Return this book on or before the Latest Date stamped below. A charge is made on all overdue books. U. of I. Library MAY 2 5 31 9324-S ?! /“*>sFTT ••'•"}> *" jf-"v ~'i Statistics of the Glucose Industry. Compiled by « The Glucose Sugar Refining Co. Chicago, Ill. April, 1898. lPt'CSS of ©eo. J6. flDarsball 8 Go. 144*4 6 /TOonroc St. Chicago INDEX. Pages. Copy of an Address before the Committee on Ways and Means, 1-6 Copy of a Petition to Congress signed by Prominent Individals and Firms,.7-11 Copy of Affidavits by Experienced Men in the Glucose Business, 12-17 Affidavits attested to by Employees in Glucose Refineries, . . 18-24 Reports of Chemists, ......... 25-34 Letter of Dr. J. B. Murphy on Flourine, ..... 35-37 Letters of W. J. Butler, M. D., and Others, ..... 38-41 Report of the National Academy of Sciences, .... 42-45 Report of Dr. Cyrus Edson,.46-47 Letters of Professors Barker, Brewer, Chandler, Gibbs and Rem- sen, reaffirming their Report to the National Academy of Sciences, ........... 48-52 What is Glucose or Grape Sugar ?.53-62 \ 00 ^ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/statisticsofglucOOgluc COPY OF AN ADDRESS BEFORE THE COM¬ MITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS. A copy of an official document, H. R. No. 309, prepared by the au¬ thority of the United States Department of Agriculture, Division of chemistry, on adulteration of Wheat Flour, and presented to the Com¬ mittee on Ways and Means, February 16, 1898, has been shown us. This document contains several statements which are not in accord¬ ance with the facts, as we shall demonstrate. We first refer to one of them, which reads as follows : “ While there may be a certain amount of value and nutrition in Corn Flour, which is shown to be very slight, there is absolutely none whatever in Corn Starch, and the use of Corn Starch as an adulterant of Pure Wheat Flour is an unmitigated fraud and a deception, practiced solely to deceive the consumers by its whiteness and by its relative reduction in price.” There is, in fact, no difference between Corn Starch and any other Starch, and the gentlemen making this statement evidently forgot that pure Wheat Flour contains on an average between 60 and 75 per cent of Starch. This average has been established by the analysis of 544 spec¬ imens of North American Wheat, gathered from every wheat-growing State in the United States, by the well known and eminent Dr. J. Koenig of Munster, Germany, who is universally recognized as authority on all human foods. Now this Starch, which constitutes over two-thirds of Wheat Flour, is exactly the same as the Corn Starch manufactured by this Company. In our process of manufacturing Corn Starch we eliminate the germ from the corn absolutely, therefore, our Starch is free from the fatty or oily substances contained in Corn. We eliminate the hull or outside covering of the kernel of the Corn and also the gluten, so that the result¬ ing product is pure Corn, freed from the hull, the oil and the gluten It is practically Corn Meal or Corn Flour from which the substances enu¬ merated have been eliminated. Without any desire of making our criticism of the above mentioned report so long that it would be tedious to the Committee, we nevertheless desire to quote one of the paragraphs of this report prepared by a Special Agent of the United States Department of Agriculture, Division of Chemistry. “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 import¬ ant exports, and should be protected against being tampered with by un- 2 ADDRESS—( Continued .) scrupulous men in pursuit of wealth. That a gigantic corporation has seized upon one of our greatest cereals ( corn) to produce one of the most widely used, insiduous, and damaging adulterants—glucose and flourine (which carry in their wake damage to many industries, defraud¬ ing thousands of producers and consumers alike,, robbing the people of millions annually in their flour, jellies, syrups, 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 Agent states that “ Glucose and Flourine carry in their wake damage to many industries, defrauding thousands of producers and con¬ sumers alike,” and that both of these products are most widely used, although they are “insiduous and damaging adulterants.” If this be true, Professors Barker, Chandler, Brewer, Gibbs, and Remsen did not know what they were talking about when they made their report to the National Academy of Sciences in 1883, nor did these same eminent gentlemen have any knowledge whatsoever of the subject on which they reported when at the request of Dr. Cyrus Edson, Com¬ missioner of Health of the State of New York, (whose report to the Hon. Thos. F. Gilroy, Mayor of New York, is embodied in these statistics) they reiterated their former statements on October 12, 1894. (See per¬ sonal letters page 46.) The Special Agent referred to, so far as we know, stands alone in the unique position which, for some reason entirely unknown to us, he has seen fit to occupy. In consideration of his statements, we invite the attention of the Com¬ mittee to some reports and affidavits from men experienced in the Glucose business on the subject of the products of a Glucose Factory (see pages 12-19), and to chemical reports by ^ome of the most eminent chemists and professors of chemistry in the United States. (See reports on pages 25-34.) The facts as to the products of Maize or Indian Corn are these : Common Corn Meal consists of the entire kernel of the Corn which has been ground by the use of buhr mills, without any previous prepara¬ tion of the Corn. In other words, the Corn as it comes from the farm, after ordinary cleaning from dirt and dust, is introduced into one of these mills and reduced to a greater or less degree of fineness. The product contains portions of all of the ingredients of the Corn : namely, the hull, the gluten, the germ and the starch. Corn Flour is made somewhat differently from Corn Meal in the fob lowing respects : The Corn as it comes from the farm, and without previous preparation, except cleaning, is run through what are called disintegrating machines, which machines are intended, besides grinding ADDRESS—( Continued .) 