serious illness. This is especially true of the very acid fruits, 
such as apples, cherries, and vegetables like tomatoes. 
One case has come under my notice, where two persons were 
seized with an attack of vomiting, purging, and cramps, after 
the ingestion of apples preserved in tin. I was fortunate enough 
to obtain the can and the remainder of the fruit. The interior 
of the can presented a crystalline appearance, such as is de- 
scribed by Wood and others who have investigated the subject. 
The fruit was acid in reaction, and analysis revealed tin in con- 
siderable quantities. 
It has been suggested that only old and imperfectly prepared 20 
fruits and vegetables cause trouble, and that to ensure the fresh- 
ness of the article the year of canning should be stamped on the 
package. This subject needs thorough investigation. 
As to illness being caused by canued corned beef and other 
meats, I can say that I have seen two cases, but the trouble 
seemed to be due to imperfect preservation, as the meat in both 
cases was partially rotten. Both cans were what is known in 
the trade as “ swelled-head,” that is, the ends were bulged out 
by air or gases in the can : hence these cases cannot be cited as 
being caused by canned meats by themselves. 
PRESERVATIVES. 
I wish to call attention to the use of preservatives, as the cus- 
tom seems to be increasing. The subject should be thoroughly 
studied before a competent opinion can be formed as to the 
advisability of their employment. Those which I have exam- 
ined have consisted of salicylic acid, either alone, or combined 
with soda, alkaline carbonates, potassium nitrate, and borax or 
boric acid. These are extensively advertised in glowing lan- 
guage, and with the usual accompanying certificates from chem- 
ists or physicians, and meet with ready sale. Many fanciful 
names are given to the compounds, and each is claimed to be 
ii positively harmless.” 
My own opinion is, that their use should be discountenanced 
by sanitarians ; for the mere fact that a certain chemical com- 
bination will check fermentation or putrefaction outside of the 
body leads us to believe that digestion will be impaired or im- 
peded. This I have sought to prove in an imperfect way, by 
treating milk with a preservative, and then attempting artificial 
digestion. Digestion was proved to be interfered with, or 
checked altogether. 
Thus far we have been discussing certain laws and duties 
relating to the food supply with which health boards may or 
mayT not properly concern themselves. Your attention is now 
called to a group of foods, and the trades connected therewith, 
which need the constant surveillance of sanitary officers. I 
refer to bread, milk, and meat, and the trades of baker, milk 
seller, and butcher, each one of which should receive the closest 21 
attention of health officers. The importance of this branch of 
our subject is so evident that I shall go somewhat into detail in 
pointing out the line of investigation necessary. 
BREAD. 
The amount of adulterated bread sold in the United States is 
very small, certainly not one per cent, of the total quantity 
used. Alum is sometimes used to make bread appear white, 
but it is not a common practice. It may by prolonged use 
cause indigestion, and of course its use should be checked. 
But the health officers’ duties do not end with the mere exam- 
ination of bread for alum: he should carry on his inspection 
further, and into the bake shop, noticing the condition and sur- 
roundings of the place, and insist that there should be clean- 
liness in every branch of the business. 
Bake-shops are generally located in cellars, and are very often 
damp, dirty, and foul-smelling, and if a person with a sensitive 
stomach should visit many of them, I am of the opinion that 
the demand for home-made bread would be increased. The 
very occupation of baker is apt to cause certain diseases of the 
skin of the hands, and although no illness may be caused by it, 
it is not pleasant to think of our bread containing the scales or 
scabs from eczema. 
To give a leaf from the history of a few visits to bake-houses 
may interest you, and impress upon your minds the importance 
of the sanitary control of such places. 
Most of the places visited were in damp, dark cellars, where 
artificial light is constantly used. In one place we find the cat 
and dog asleep in the kneading-trough, fowls running around 
and perching on the various utensils, and a general air of filth 
and lack of thrift. In one shop the kneading-trough was con- 
nected with the sewer by means of an untrapped waste pipe. 
In another the soil pipe had burst, and the floor was flooded 
with liquid filth. The baker said that “that always happened 
after a rain-storm.” I have seen a baker mixing his bread with 
hand and arm covered with the eruption of eczema. He said 
that “ the doctor told him the dough was good for the disease.” 
But he would say that the quality of the bread was not improved 
thereby. 22 
The custom of using bake-shops for sleeping-rooms is very 
common, and must be discountenanced. 
I would insist, then, on the necessity of frequent inspections 
of bake-houses, in order that cleanliness should be insured. 
MILK. 
When we consider that milk is universally used, and that it 
constitutes almost exclusively the diet of children at that time 
of life when they are least able to resist any interference with 
the purity of their food, we are forced to the conclusion that 
strict measures should be adopted by every health authority to 
insure that condition of the supply necessary for good health. 
It is pleasant and encouraging to know that this is acknowl- 
edged by most sanitary officers, and that more or less efficient 
work is done by a great number of health boards to check the 
sale of impure milk. 
