wheat that has more strength in it, more gluten and everything, and therefore will take this 20 per cent of cornstarch or corn flour and make a resulting flour equivalent to a pure wheat flour and which will make as large a loaf of bread as the other fellow's flour, he ought not to be punished for that extra knowledge. Mr. MOORE. I may agree with you as to that. Dr. WESENER. There is that possibility that a miller may know his business better as to his product. But they know that pretty well. They are pretty keen and shrewd on that, and it is right that they should be. They have to keep up their brand. They have spent millions of dollars, and they do not want to make any difference in their product when the new crop comes in, because their customers have become accustomed to certain qualities in their flour. Mr. MOORE. From what you have said I judge that under the law it would be possible to mix wheat and corn flour, if you cared to pay the tax and submit to the regulations of the department? Dr. WESENER. Yes, and practice the worst kind of fraud. Mr. MOORE. Any man who has the incentive you just spoke about, and who is willing to submit to the regulations, could enter into this business now? Dr. WESENER. That is a fact. Mr. MOORE. That is a fact? Dr. WESENER. Yes. Mr. MOORE. That is the reason I asked you whether there would be any advantage that any particular line of scientific management would have over other millers, if we were to repeal the existing regulations, because the tax, it is generally conceded, amounts to nothing. Dr. WESENER. I should say that if the millers were making mixed flours now to the same extent that they did before this present law was passed, it would demoralize the trade, because they have a right to put in any way from 5 per cent to 49 per cent of corn flour or cornstarch, as long as they label it "mixed flour." For example, John Jones could put out a flour and sell it to the grocer, and say, "Here is my mixed flour which I will sell you at so much a barrel, containing 15 per cent cornstarch, or flourine," Mr. Smith would come along and say, "I will give you that same flour for 15 cents less," and then he could put in 25 per cent cornstarch and he would call that flour, and he could do that right now, under the old law. Mr. MOORE. I know, but this bill would not stop it. Dr. WESENER. I thought it would. I thought this provided for quantitative labeling. Mr. GREEN. That is true now, but your bill would stop it because it would inform the customer just how much was in the mixture. Dr. WESENER. That is what I thought. It provides for quantitative labeling. Mr. MOORE. How can the customer tell? Dr. WESENER. He can not tell now. Mr. MOORE. I will submit again the report submitted by Mr. Helvering, of Kansas. Dr. WESENER. The customer can not tell. Mr. FORDNEY. If the mixed flour is sold within the State where it is manufactured, can you not cut the label right from the sack without violating any law? Dr. WESENER. Your State commission would prevent that. that. Dr. WESENER. I beg your pardon, I think you are wrong; but I can not talk of that. These high-priced legal gentlemen must handle some of this, and I do not want to talk on it. Mr. FORDNEY. To carry out the idea I endeavored to convey, the Government now exercises its right of inspection. Dr. WESENER. Inspection? I thought all they wanted was to get the money from the tag or the stamp. That is what this man said; he did not care whether it had mineraline in it, so long as it was marked. Mr. FORDNEY. Then, they might put arsenic in it. Dr. WESENER. No; the pure-food law would cover that. Mr. FORDNEY. He pays the tax upon it, and the State leaves it entirely to the Federal Government? Dr. WESENER. Yes. Mr. FORDNEY. And, under this law, if the material is made and sold within the State, the State would not discover it at all and would not look at it. Dr. WESENER. Oh, yes; they would. They would be mighty quick to do so. Mr. FORDNEY. I do not think they would. Dr. WESENER. Now, to say one more word about this blending, about blending a wholesome product with the flour that has gluten as the framework: The reason we make wheat flour is to make bread. That is all there is to it. There is no getting away from that. They have to have flour to mix with corn flour; the mixture will then make bread. Now, are you allowing that to-day, mixing wheat flour with. rye flour to make rye bread? Mr. FORDNEY. Can you not make bread out of wheat flour without mixing it with corn flour? Dr. WESENER. Yes, but you mix rye with wheat flour in order to get a good, presentable loaf of bread." Mr. FORDNEY. I understood you to say that you had to mix these things in order to make bread. Can you not make bread out of wheat flour? Dr. WESENER. Oh, certainly. Much of it; much of it; certainly. But I want to say this, the reason that they use wheat flour is because of the peculiar property of that gluten, which is that when the gluten comes in contact with water it coagulates and produces a rubbery, stringy mass; and I will say this, if corn-flour gluten had this same chemical property, to coagulate when it came in contact with water, you would be making bread out of corn flour. Mr. FORDNEY. Will you let me read this from Wedderburn in the report of the Agricultural Department at the time this law was before us on December 18, 1897, in submitting the report to the Secretary of Agriculture, attached to a report by Dr. Wiley to the Secretary of Agriculture at that time? Mr. Wedderburn said