3 the Corn, to remove the germ. The process generally used is, however, a very crude one, and by it, it is utterly impossible to remove more than a small percentage of the germ without great loss of the starchy parts of the kernel. After passing through a disintegrating machine, the resulting product goes through various forms of aspirators which remove more or less perfectly the hull and the germ; if this mechanical operation could be carried out in practice perfectly, we would have a product consisting only of the gluten and starch. In practice, however, we find that this whole process is so imperfect that the Corn Flour which is on the market today is practically Corn Meal with a smaller percentage of the germ (oil) and a smaller percentage of the hull (cellulose). Neither Corn Meal nor Corn Flour are unwholesome; but Corn Starch Flour (sometimes called by the Millers Flourine) is a superior product, being more refined in having removed from it all useless material and nothing deleterious having been added. Corn Starch Flour is manufactured by soaking the Corn (which has been previously cleaned) in water, for a sufficient time to cause the kernel to swell so that when crushed the germ tends readily to separate from the rest of the Corn. This germ is removed by passing the crushed Corn through separators so constructed that a mixture of starch water can be maintained at a density which causes the germ to float and the mealy parts of the Corn to sink to the bottom of the separator, from which they are conveyed to the mills and ground. The mealy parts of the Corn, namely, the mixture of hull, gluten and starch as it comes from the mills, passes over a series of sieves covered with silk cloth, the meshes of which prevent the ground hull from pass¬ ing through but permit the passage of the gluten and starch. During the process large quantities of water are used and the product is thor¬ oughly washed. From the sieves, the gluten and starch pass to the settling tables, where the starch (which is heavier than gluten) settles and the gluten runs off. The starch is then removed from the settling tables to the kilns, where after being spread on frames it is dried, and sold (according to different degrees of fineness) as Pearl Starch or Powdered Starch. Commencing with the Corn as the initial product, we find therefore, first, Corn Meal, (ground Corn); second, Corn Flour (the ground Corn from which a small percentage of the hull and germ has been removed) ; third, pure Corn Starch, which is the ground Corn from which the hull, the germ and the gluten have been wholly removed. Now to take the stand that Corn Starch, which is Corn in its purest form, is unwholesome, or to quote from the report, “an insiduous and damaging adulterant,” is absurd. We do not wish to be misunderstood as condemning Corn Meal, which is a wholesome product, or Corn Flour, which is perhaps more wholesome. We simply wish to illustrate that in 4 ADDRESS—( Continued .) Corn Starch we have reached the highest degree of perfection in the refining process of Corn, by eliminating therefrom the hull, the gluten and the germ, which substances appear in Corn Meal and Corn Flour to a greater or less extent. There is hardly a standard book on organic chemistry which does not contain a complete analysis, showing exactly the composition of Starch and the various products made therefrom in a Glucose factory, so that the proof that this Special Agent’s statements are either based on igno¬ rance of the facts or are untrustworthy, is overwhelming. For the information of the Committee and for the purpose of off¬ setting some of the false statements which have been made, we do not hesitate to assert that there is no purer product used for human food to¬ day, than this Very Corn Starch Flour. It is well known that the miller of Spring Wheat is troubled to a great extent on account of the fact that his flour contains too little starch and too much gluten. It is customary therefore, to mix this so-called “hard” Spring Wheat Flour, which contains too little starch as compared with its gluten, with a flour made from Winter Wheat, which contains more starch as com¬ pared with its gluten. Now, what is the object of this? Simply to produce a blended flour containing a proper amount of starch with a proper amount of gluten. We claim that it makes absolutely no difference whether we increase the percentage of starch in the Spring Wheat Flour by means of an ad¬ mixture of Winter Wheat Flour or whether we increase this percentage by an addition of Corn Starch Flour, which is free from gluten and a very much purer article, on account of the care which is used in its manufacture, than the best grades of Winter Wheat Flour. (See Dr. Murphy’s letter on Flourine, page 35.) As the report contains a general attack upon the Glucose industry, we venture to add some information about it which may interest the Committee. The Glucose industry of today is based on the fact that Corn contains four essential ingredients which are separated without the use of chemicals and when so separated are then refined and converted into the various forms of Starch, Glucose, Sugar, etc., known to commerce. The four essential parts of the kernel of Corn consists : First: Of the hull or outside covering, which when removed is dried, ground and sold for feeding cattle. Second : The glutenous portion of the Corn, which is found very largely immediately under the hull, which product is also separated, re¬ fined, dried, and sold as gluten meal for feeding cattle, throughout the country, as well as for export. Third : The starchy part of the Corn, which is removed by processes of washing and settling, and is then either dried at a low temperature ADDRESS—( Continued .) 5 and sold commercially as Starch, or when reduced to a powder, as high grade Corn Starch Flour. Fourth : The germ or heart of the Corn, which when separated is dried and pressed, the result being Corn Oil and Corn Oil Cake. Beyond the above mentioned separation of the Corn into the hull, the gluten, the starch and the germ, there are other products, some thirty- three in number, manufactured from these four products. The hull, from which all traces of gluten and starch have been removed, is dried and reduced by grinding, to various degrees of fineness, after which it finds its way into the market as feed for cattle, under the names of Bran, Chop Feed, Corn Feed, etc. The Gluten, after having been washed and dried, is either mixed with the hull or sold separately. The mixture of the hull and gluten is known as Maize Feed or Gluten Feed. The pure gluten is sold for feed under the name of Gluten Meal and finds its principal mar¬ ket in the dairy districts of New England, as well as for export. The germ, after having been washed and dried, is ground and treated much in the same manner as linseed. The oil, after having been ex¬ tracted, is refined by filtration or otherwise, and is