But the mere inspection of milk for the purpose of detecting 
adulteration, although most commendable, does not go far 
enough, and is not in itself sufficient. The watchfulness of 
health officers should go much further, and should extend to 
the dairies from which the supply may come. This I shall insist 
on, and shall state cogent reasons for demanding it. 
We are in a position to assert that the adulteration of milk is 
confined almost exclusively to the addition of water, preserv- 
atives, and alkalies, and to the abstraction of cream. These 
adulterants are not in themselves injurious to health ; but when 
we know that the nutrition of an infant is seriously interfered 
with by the impoverishment of the milk given it, we see wherein 
harm may be done. 
Besides checking the sale of adulterated and impoverished 
milk, the inspector should be on the lookout for milk from dan- 
gerous sources, some of which I shall now indicate. 
Milk produced by improper feeding.—Distillery waste, and 
sometimes beer grains, produce a quality of milk of low nutri- 
tive powers, and dangerous to infants. 
Colostrum.—The milk from cows soon after calving should 
not be sold. It has often produced intestinal troubles in chil- 
dren. 
Cattle improperly cared for.—Cattle improperly housed and 23 
cared for, especially those kept in cities, need close watching, 
and the stables should be frequently inspected. 
Milk from diseased cattle.—Milk from diseased cows is espe- 
cially dangerous, and we may assert that the use of this article 
from tuberculous cows is very hazardous. Sufficient evidence 
has been offered by good and careful authorities to prove that 
there is a possibility of the transmission of tuberculosis by means 
of the milk, and phthisis is quite a common disease among milch 
cows when crowded in ill-ventilated stables. Fortunately the 
secretion of milk is checked during many of the acute cattle dis- 
eases, but there is the risk of carelessness on the part of dairy- 
men ; hence inspectors should always be on the alert. 
Finally, there is the great danger of the transmission of con- 
tagious diseases, the milk acting as the carrier. This fact has 
been carefully noted in England, and many epidemics of typhoid 
fever, scarlet fever, and diphtheria have been traced to the 
dairyman’s house. 
Mr. Ernest Hart, of London, has epitomized about all that is 
known on this subject in an article read by him before the Inter- 
national Medical Congress in 1881. He sums up as follows : 
The number of epidemics of typhoid fever recorded in the abstract as 
due to milk, is 50; of scarlatina, 15; of diphtheria, 7. The total num- 
ber of cases occurring during the epidemics traced to the use of infected 
milk may be reckoned in round numbers as 3,500 of typhoid fever, 800 
of scarlet fever, and 500 of diphtheria. When it is remembered that 
barely ten years ago we were utterly ignorant of milk’s being a carrier of 
infection, and that consequently these epidemics have all occurred within 
one short decade, it will be seen how vitally important is the safe guard- 
ing of our milk supplies from contamination. 
The last number of the Lancet, October, 1883 (No. 88, p. 
652), records an epidemic of typhoid fever at St. Pancras, the 
details of the investigation being given by Mr. Murphy, Medical 
Officer. There were 431 cases in 276 houses, and 220 cases 
were traced back to a dairy which supplied most of the houses 
with milk. 
We can easily account for the method of transmission in 
many cases. Thus, a can of milk—a fluid capable of absorbing 
all kinds of odors—may have been exposed to the emanations 24 
from a case of scarlet fever, or the can wiped out with a soiled 
towel or cloth from the patient. The cases of typhoid fever 
traced to dairies have, as a rule, been accounted for by the con- 
taminated water which has been used to dilute the milk or wash 
out the cans. 
That the causes of the epidemics of some zymotic diseases 
have not been traced out in this country is probably due to 
want of care on the part of our sanitary officials. 
I shall ask you now to consider a plan for a control of the 
milk supply, which I think should be followed by all sanitary 
officials. A registry of the milk dealers should be kept, backed 
up by law if necessary, and this should include the name of the 
dealer, the location of the farm, the amount of milk sold daily ; 
and, after inspection of the farm and the milk, notes should be 
added as to the quality of the milk, the condition of the farm- 
yards and the cattle, the breed of the herd, and the kind, qual- 
ity, and quantity of feed given. 
If this plan is followed out, it will not be long before a com- 
plete sanitary control can be kept over the milk supply. We 
are working on this plan in Paterson, but it is too early to arrive 
at results : so far it has worked well. 
MEAT SUPPLY. 
Most of our larger cities provide for meat inspection in their 
markets, but it begins and ends with the inspection of the meat 
actually exposed for sale, and as a rule only meagre, putrid, and 
immature meat is condemned. This system is defective in that it 
does not provide for the surveillance of slaughter-houses and the 
examination of all cattle before or immediately after killing, and 
before the meat is offered for sale. 
In many of our cities the cattle are brought to the butcher by 
railroad, after a long journey : they arrive in an exhausted and 
feverish condition, frequently in a famished state, and are not 
fit to be used as food. In our smaller towns and villages only 
the very young or very old cattle are slaughtered for local use. 