there very briefly : UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SIR: As a result of investigating the question of food and drug adulterations, as required by my commission from the Secretary of Agriculture, I am con vinced that one of our chief articles of commerce and home consumption is seriously tampered with by the adulterators. With the aid of our leading milling journals I have made as extended an investigation into the adulteration of flour as time permitted, and finding the fraud so extensive, the proof so convincing, and the damage so great, it appears from its importance to require a special report, which I herewith submit to your consideration. Very respectfully, Dr. H. W. WILEY, Chemist. ALEX. J. WEDDERBURN, Special Agent. Then the report follows, signed by Alex. J. Wedderburn, special agent. This was the condition prior to this law which is now sought to be repealed. Would not the same conditions prevail if you were to repeal the law? Dr. WESENER. No; I want to absolutely prohibit adulteration. I am against it to the last ditch, and I have stood against it all my life and have stood against it in my work. May I read this? Let us see what Dr. Wiley says. This is by Dr. Wiley, on this other page here, Congressman, in the same report. It is on page 2 of that same report you read from. May I read this? Mr. FORDNEY. Do you mean to say that I did not read it all? Dr. WESENER. No; but right in that same connection, on that same page, I think we ought to have this. [Indicating to Mr. Fordney.] Mr. FORDNEY. That which you indicate is from Dr. Wiley, not by Wedderburn. Dr. WESENER. But this is on the adulteration of wheat flour. Mr. FORDNEY. Yes; but I read Wedderburn's report. You want to read from the report of Dr. Wiley. Dr. WESENER. It is all in the same connection. Mr. FORDNEY. Yes; but I do not want to be misunderstood. I do not want it to appear that I did not read it all. I would be glad to have you read Dr. Wiley's report, if you want to do so. Dr. WESENER. This is all in connection with the same adulteration of wheat flour. Here is what Dr. Wiley says: It has never been the policy of this division to favor laws which prohibit the manufacture and sale of wholesome articles of diet which are compounds or mixtures. It has, however, always maintained the principle that such compounds or mixtures should never be sold except when properly labeled, and with a full knowledge on the part of the buyer of the character of the goods which he is purchasing. A wise and liberal law regulating commerce in adulterated or misbranded foods would not prohibit the manufacture and sale thereof, but would properly protect both the farmer who produces the foods and the consumer who eats them. That is my sentiment. Mr. FORDNEY. There is a whole lot to that report, I will not take the time to read it; but I should like to have you insert as part of your remarks the entire report of Dr. Wiley. It is too long for me to take the time of the committee to read it here, but for the benefit of the committee, here is another part from Dr. Wiley's report that I will read: Whenever the price of wheat is very much above that of Indian corn it becomes profitable to mix the two products, using as large a proportion of the Indian-corn flour as can be employed without materially injuring the raising qualities of the mixture. The proteid matter contained in Indian corn contains no gluten, which is the chief proteid matter of wheat flour. Dr. WESENER. Yes, sir. Mr. FORDNEY. Will you print the entire report? The report referred to is here printed in full, as follows: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY, Washington, D. C., December 13, 1897. SIR: I beg to submit herewith for your inspection the manuscript prepared by Mr. A. J. Wedderburn, the special agent of the department for collecting information in regard to the extent and character of food adulteration in the United States. The manuscript submitted herewith relates solely to the adulteration of wheat flour with flour made from Indian corn. Whenever the price of wheat is very much above that of Indian corn it becomes profitable to mix the two products, using as large a proportion of the Indian-corn flour as can be employed without materially injuring the raising qualities of the mixture. The proteid matter contained in Indian corn contains no gluten, which is the chief proteid matter of wheat flour. It is to the gluten that wheat flour owes its property of making a light, porous, and spongy loaf. The admixture of Indian-corn flour, therefore, with wheat flour can not be done without injuring to that extent the special qualities for which wheat flour is so highly valued. From a nutritive point of view, there could be little objection to the admixture, inasmuch as the flour of Indian corn is almost if not quite as nutritious as that made from wheat. From the baker's point of view, however, and from the point of domestic use, the admixture of the two flours is most objectionable. If this mixture be made and sold as such, and the purchaser is aware at the time of buying that, he is securing a mixture, there could be no valid objection to this form of adulteration. Such, however, is not the case. Whatever knowledge the seller may have of the material, the buyer is usually an innocent victim of the fraud. The difficulty of detecting the admixture tends to favor the fraud. Purchasers, as a rule, do not have chemical analyses made of the articles which they buy, and there are very few States where