much sought after by manufacturers of soaps, by tanners for dressing leather and large quanti¬ ties are also exported. The residuum which is left after the oil has been extracted by pressure, is sold in the form of cake and goes principally abroad as feed for cattle. This shows the disposition of three of the primary products in the separation, leaving the STARCH, from which all the other products manu¬ factured by this company are obtained. If Starch Flour is desired, this Starch is simply dried and reduced to a powder without having come in contact with any acid whatever. If we desire to manufacture Glucose, Sugar, etc., from this Starch, it is necessary to treat it with muriatic acid. We manufacture some seven or eight different grades of glucose, each grade specially suited to the requirements of the syrup mixer, the jelly manufacturer, the confectioner, the brewer, according to the trade which we wish to supply. By varying the temperature, pressure and degree of acidity, the action on the Starch is changed at will, so that pro¬ ducts like our Anhydrous Sugar (the only Crystallfzed Sugar made from Corn) and what is known as Brewers’ 70% and 80% Sugars can be ob¬ tained by these modifications. The Anhydrous Sugar is used principally by the bottlers of wines and beers. This Sugar has a purity of 97%. The 80% Sugars are used largely in this country and abroad in the manufac¬ ture of beer, ale, wine, etc., and vary in color from light yellow to dark brown. The 70% Sugars are used principally in the manufacture of lager beer and are quite white in color. The Glucose and Sugar products are manu¬ factured from Starch by treating starch solutions with muriatic acid, which acid is neutralized by means of soda ash, producing common salt. 6 ADDRESS—( Continued .) Absolutely every trace of the acid which has been used as a convert¬ ing medium, is disposed of by being converted into this harmless common salt. In addition to the products mentioned, we produce the various forms of Pearl, Powdered and Confectioners’ Starch known to the trade, by sim¬ ply taking the Starch which otherwise would be converted into Glucose or Sugar, and drying it on frames at a moderate temperature. The Dex- trines or Gums are made from this dry starch by drying it at a still higher temperature. We manufacture some four or five different grades of dextrine. From the dextrine another product known to the trade as American Gum, which is almost identical in chemical composition with the best grades of gum arabic, is manufactured. This product is used in the preparation of pepsin and also by confectioners as a coating for cer¬ tain grades of candy. It will thus be seen that some thirty-three distinct and valuable products, each one having its special characteristic which makes it valuable for the purpose for which it is intended, are produced from Indian Corn. The Glucose industry utilizes at present approximately 100,000 bush¬ els of Corn a day (and the capacities of the various factories are being rapidly increased), all of which is treated as stated above. For the purpose of demonstrating the wonderful growth of this busi¬ ness, it might be well to mention that thirty-five years ago there was practically no Glucose made in this country. Large quantities, however, were imported from Europe. Within this comparatively short period of time, this business has developed so that we not only supply all of the requirements of this country for these products, but export enormously as will be seen by the accompanying tables which shows a constantly increas¬ ing demand for our products abroad, and a steady decrease in imports from 1884 to 1897, during which period the imports were reduced from 3,428,379 pounds to no imports this year. (See page 9.) In conclusion we wish to state clearly that we do not want to be under¬ stood as opposing any bill which has for its object the prevention of mis¬ description of any human food. We think it is just and proper that all products used for human consumption should be plainly marked or branded in such a way that customers need not be deceived; in other words, we would have no objection to any law which would require a confectioner to state that he uses glucose in manufacturing his candy, or which would require a miller who blends Corn Starch Flour with his Flour, to state this fact, but we think it is a great injustice to impose a tax on these cheaper food products, which tax would increase the prices at which these wholesome food products can be obtained. THE GLUCOSE SUGAR REFINING CO, PETITION TO CONGRESS. 7 COPY OF PETITION SIGNED BY 100,000 PROMINENT INDIVIDUALS AND FIRMS. To the Committee on Ways and Means , Hon. Nelson Dingley , Chairman, Washington , D. C. Some years ago doubts were raised as to the purity and healthfulness of Glucose, Grape Sugar and Starch, and the questions involved were referred by the government of the United States to the National Academy of Sciences, a body incorporated by act of congress, and composed of the most eminent men in almost every branch of science. It was the duty of this Academy to investigate, examine and report upon any subject of science or art submitted to it. The following members of the Academy were appointed to investigate the question as to whether or not, Starch Sugar and Starch products were wholesome and fit for use as human food: Prof. George F. Barker, University of Pennsylvania. Prof. Wm. H. Brewer, Chairman, Yale University Prof. Wolcott Gibbs, Harvard University. Prof Charles F. Chandler, Columbia College. Prof. Ira Remsen, Johns Hopkins University. These eminent men, after an investigation extending over a period of nearly two years, in a voluminous and exhaustive report, said in part as follows: “STARCH SUGAR represents one distinct class of sugars, as cane sugar does the other—the former being obtained naturally from the grape, as the latter is from the cane and the beet. STARCH SUGAR, which is a term chemically synonymous with dextrose and GLUCOSE, when pure, has about two-thirds the sweetening power of cane sugar. No impurities, either organic or inorganic in character, were detected in any of the samples examined. “Theelaborate experiments upon the fermentation of STARCH SUGAR would seem to be final on the question of the healthful¬ ness, not only of GLUCOSE itself, but also of the substances pro¬ duced by the action of a ferment upon it. This result, rigidly applied, holds of course, only for those sugars which are made from the STARCH of Indian Corn or MAIZE. “The manufacture of SUGAR from STARCH is a long estab¬ lished industry, scientifically valuable, and commercially important. The processes which it employs are unobjectionable in their char¬ acter, and leave the product uncontaminated. 