Not only are the cattle actually diseased at the time of kill- 
ing, but the meat itself, by improper treatment, may act as a 
home for dangerous germs. Mr. Francis Vacher, of Birken- 
head, in an able paper read before the International Medical 25 
Congress, refers to several ways in which meat might spread 
diseases : thus, it might itself be in a pathological condition, or 
serve as a medium in which disease germs were nourished and 
multiplied, or it might serve as a nidus in which such germs 
rested. Thus, a specific disease majT be communicated to man 
by the ingestion of meat tainted with splenic fever, or foot and 
mouth disease, or from a tuberculous animal. 
We are warranted, then, in claiming that meat inspection 
should include an examination made by a competent person, 
before death or before the meat shall be exposed for sale in the 
markets. This plan may require the services of a skilled vet- 
erinarian, but it seems to me essential. 
As many of our towns are now supplied almost entirely with 
meat killed and dressed in the West, and brought to market in 
refrigerator cars, this system of inspection will perhaps have to 
be followed by officials appointed by the general government, 
for it would not be equitable to burden a city with work which 
does not concern it. ADDENDUM. 
Since this essay was read before the American Public Health Association, 
at Detroit, November 14th, 1883, the following facts, in relation to milk acting 
as a carrier of disease, have come under the writer’s notice, and are here 
added in order that the subject may be as complete as possible. The essay, 
besides being printed among the papers of the Association, was thought to be 
of sufficient importance to be published by the State Board of Health of 
New Hampshire, and on account of the manuscript being in the hands of 
the printer, at Concord, these recent notes could not be completed in time to 
go into the reprint, and this addendum is now inserted. 
[Note.—These notes should be read before the words “We can easily 
account, etc.,” at the foot of page 23.J 
Epidemic of Typhoid Fevek at Dundee, Scotland.—In this epidemic 
thirty-six cases occurred among the customers of one milkman. Upon in- 
vestigation it was found that three of the man’s children were sick with the 
disease in the room adjoining the “ dairy.”—Lancet, Oct. 27, 1883. 
Epidemic at Penzance, England.—Over thirty cases of typhoid fever 
were traced back to a case in the family of a dairyman.—Lancet, Jan., 1884. 
Epidemic at Aberdeen, Scotland.—Sixteen cases of typhoid fever in 
nine families were caused by polluted milk from a dairy farm where there 
were cases of the disease. —Lancet, Jan., 1884. 
Epidemic at Allegheny City, Pa. —This epidemic of typhoid fever is 
probably the first that has been traced to contaminated milk, as its cause, in 
this country. The record of the cases has not been published, but the writer 
is indebted to Mr. Joseph Albree. who kindly furnished very complete notes, 
which are endorsed by Dr. W. W. Jones, of Allegheny City. In this epidemic 
forty-eight cases of enteric fever occurred among the customers of one milk- 
man, and were scattered over the city. There was but one case of the disease 
in the city which could not be traced to this man. An inspection of the dairy 
farm was made and the results are copied from Mr. Albree’s notes : “A few 
feet from the upper door of the stable was a well which furnished all the 
water used on the premises. A short distance above this well, on the hill 
side, there was a large, deep privy, filled to the surface. The natural course 
of the surface drainage as well as the seeping through the earth led directly 
to the well. It was also discovered that a son of the milkman (whose dwell- 
ing was very near the privy) had been sick with typhoid fever. As there was 
no dairy building on the premises, it is supposed that the milk was kept in 
the house where the sick boy lay. ” The well water was analyzed and found 
to be badly polluted. The natural inference is that this man diluted his milk 
with the well water, or washed out the cans with it. A short paper on this epidemic, by Dr. D. N. Rankin, is printed in the Pittsburgh Medical Journal, 
for October, 1883. 
Epidemic at Port Jervis, N. Y.—This attracted a great deal of atten- 
tion both in the lay and medical journals, and was investigated by Dr. F. C. 
Curtis for the State Board of Health of New York. Between Sept. 28th and 
Dec. 31st, 1883, there were 148 cases of enteric fever in Port Jervis, distribu- 
ted pretty generally over the village. The cases occurred among the custo- 
mers of one milkman to whose farm was traced the origin of the epidemic, 
there being typhoid fever in his family. Dr. Curtis sums up as follows : 
* ‘ The epidemic was one of true enteric fever ; it made its appearance in 
a previously healthy locality ; it arose suddenly and ended suddenly ; it ex- 
hibited no local foci of infection ; it affected several members of a large pro- 
portion of the affected families ; 87 per cent, of the cases occurred among 
persons using the milk supplied by one milk vender ; the possibility of the 
milk becoming infected from the cases of the disease at the dairy farm is es- 
tablished. I would report, therefore, that the epidemic was caused and 
spread through the medium of infected milk.”—Fourth Annual Report, 
State Board of Jlealth of New York. 
Paterson, N. J., September, 1884.