the laws against food adulteration are enforced with sufficient vigor to prevent the practice of this adulteration. The mixtures of these two flours, therefore, at the present time, are favored by immunity or prosecution or conviction, and the limit of the adulteration is only fixed by the possibilities of baking. Although there is a marked difference in the chemical and physical properties of the zein, which is the principal proteid of corn meal, and the gliadin and glutenin, which are the principal proteids of gluten, yet the detection of the mixture by chemical means is a long and tedious process. Likewise, the estimation of the quantity of gluten present can not be regarded as a safe index of the degree of adulteration, since pure wheat flours differ among themselves very greatly in the percentage of gluten which they contain. Practically the only reliable means of detecting the adulteration at the present time is the use of the microscope, and this only gives certain results in the hands of an expert. The literature in regard to this adulteration, which is herewith presented for publication, supplements very happily the chemical researches which have just been completed in this division on the composition and adulteration of cereal products. It is believed that a publication of this matter will help to form a public opinion which favors the enactment of a general national law regulating commerce in adulterated and misbranded foods in the District of Columbia and the Territories of the United States and between the States. Such a national law would serve as a model for the local control of food adulteration in the several States. It is only by a cordial cooperation between the National Legislature and the legislatures of the several States that the practice of food adulteration can be sufficiently controlled to protect the farmer and the consumer. It has never been the policy of this division to favor laws which prohibit the manufacture and sale of wholesale articles of diet which are compounds or mixtures. It has, however, always maintained the principle that such compounds or mixtures should never be sold except when properly labeled and with a full knowledge on the part of the buyer of the character of the goods which he is purchasing. A wise and liberal law regulating commerce in adulterated or misbranded foods would not prohibit the manufacture and sale thereof, but would properly protect the farmer who produces the foods and the consumer who eats them. I therefore recommend that this manuscript be transmitted to Congress as a report on the extent and character of food adulteration and be printed for the information of Members of Congress and others who are interested in such matters. I recemmend also that 10,000 copies of the report be requested for the use of the Department of Agriculture. I am, respectfully, H. W. WILEY, Chief of Division. The SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE. Mr. HILL. Doctor, will millet make flour and make bread? Dr. WESENER. Yes; I presume bread could be made from millet. You would have to take off the hull. Mr. HILL. Would it rise? Dr. WESENER. No; you would have to mix it with wheat flour if you wanted it to rise. Mr. HILL. Will barley make leavened bread? Dr. WESENER. No; you would have to mix it with that peculiar gluten from the wheat flour. Mr. HILL. Would rice flour make bread? Dr. WESENER. Not leavened bread. They are all breadstuffs. Mr. HILL. What proportion of the population of the world eat leavened bread? Dr. WESENER. That is a hard question. I do not think it would be more than 50 per cent, because a large number of the world's population are rice eaters, the Chinese and Japanese and the East Indians, and some of the natives down in Africa, of course, do not have any bread at all. In that same connection, you ask about these other cereals--whether they will make leavened bread. They will not. In this connection I wish to speak of gluten bread. Diabetics must have bread low in starch. Such flours can not be prepared by the regular wheat milling process. Therefore the miller must add gluten to his flour to bring it up to the gluten percentage called for in the food standard, which for a gluten flour is 40 per cent. That is a mixed flour. I do not know that that pays any tax; but that is a mixed flour, and would, I imagine, come under the old law. Mr. GREEN. You have been asked some questions about the law that prohibited adulteration. From a chemist's point of view, which is the more strict as to adulterants, the proposed statute or the one which is now in force? The statute which is now in force permits the use of adulterative substances. Dr. WESENER. Mineraline I call an adulterative substance, because if you get enough of that it is liable to affect you very injuriously. No man wants that kind of stuff in his stomach. Mr. GREEN. The proposed law prohibits substances to be made use of except where they are the products of grain. Would that permit the use of any adulterative substance? Dr. WESENER. I would say not, sir. Mr. GREEN. There is one other matter here I do not exactly understand, although it may not be material. Cornstarch in small packages is sold at a price much higher than wheat flour. Dr. WESENER. Yes. Mr. GREEN. How is it possible to make use of that at a profit? Dr. WESENER. It could not be, from that package. I use that at home when I want biscuits on Sunday morning. I always have my cook put in 25 per cent of cornstarch along with the flour, and less |