8 PETITION TO CONGRESS—( Continued.) “The STARCH SUGAR thus made and sent into commerce is of exceptional purity and uniformity of composition, and contains no injurious substances. Though at best having only about two- thirds the sweetening power of cane sugar, yet STARCH SUGAR is in no way inferior to cane sugar in healthfulness, there being no evidence before the committee that MAIZE STARCH SUGAR, either in its normal condition or fermented, has any deleterious effect upon the system, even when taken in large quantities.” In 1894, after the expiration of ten years from the time of making their previous investigation and report above quoted from, these eminent scientists gave separate individual certificates reiterating their former opinions as to Glucose, Grape Sugar and Starch. The product commercially known as Glucose and Grape Sugar was recognized some forty years ago in Europe as an article of com¬ merce, where it was made from potatoes. The manufacture of Glucose and Grape Sugar from Maize was commenced in this country about thirty years ago on a small scale. As the industry in the United States has progressed, imports of Glucose and Grape Sugar have gradually decreased, while domestic exports have marvelously increased, as will be seen by the accompanying tables, showing the quantities and values of imports and exports of Glucose and Grape Sugar from 1884 to 1897 inclusive, also exports of Starch for 1896 and 1897. EXPORTS OF GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR. YEARS. QUANTITIES. VALUES. 1884.. _ 6,773,115 lbs_ .. $ 212,628. 1885. _ 1,825,795 tt .. 60,078. 1886. _ 2,572,090 tl . .. 67,775. 1887. _ 4,476.931 It . .. 118,620. 1888.. . 6,263,757 It _ 163,573. 1889.- . 31,285,220 tt _ 748,560. 1890_ . 38,256,161 t< _ 855,176. 1891_ _58,149,127 tl _ 1,394,131. 1892_ . 96,486,953 44 . 2,272,779. 1893... _101,546,814 4 4 _ 2,204,216. 1894_ .124,796,288 it . 2,328,707. 1895_ _133,808,329 ii . 2,567,784. 1896.- .171,231,650 tt . 2,772,335. 1897. _186,991,779 it . 2,676,600. (It will be observed that exports are continually increasing.) PETITION TO CONGRESS—( Continued .) 9 IMPORTS OF GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR INTO THE UNITED STATES. YEARS. QUANTITIES. VALUES. 1884. .3,428,397 lbs. ..$72,684. 1885. .2,496,408 “ . 68,495. 1886. .2,004,702 “ . 45,227. 1887. ..1,784,642 “ .- 35,644. 1888. ._1,863,598 “ . 38,260. 1889. . 846,957 “ .. 21,896. 1890.... _ 911,573 “ . 21,035. 1891.. _ 815,491 “ . 22,038. 1892. . 202,971 “ . 11,929. 1893 195,194 “ . 6,175. 1894. 217,847 “ . 6.621. 1895. .. 120,402 “ . 2,976. 1896. . 137,603 “ .. 3,180. 1897. _(So small no report obtainable.) (It will be observed that imports are steadily decreasing.) The list of countries and colonies or possessions to which Glucose and Grape Sugar was exported from the United States in 1896, follows: QUANTITIES. VALUES. Austria-Hungary. -- 152,806 lbs. $ 2,720. Belgium. .. 1,320,113 “ 21,574. Denmark__ 600 *• 11. Germany . _ .. _ 747,766 44 12,095. France__ 256,000 44 6,080. Italy __ 31,596 44 411. Netherlands.. 140,965 44 2,818. Sweden and Norway. . 12,000 44 320. United Kingdom ..160,461,173 44 2,593,620. Dominion of Canada_ 2,333,144 44 37,599. Central America.. 192 44 5. Mexico... 386 14 14. West Indies_ 5,511 44 109. Argentina... 403,844 44 8,826. Ecuador__ 2,763 44 54. Peru.. 1,200 44 18. Uruguay.. 12,770 44 185. Turkey-... 1,280 44 24. Australasia ... .. 4,915,319 44 77,163. Hawaiian Islands. 632 “ 19. Africa. 441,591 44 8,670. 10 PETITION TO CONGRESS—( Continued.) EXPORTS OF STARCH. The exports of Starch from the United States for years 1896 and 1897, respectively, were: YEARS. QUANTITIES. VALUES. 1896 _44,893,614 lbs..... $1,088,751. 1897 _86,706,240 “__ 1,685,514. (Note increase.) The Glucose industry at the present time consumes approximately 35,000,000 bushels of corn annually or about one-half of the maximum exports of corn, as shown by the accompanying table : Year Corn Crop of the United States Amount of Com Exported 1887. ..1,456,161,000 No report 1888. ..1,987,790,000 «< a 1889. ..2,112,892,000 tt u 1890. ..1,489,970,000 a if 1891. ...2,060,154,000 a it 1892. ..1,628,464,000 a a 1893. ...1,619,496,000 55,145,698 1894. ..1,212,770,052 41,806,698 1895. _2,151,139,000 60,921,985 1896.. ..2,283,875,165 116,603,971 For the purpose of demonstrating still further the magnitude of this business, we might say that during the month of October 1897, The Glucose Sugar Refining Company, which owns five factories, three of which are located in Illinois and two in Iowa, paid out sums of money for wages, supplies, etc., amounting to $1,160,115.85, as shown by the following table : EXPENDITURES OF OCTOBER 1897. Pay Rolls.$ Coal. .... Corn.... Barrels, Bags, Boxes. Supplies.. Freights.. 121,151.67 57,685.41 593,380.03 118,717.31 70,973.53 198,207.90 $1,160,115.85 There can be no question whatsoever as to the wholesomeness and value of the products manufactured from Corn by this Company, as they are endorsed by all of the prominent men in the chemical profession, by the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and by almost everybody who is at all familiar with the industry. We have forwarded to the various legis- PETITION TO CONGRESS—( Continued .) 11 lative bodies who have become interested in this question, affidavits pre¬ pared by people who have been familiar with the Glucose business ever since its inception, and by others who are competent to testify as to the value and purity of the products manufactured in the factories owned by this Company, which we think will be sufficient to convince those now interested in this subject, that the Glucose business is established on a firm foundation; that there is no necessity for interfering by means of legislation with its business; that these products should not be sub¬ jected to taxation or should not be discriminated against as long as sugar, wheat, flour, and other standard products are let alone. In view of the above, we respectfully petition your Honorable Body not to interfere in any way with the Glucose business as carried on to-day. The above petition was signed by the following, together with one hundred thousand others: Mr. P. D. Armour, Chicago, Ill. Mr. John W. Gates, Pres’t Illinois Steel Co., Chicago, Ill. Mr. John J. Mitchell, Pres’t Illinois Trust and Savings Bank, Chi¬ cago, Ill. Mr. F. O. Matthiessen, Chairman