these substitutes for corn and wheat in the manufacture of flour affects not only the health of the people-it not only tends to destroy the milling industry of the United States, but it also affects every farmer engaged in the production of either corn or wheat. And in addition to this, unless this practice of manufacturing adulterated flour and selling it for pure flour is stopped, our foreign flour trade, which in 1897 equaled almost 15,000,000 barrels, will be entirely destroyed. From the reports of American consuls abroad, and from letters written by foreign buyers of American flour, presented to the committee and printed in the hearings on House bill 9380, the American export trade in flour is not only menaced, but is actually suffering to-day on account of the practice of adulterating wheat flour, shipping it abroad, and there selling it in competition with pure flour. Consul McCunn, of Dunfermline, on February 24, 1898, says: "American flour is looked upon with suspicion, owing to the fact that it is believed to be mixed with corn ground exceedingly fine. I have it from unquestionable authority that four out of nine samples of American flour tested within the past three weeks are alleged to contain 10 per cent of corn flour. The high price of wheat and the low price of corn are believed to have led unscrupulous millers to adulterate their flour in this manner. If this adulteration is not speedily checked it will expose the American flour trade to great danger, the effects of which will be far-reaching." 66 I also quote an abstract of a letter from H. Pulvermacher, of Hamburg, Germany, April 4, 1898, addressed to Kehlor Bros., of St. Louis, Mo., as follows: Naturally there is considerable talking about flour adulteration. Every one of the importers, of the reasonable wholesale dealers, and consumers with us know very well that none of the big milling concerns, doing three-fourths or more of the trade in American flour in Germany, will ship an adulterated stuff. All these concerns have to lose a good repute, and nobody thinks these firms will risk it. "But there is also some flour sent to Germany, by unknown mills almost, as consignments. If a bit of such an issue is found adulterated with corn flour or starch, this would do an inexpressible harm to the whole trade. Our home millers are not very favorably inclined toward the competition from abroad, and although I have not heard about a single lot seized, with us as adulterated, the millers and agrarian press is exhibiting very much zeal to spread the rumors about adulteration in America. And I have not the slightest doubt that our Government will support them and will forbid or complicate the importation as soon as a single case of imported adulterated flour is found out. And such steps will enjoy the approval of the majority of people with us, because, as a rule, the tendency prevails in Germany to allow the importation of the raw material and to make difficult the importation of the manufacture. In such case of evidence of sending to us adulterated flour the honest miller will suffer under the fraudulent manipulations of the mixer. As the danger is imminent I can also commend heartily the vigorous proceedings of the honest American miller to protect their trade, acquired with great pains, and a well-advised government ought to help them in any way." The evils growing out of the business of mixing with wheat flour the refuse starch of the glucose factories or ground clay or rock are so enormous, so farreaching, so dangerous to the public health, and so injurious to legitimate trade, commerce, and industry that Congress should promptly apply an appropriate and an effective remedy; a remedy that will not alone require those engaged in the business of adulterating flour to brand their product and sell it for what it is, thereby protecting the consumer, but a remedy that will also require these parties to contribute to the support of the Government by the payment of a tax upon the sale of their product, thereby insuring the enforcement of the law by the agents of the Government charged with the duty of collecting its revenue. This is all that the accompanying bill proposes. It requires the producers of mixed flour to brand their product, specifying the ingredients used in its manufacture, and at the same time the bill seeks to raise revenue for the Governmentat a time, too, when more revenue is needed-thus affording to all classes protection against this fraud and possible disease. It proposes to suppress false pretenses and to promote fair dealing in the manufacture and sale of an article of food universally consumed. It will compel the sale of mixed flour for what it really is by preventing its sale for what it is not. The power of Congress to enact legislation of this kind will not be questioned. This power has been exercised on several occasions in the past. Once in 1886, by the passage of the act commonly known as the oleomargarine law, and again, in 1896, by the passage of an act known as the filled-cheese law. The right of Congress to enact either of these laws has never been questioned in the courts of last resort. Their benefit to the producers and the consumers of pure butter and pure cheese is likewise conceded, while neither the Constitution nor the Government has suffered by the enactment or by the administration of these measures. In a case recently decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, involving the right of the State of Massachusetts, under the Constitution of the United States, to enact a law to regulate the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine, Justice Harlan, in delivering the opinion of the court said: "Can it be that