Manufacturing Committee, Amer¬ ican Sugar Refining Co., New York. Mr. Byron L. Smith, Pres’t Northern Trust Co., Chicago, Ill. Mr. Martin Kingman, Agricultural Implement Manufacturer and Capitalist, Peoria, Ill. Judge Wm. Lawrence, Pres’t National Wool Growers’ Ass’n, Belle- fontaine, Ohio. Mr. F. H. Griggs, Pres’t Citizens’ National Bank and Capitalist, Davenport, la. Mr. Chas. Deere, Proprietor Deere Plow Works, Moline, Ill. Mr. C. H. Matthiessen, Pres’t Glucose Sugar Refining Co. Mr. Levi Z. Leiter, Capitalist, Chicago, Ill. Mr. John W. Doane, Capitalist, Chicago, Ill. Mr. Marshall Field, Dry Goods Merchant, Chicago, Ill. Mr. Jas. H. Eckels, Pres’t Commercial National Bank and ex-Comp- troller of Currency, Chicago, Ill. Mr. Norman B. Ream, Capitalist, Chicago, Ill. Mr. E. F. Leonard, Pres’t Toledo, Peoria & Western Ry., Peoria, Ill. Mr. J. T. Harahan, Second Vice-Pres’t Illinois Central Ry., Chicago, Ill. Hon. F. W. Matthiessen, Matthiessen & Hegeler Zinc Co., LaSalle, Ill. Mr. Melville E. Stone, Pres't Associated Press, Chicago, Ill. Mr. James B. Forgan, Vice-Pres’t First National Bank, Chicago, Ill. 2 AFFIDAVITS. COPY OF AFFIDAVITS BY EXPERIENCED MEN IN THE GLUCOSE INDUSTRY. March 21st, 1898. I, C. H. Matthiessen, have been familiar with the processes in use in the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company, for seventeen years, being fully posted in regard to the methods of steep- ing, grinding and separating starch from Indian Corn, also with the methods employed in preparing this starch for the market, and hereby certify that in all my experience in the glucose business, I never saw or heard of any one using sulphuric acid in the manufacture of starch, nor did I ever hear of any of those who were employed in the glucose fac¬ tories being injured in health by such work. Furthermore, I hereby certify that I have seen thousands of tons of starch prepared in the various glucose factories and have never seen one pound of this product leave the factory in a condition which could be considered harmful or injurious to health, when used as a human food. I hereby certify that the process of manufacturing starch in the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company, is as follows: The corn, after removal from the cars, is passed through screens and thoroughly cleaned from any adherent foreign substance, after which it is soaked for a period of from twenty-four to forty-eight hours in tanks containing water, heated to a moderate temperature. When sufficiently softened the grain is removed from the steep's, or tanks, passes through buhr mills, or disintegrating mills, thence through separators, in which a certain density of the starch milk is maintained, causing the germs to float and the remaining portion of the corn to sink to the bottom of the separator. The germ is then thoroughly washed, dried, and pressed to extract the oil, the residue being what is known to commerce as Corn Oil Cake. The heavier portions of the corn which have settled to the bottom of the separator are removed and run through buhr mills, which grind them finer, and from the buhr mills over silk sieves through which the starch milk and gluten run, leaving a residue consisting of the hull of the corn. The starch milk and gluten run through the sieves is then al¬ lowed to run over what are known as the settling tables, where the heavier portion, namely, the starch settles and the gluten runs off the tables. The gluten is then dried and sold as cattle feed. The starch, after being removed from the tables, is placed in kilns, where it is dried and sold either in that shape as Pearl Starch, or when ground as Powdered Starch* During this entire process, neither the corn nor the hull, gluten or starch AFFIDAVITS. 13 come in contact with any substance which could be considered deleterious or injurious to health. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the health and physical condition of the laborers in the glucose factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company is of a much higher standard than is found in any other factories, with which I am familiar, where large numbers of men are employed. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, all of the starch which is shipped from the glucose factories, in any form whatso¬ ever, is of the highest standard of purity, as the greatest care is used in its preparation and manufacture. C. H. MATTHIESSEN, B. A. Yale University. President The Glucose Sugar Refining Co. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of March, 1898. W. J. GORMAN, Notary Public. AFFIDAVIT OF F. O. MATTHIESSEN. I, F. O. Matthiessen, have been familiar with the processes in use in the former Chicago Sugar Refining Company, now owned by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, for seventeen years, being fully posted in re¬ gard to the methods of steeping, grinding and separating starch from Indian Corn, also with the methods employed in preparing this starch for the market, and hereby certify that in all my experience in the glucose business I never saw or heard of anyone using sulphuric acid in the manufacture of starch, nor did I ever hear of any of those who were em¬ ployed in the glucose factory being injured in health by such work. Furthermore, I hereby certify that I have seen thousands of tons of starch prepared in the various glucose factories, and have never seen one pound of this product leave the factory in a condition which could be considered harmful or injurious to health, when used as a human food. I have been informed that all the factories owned by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company are working exactly the same as the former Chicago Sugar Refining Company. I hereby certify that the process of manufacturing starch in the former Chicago Sugar Refining Company, now owned by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, is as follows: The corn, after removal from the cars, is passed through screens and thoroughly cleaned from any adherent foreign substance, after which it is soaked for a period of from twenty-four to forty-eight hours in tanks u AFFIDAVITS. containing water, heated to a moderate temperature. When sufficiently softened, the grain is removed from the steeps, or tanks, passes through buhr-mills, or disintegrating mills, thence through separators in which a certain density of the starch-milk is maintained, causing the germs to float and the remaining portion of the corn to sink to the bottom of the separator. The germ is then thoroughly washed, dried, and pressed to extract the oil, the residue being what is known to commerce as corn oil cake. The heavier portions of the corn, which have settled to the bot¬ tom of the separator, are removed and run through buhr mills, which grind them finer, and from the buhr mills over silk sieves through which the starch milk and gluten run, leaving a residue consisting of the hull of the corn. The starch-milk and gluten run through the sieves is then al¬ lowed to run over what are known as the settling-tables, where the heavier portion, namely, the starch, settles and the gluten runs off the tables. The gluten is then dried and sold as cattle feed. The starch, after being removed from the tables, is placed in kilns, where it is dried and sold either in that shape as Pearl Starch, or when ground as Powdered Starch. During this entire process neither the corn nor the hull, gluten or starch come in contact with any substance which could be considered deleter¬ ious or injurious to health. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the health and physical condition of the laborers in the former Chicago Sugar Refining Company, now owned by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, is of as high a standard as is found in any other factory, with which I am familiar, where large numbers of men'are employed. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all of the starch which is shipped from the glucose factories, in any form whatsoever, is of the highest standard of purity, as the greatest care is used in its preparation and manufacture. F. O. MATTHIESSEN. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 25th day of March, 1898. J. S. TRELOAR, Notary Public, Kings County. Certificate filed in New York County. This affidavit has been attested to by the following gentlemen who have had a great number of years of practical experience in the manufacturing of the products of the Glucose Factories, as you will notice by the statements following the names. C. H. Matthiessen, B. F. Rhodehamel, A. B. Steffens, F. O. Matthiessen, George Firmenich, J. Schoen, Thomas Gaunt, J. Firmenich, Dr. A. E. Ebert, S. T. Butler, Lee S. Harrison, Robt. H. Foos. AFFIDAVITS. 15 C. H. Matthiessen was Vice-President of The Chicago Sugar Refining Co. from 1890 to 1893, and President of The Chicago Sugar Refining Co. from 1893 to 1897. Prior to 1890, he worked through every department of The Chicago Sugar Refining Co. Thomas Gaunt, for nineteen years has been associated with the Glucose business, as the following supplement to his affidavit will testify: I, Thomas Gaunt, General Superintendent of the Glucose Sugar Re¬ fining Company, am familiar with the manufacture of starch and do de¬ clare that the following is my experience in the said manufacture : In the year 1879, F. O. Matthiessen, Esq., of New York, decided to start a Company for the manufacture of starch and glucose on a more extensive scale than there existed. I was employed by Mr. Matthiessen to take charge of the construction and development of the enterprise he had started, and which became the Chicago Sugar Refining Company. These works differed materially from all others then in operation. Dur¬ ing the three years which were consumed in their construction, I became familiar with the details of the old manufacture of starch, as well as the many improvements which I, with others, made in the methods. A large amount of money was spent in getting the best experts in this country and from Europe, men who were familiar with the methods then in use and had new ideas on the subject. Patents were purchased and taken out by myself and others, covering improvements in this branch. Making use of this knowledge, we built the Chicago Works, developing a method for the manufacture of starch which is now practi¬ cally in use in the factories of the Glucose Sugar Refining Company. In the year 1891, I became General Superintendent of the works con¬ trolled by the Messrs. Hamlin & Co. of Buffalo, consisting of two fac¬ tories in Buffalo, one in Iowa City, Leavenworth, Tippecanoe and Free¬ port. At the time, they were using the older methods of manufacture. The Buffalo Factory burning down, I removed my headquarters to Peoria, and practically rebuilt this factory and introduced such improvements in its methods and machinery, that it is one of the largest and best equipped factories for the manufacture of starch and glucose. In 1897 all the principal works were purchased by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, of which I am the General Superintendent. This Company has five factories, one at Chicago, Peoria, Rockford, Marshall¬ town and Davenport, which consume each day nearly 90,000 bushels of corn. I feel, therefore, on account of this varied and extensive exper¬ ience, that I am able to judge authoritatively as to the products produced and the method used in the manufacture of starch. In my opinion, the starch manufactured by the Glucose Sugar Refin¬ ing Company, is an absolutely pure and healthful food product. For 16 AFFIDAVITS. half a century, corn-starch has been extensively sold. As for example, the corn starch of the Kingsford Company, the Maizena of the Duryea Works at Glen Cove, the Patent Corn Flour of Brown & Poulson of Great Britain, and many other brands. The starch now made is even purer than formerly, as the improvements in the manufacture have all tended to keep the factory clean and sweet, free from all fermen¬ tation and putrefaction, which always more or less accompanied the older methods. Formerly, a starch factory could only be built on the out¬ skirts of a town, on account of smells and odors which were a constant annoyance and danger to the health of the community. Now no such care is necessary, as is notably the case in the Chicago Works, which are built in the very heart of the city. The great and constant attention given to all sanitary regulations make the factory much healthier for its employees. I most emphatically declare that no where in the world is there produced a starch of so great purity as that now manufactured by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, and that it is absolutely free from all harmful ingredients. THOMAS GAUNT, General Superintendent The Glucose Sugar Refining Co. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of March, 1898. W. J. GORMAN, Notary Public. Mr. S. T. Butler, Treasurer and Secretary of The Glucose Sugar Re¬ fining Company, has been connected with the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for thirteen years. Mr. B. F. Rhodehamel has been connected with the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for seventeen years. Regarding the affidavit of B. F. Rhodehamel and the positions and experience he has had in the Glucose business, would state that he was General Manager and had entire charge of the building and managing of the Glucose works at Tippecanoe City, which were built in the year 1880 and was the General Manager until said works were sold to the American Glucose Company, at the time of the formation of that Company. He was then associated in the general management of the business of the American Glucose Company, from the time of its formation until August 31, 1885. On September 1, 1885, he took charge as General Manager of the Peoria Grape Sugar Company, until it was sold to The Glucose Sugar Refining Company, and therefore, has been constantly engaged in the Glucose business since 1880. Mr. George Firmenich has been connected with the various factories AFFIDAVITS. IT owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for fifteen years. Mr. J. Firmenich has been connected with the various factories owned by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company for twenty-eight years. Mr. Lee S. Harrison, Supt., Glucose Sugar Refining Company, Dav¬ enport, Iowa, has been connected with the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for fourteen years. From 1882 to 1885 he was : Supt. of works, American Glucose Co., Buffalo, N. Y. “ “ 44 “ “ 44 Leavenworth, Kansas. “ 44 44 14 “ 44 Peoria, Ill. “ 44 44 4 * 44 44 Tippecanoe City, Ohio. From 1885 to 1897. Supt. of works, Peoria Grape Sugar Company, Peoria, Ill. Mr. A. B. Steffens, Purchasing Agent The Glucose Sugar Refining Company, has been connected with the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for five years. Mr. J. Schoen, Chemist and Expert in Starch, has been connected with the various factories of The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for eight¬ een years. He was chemist and Superintendent of the American Glu¬ cose Company for a number of years at their works in Buffalo, N.Y.; Leavenworth, Kansas; Iowa City, Iowa; Peoria, Ill., and was also with Firmenich, Marshalltown, Iowa. Dr. Albert E. Ebert, has been familiar with the glucose business as it has been carried on in the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for twenty-five years. He has been in the glucose business part of the time on his own account and the remainder in the employ of others as an expert; among which are, the Maize Saccharine Co., The Cream City Sugar works, The Archer Refinery, The American Glucose Co., The Peoria Sugar Refinery, The New York Glucose Co., The Rockford Glucose Co., The Pope Glucose Co., The Chicago Sugar Refining Co., The United States Glucose Co., and many other manufacturing interests who are directly or indirectly connected with Starch and Glucose as Food pro¬ ducts. He states: “As my training, that of a chemist, has been especi¬ ally directed to food and medicinal products; I believe that I am in a position to judge of the Purity and wholesomeness of Starch and Glucose as manufactured by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company. Robert H. Foos, of the Foos Manufacturing Co., Springfield, Ohio, has been connected with the various factories owned by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company for three years. 18 AFFIDAVITS OF EMPLOYEES. AFFIDAVITS ATTESTED TO BY EMPLOYEES IN GLUCOSE REFINERIES. I, J. Heede, have been engaged in the manufacture of Glucose and Starch for the past 26 years, and during all that time have enjoyed normal health; am familiar with the processes for extracting starch and prepar¬ ing it for the market such as are at present practised in the various fac¬ tories operated by The Glucose Sugar Refining Company. I, therefore, consider myself qualified to certify that such commercial starch is of superior purity and free from all harmful ingredients and admixtures. The following outline of the process should convince even those un¬ familiar with the manufacture that the result can only be as above stated, viz. a pure starch perfectly adapted to be used as a human food. The shelled corn as it leaves the cars is passed through cleaning machines, which remove from it various impurities; such as dust, stones, pieces of cob, etc. It is then immersed in a warm dilute solution of sulphur-dioxide in water, for the purpose of softening the grains. The sulphur-dioxide is a gas obtained by the burning of sulphur in air. It is soluble in water and the main advantage of the use of this solution is that it keeps the mixture of corn and water perfectly sweet during the soft¬ ening. The grinding is carried on in two stages, first coarse, then fine, and allows an intermediate separation of the corn germs which form a valua¬ ble by-product and furnish oil and a press cake for cattle feed. The ground corn is then washed on fine silk screens. The part remain¬ ing on the screen is more or less dried and sold as cattle feed. The part passing through the screen which contains all the available starch of the corn suspended in a large amount of water is run over long slightly inclined planes, so called starch-tables, whereon, by a process of settle¬ ment, and washing, the clean starch builds up in a solid layer in the bottom, while the lighter ingredients, viz. oil, gluten, fiber, etc., are carried off in the current of water and over the end of the starch-table. These sub¬ stances are ultimately recovered and manufactured into a cattle feed. It remains now only for the wet starch to be removed from the starch tables and to be dried. The latter operation is carried on in kilns pro¬ vided with steam heat, exhaust fans and such other appliances as are in common use for this purpose. Care is taken to"keep the starch as clean and sweet as possible. For certain purposes the dry starch is ground in a mill and is then sold as powdered starch. The small proportion of sulphur-dioxide which is used in softening the corn is washed out and removed by the large quantities of water with AFFIDAVITS. 19 which, during the various manufacturing operations, the starch of necessity comes in contact. There is no sulphuric acid or oil of vitriol used in this process as sometimes has been asserted by people unfamiliar with this manufacture Neither is the statement true that the health of the workmen employed in this manufacture is injuriously affected. Testimony to this effect can readily be obtained from men who have been working for years in its various branches. Sworn to before me this nth day of April, A.D., 1898. W. J. GORMAN, Notary Public. This affidavit has been signed and attested to by the following employees of the various factories of the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, giving the years of their experience and the respective positions they occupy. J. HEEDE, Superintendent Starch House. CHICAGO FACTORY. NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. John LewandovskL _ _ ... 