the Constitution of the United States secures to anyone the privilege of manufacturing and selling an article of food in such manner as to induce the mass of people to believe that they are buying something which in fact is wholly different from that which is offered for sale? Does the freedom of commerce among the States demand a recognition of the right to practice a deception upon the public in the sale of any article, even those that may have become the subject of trade in different parts of the country?" Under the evidence, therefore, as to the fact and the effect of the adulteration of wheat flour, and under the precedents heretofore established by Congress, it is the judgment of the committee that the bill herewith reported should become a law, with the following amendment: After the word "upon," on page 4, line 2, insert "the manufacture and sale, or removal for sale of." ADULTERATION OF WHEAT FLOUR. [House Document No. 309, Fifty-fifth Congress, second session.] OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, SIR: It gives me pleasure to comply with your request of the 8th instant, and I send you, under separate cover, the report on the character and state of adulteration of wheat flour, prepared under the direction of Dr. Wiley, the Chemist of the department, by Mr. A. J. Wedderburn. 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 herewith submitted 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 view 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 can 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 mixers of these two flours, therefore, at the present time are favored by immunity from 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 zoin, 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 the publication of this matter will help to form a public opinion which will favor 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 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. 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 recommend also that 10,000 copies of the report be requested for the use of the Department of Agriculture. I am, respectfully, The SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE. H. W. WILEY, Chief of Division. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY, Washington, D. C., December 6, 1897. 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 convinced 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 for your consideration. Very respectfully, Dr. H. W. WILEY, Chemist. FLOUR ADULTERATIONS. ALEX. J. WEDDERBURN, Special Agent. In Bulletin No. 25, in 1890, the writer had occasion to remark that the only things that were absolutely free from adulteration were the old-fashioned loaf sugar (which now seems to be a thing of the past) and flour. To-day, one of the most important articles of commerce and home use to which the sophisticator's art is applied, is the product from which the "staff of life is made-flour. The milling and other journals are full of articles commenting upon the adulteration of flour by the admixture of cornstarch and finely ground meal. I give below circular letters from two different concerns, which, among the many, are engaged in the manufacture of these adulterants. The originals are filed in the Chemical Division of the Department of Agriculture, as are also the directions for mixing the products with flour sent out with them. There is no national law, nor, so far as I have been informed, State law which prevents the offering of such adulterants for sale, and as the manufacturers do not actually adulterate the product they escape liability. Whether a law can be framed to cover such cases may be doubtful, but where men willfully, deliberately, and knowingly manufacture a product for the express purpose of adulterating another, and urge its use for this purpose, they are certainly particeps criminis, and when they induce men to purchase their product for nothing but adulteration it seems proper that laws should be enacted to make them parties to the crime and hold them equally, if not primarily, responsible. The adulteration of flour with cornstarch and finely ground corn meal has grown to such an extent as to cause honest millers and their representatives in all sections to unite in protesting against its unrestricted continuance. Manufacurers and dealers from many States will be found represented in the protest against this fraud and others allude to the same subject in discussing general adulteration, as will be shown in my main report. The parties presenting their protest and proofs are among the most respectable and honorable men engaged in one of our most important industries. Their protest is emphatic, their proof positive, and these reputable manufacturers and dealers from Maine to California, with millions of capital invested in their business, giving employment to thousands of workmen, urge that a remedy be found to permit them to conduct an honest business and to save them from financial ruin. It is said by some that the adulteration of flour with cornstarch, corn flour, corn meal, and glucose refuse is not unhealthy and therefore should not be prevented by legislation. This claim is refuted by a leading medical journal, as well as others, from which I quote. It is estimated by my correspondents that the adulteration of flour now runs: from 10 to 40 per cent, which, with wheat at 70 cents per bushel, would mean from 35 cents to $1.40 per barrel less the cost of the starch or meal, or a profit of from 15 to 60 cents per barrel; the profits to the adulterator and the loss to the honest manufacturer can be easily calculated on mills turning out from 100 to 1,000 barrels per day, allowing that the adulterants cost even one-half the price of wheat. We produce about 550,000,000 bushels of wheat. Estimating that the adulterator uses only 10 per cent, or 20 pounds, of the substitute to each barrel of flour (as advised by the glucose company for high grades), this would show a displacement of 55,000,000 of bushels. As a matter of fact, these figures are extravagant and are used only to show the possibilities that unfold themselves in this direction. I have been unable to secure even an approximate estimate from the statistical divisions of the Government as to the amount of flour manufactured in the United States. We use a large part of our wheat for seed and export largely both wheat and flour (for fiscal year ending June 30, 1897, wheat 79,562,020 bushels, flour 14,569,545 barrels), but every pound of adulterant that enters into a barrel of flour displaces that much wheat. This displacement is. not yet sufficiently large to affect the world's surplus and therefore does not at once reduce the price of wheat in America, since the price of this article, so long as we export, is fixed in the world's central markets, but it should be remembered that every additional pound of surplus wheat will in time be taken into account and help to reduce the world's price, and thus finally fall upon the producer of this article--the farmer. In the meantime our millers, that is, the honest ones, and they are by far the majority, are the sufferers, and to be able to meet the competition caused by the addition of these adulterants they are compelled to "cut" their prices to meet those of the adulterators; placing this: "cut" at only 10 cents per barrel, and the loss to the legitimate manufacturer must necessarily run up into millions of dollars. Flour is an article used in every American home; it is the chief daily food supply of every citizen; it furnishes one of our most important exports and should be protected against being tampered with by unscruplous men in pursuit of wealth. That a gigantic corporation has seized upon one of our greatest cereals (corn) to produce two of the most widely used, insidious, and damaging adulterants-glucose and flourine (which carry in their wake damage to many industries, defrauding thousands of producers and consumers alike, robbing the people of millions annually in their flour, jellies, sirups, preserves, etc., striking a blow at commerce, interstate and foreign, pulling down legitimate trade, and plundering honest labor in our factories and fields, openly advertising their methods and plans to the world)—is no reason that such practices should be permitted. This has gone so far that not only this concern but others have sprung up, mushroomlike, in an incredibly short period of time all over the country to pollute and contaminate the moral and business atmosphere until even the manufacturers of milling machinery, as will be shown, are urging all wheat mills to put in corn-flour mills, so as to compete with the users and mixers of starch, corn flour, and flourine. The following mass of indisputable testimony, going to prove this fraud, gathered in the short space of between eight and nine weeks, must be my excuse for this report. THE MILLERS, DEALERS, AND PRESS ON FLOUR ADULTERATION. The following circular was sent out, and the questions asked therein are the ones referred to numerically in the correspondence published herewith: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY, Washington, D. C., September 17, 1897. DEAR SIR: Under authority of Congress, the Department of Agriculture is investigating the extent and character of food and drug adulterations, and is desirous of securing all the information possible on the subject. Having been appointed special agent to inquire into and report upon this matter, the undersigned writes to request that you kindly furnish the department (under the inclosed franks) all the information you have in regard to adulterations, together with any suggestions as to the best remedy for the evil. (1) Do you know of any new adulterant? If yes, state what, and how used. (2) Would a national food and drug law assist in preventing adulteration? (3) Would uniform food, drug, and pharmaceutical laws tend to promote efficiency and purity? (4) Please suggest what would best promote the interest of consumers and legitimate manufacturers and dealers. (5) What is your opinion as to the extent of damage done legitimate business by imitations of brands, packages, etc.? (6) To what extent do sophistication, misbranding, and injurious adulteration exist? (7) Have State laws aided in preventing adulteration? To what extent? (8) Would a national law assist State officials in properly executing the local laws? (9) Have adulteration, sophistication, and misbranding increased or decreased? Prompt replies to the above, together with any other information or suggestions, will be highly appreciated. Yours, respectfully, Approved. A. J. WEDDERBURN, JAMES WILSON, Secretary. CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. Harvest Queen Milling Co., J. Fulkerson, manager, Elkhart, Ind., November 29, 1897: "In reply to your circular letter, regarding the adulteration of food products, we suppose that our answers are to be confined to our knowledge of the adulteration of flour. We have no positive proof that any one is doing anything of the kind, but we have read that such is the case, particularly in the South, or with some of the mills that have a southern trade. Through the means of the circular letters that the makers of white corn flour, called flourine,' are sending out, we should judge that the mixing of 'flourine with wheat flour is very extensively practiced. We inclose with this letter a |