6 years. Starch Packer. Wm. Kluth... _18 u Black Filter Operator. Henry Buettner_ ...10 u Sulphur Foreman. C. Seifert_ ...16 w Watchman. Joseph Petritsch_ ... 5 it Starch Packer. F. Schwdkowsky_ ... 9 it Starch Handler. Frank Brink _ ... 5 it Starch Settler. Anton Sirovatha_ ...18 ii Gum Foreman. Joseph Menth_ ...10 it Starch Convertors. Carl Boldt_ ... 7 ft Gluten Settler. John Menth_ ...10 ft Starch Convertor. Mike Madi_ ...10 ii Foreman. F C. Thomas_ ... 6 ii Foreman. F. C. White_ ...16 ft Supt. Refinery. Charles Tornquist_ ... 6 if Foreman. Patrick Darcy_ ...12 ii Watchman. Adolph N. Rottenberg ... 8 if Watchman. Justus Kluth_ ... 4 if Oiler. J. Heede_ ...26 ft Supt. Starch House. Hugo Reise__ ... 7 if Drier Man. C. Bornhauser_ _ ...11 ii Foreman Feed House. LIST OF EMPLOYEES SIGNING AFFIDAVITS. Chicago Factory— (Continued.) NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. H. Lindeman_10 years. Pressman. W. B. Seibenthal_5 “ Engineer. Walter R. Tyler_4 “ Pan Man. Louis E. Otte_5 “ Engineer. Aug. Hurtig_6 “ Pan Man. H. Martin_16 “ Machinist. Joe Branitzky_10 “ Liquor Foreman. George Weber_6 “ Shipper. Frank Zelinck_7 “ Starch Operator. John Zeiler_9 “ Shipper. M. Kramer_11 “ Black Filter Operator. Alfred Flick_13 “ Glucose Finisher. Joe Prikopa_6 “ Liquor Foreman. Paul Weigel_ 7 “ Foreman Char House. Albert Biel_7 “ Oiler. John Kennedy_5 “ Foreman. Godfried Walter_5 “ Supt. Dry House. Edward Bittner_7 “ Carpenter Foreman. M. Gallovich_10 “ Steam Filter Foreman. J. Raszka_5 “ Convertor Man. Stanislas Stahowach_6 “ Packer. Charles Giese_6 “ Oiler. Joe Miller_6 “ Pressman. George Barth_6 “ Washer. Edward Sheridan_17 “ Foreman Kilns. Joe Werkus_6 “ Starch Packer. John Oberlin_12 “ Gluten Sieves. G. Gnatz___14 “ Kiln Fireman. Otto Kluth_7 “ Carpenter. Henry Spoo_7 “ Starch Miller. T. Schreimann_7 “ Press Man. M. Mondry_10 “ Press Man. S. Faber_6 “ Press Man. Otto B. Dohm_3 “ Machinist Foreman. M. Oertlen_14 “ Frame Maker. Herman Goerner_8 “ Starch Wagon Packer. C. Gutmann_ 8 “ Miller. E. Schneider_10 “ Starch Miller. T. Benesch_9 “ Engineer Starch House. Rudolf Schrader_15 “ Foreman Starch House. G. Tomazzi_12 “ Dextrine Kiln Man. John Derrig_17 “ Time Clerk. LIST OF EMPLOYEES SIGNING AFFIDAVITS. 21 Chicago Factory— (Continued.) NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. J. Valeta_ _7 years. Press Man. J Bukog____ _7 .< Press Man. G. Birke _ _16 44 Feed House Helper. A. Specht __ _ _ _7 44 Starch House Helper: R. Herhold_ _ 7 44 Pan Man. John Johannes.. _7 44 Sulphur Foreman. P. H. Kasper _ _7 41 Foreman Machine Shop. M. Lezarin_ _16 44 Starch Packer. M. Wichnowiki__ _10 44 Starch House Operator. Joseph Weigel __ _ ..6 44 Kiln Foreman. K. Pannoviz_ _ _6 44 Pressman. H. Petter_ _12 44 Foreman Wet Starch House. PEORIA FACTORY. NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. Frank R. Cushing _3 years. Superintendent. L. P. Bauer_ _20 44 Refinery Superintendent. B. Hogan__ _9 44 Millwright. P. Gorman _ _15 44 Foreman. C. Rettberg„_ _15 44 Supt. Starch House. A. Suabel__ _7 44 Foreman Starch House. H. Blundell_ _9 44 Workman Refinery. P. Neptun. _ __ _5 44 Miller. H. J. Baujan_ _4 44 Stone Dresser. Z. Zepprich __ _7 44 Miller. C. Jonas._ _10 44 Starch Shoveller. Jos. F. Sturm _ _10 44 Starch Department. J. Falkner. _ .. _14 44 Forman Starch Shovelers. N. Connolly_ _14 44 Convertor. John Wilson _9 44 Neutralizers. N. Duncan _6 44 Foreman. J. P. Werner. _3 44 Shipping Clerk. H. Metz_ _20 44 Warehouse Foreman. Patrick McGuan.. _15 44 Pan Man. Thos. Purviance _7 44 Foreman Refinery. Wm. T. Whitly _ _15 44 Coppersmith Refinery. Geo. Greenwood _15 44 Millwright. John Linder_ _10 “ Belt Maker. John Prill_ _5 44 Starch Shoveler. Wm. F. Smith. _ _10 44 Bone Filterer. A. Mutzelfelt._ _ 3 44 Starch Shoveler. Ferdinand Wyss _10 44 Starch Shoveler. 22 LIST OF EMPLOYEES SIGNING AFFIDAVITS. Peoria Factory— (Continued.) NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. C. F. Dallowitz _ _5 years. Millwright. Mattie Oshietes__ ... 7 Workman in Starch House. John Barnwell_ ... 6 <« Germ Cooling Room. H. Olsen__ ...18 u Millwright. Tilson Ewalt_ _ ... 6 w Carpenter Foreman. James W. Donaldson, Jr_ ... 5 tt Day Foreman Oil Dep’t. Herman T. Wilson_ ... 3 it Chemist and Ref. Ass’t. Edward E. Smith __ ...20 It Foreman Feed Dep’t. C. Bradford __ ... ... 5 ft Foreman Feed Presses. Robert Colville_ ...20 t< Master Mechanic. Louis Beihmann __ _ ...13 if Starch f'oreman. John Walter___ ... 3 tt Starch Paddler. Nick Jeager__ 2 tt Starch Paddler. Thomas Ellis._ _ __ _ ...25 ft Carpenter Foreman. DAVENPORT FACTORY. NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. Wm. Klein_ _18 years. Night Superintendent. Franz Bode __ _ _23 tt Head Miller. H. Tlsemann__ _19 tt Sieve Maker and Belts. H. Muxfeldt. _17 <( Ass’t Superintendent. Wm. Schoendelen_ _21 tt Master Mechanic. Lee S. Harrison __ _14 it Superintendent. F. Gerhen_ _ _ _19 tt Carpenter. A. Klare_ _15 tt Foreman Syrup Dep’t. John Mohr__ _17 tt Feed House Operator. John Link._ _11 tt Mechanical Supt. Aug. Ruess_ _16 tt Starch Paddler. N. Wohlers_ _13 tt Miller. M. Garshler _ __ _14 ft Pumps. J. Meetz... _.16 tt Pans. Carl Biekel.. .. _12 ft Foreman Starch Tables. F. Behning__ .20 ft Corn Steeper. F.. Gollnitz__ _15 tt Char Operator. C.Jacobs _17 ft Foreman Wet Feed House. J. C. Langfeldt__ _9 tt Agent. Frank Stiebens _ _19 tt Feed House Operator. Boi Ingnens_ _21 tt Vacuum Pan. H. M. Seiss_ _19 tt Convertor Foreman. Claus Lage. ... _17 tt Press Man. C. Jansen.. _9 tt Press Man. Henry Hinz_ _11 *tf Fireman. LIST OF EMPLOYEES SIGNING AFFIDAVITS. 23 Davenport Factory—(C ontinued.) NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. F. Panke_12 years. Pumps. John Thorsen. 12 “ Press Man. Wm. Herzberg_18 “ Mechanic. Carl Lange_11 “ Mechanic. A. Luthyens_15 “ Foreman Mixing Dep’t. Wm. Kluess..18 “ Dry Feed House. ROCKFORD FACTORY. NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. H. C. Clark.10 years. Chief Engineer. R. Haley. 19 “ Foreman. J. Kintz_ 3 “ Steam Fitter. M. Slater.18 “ Foreman Refinery. Pat Curry..11 “ Chief Steam Fitter. Ed Riley. 2 “ Steam Fitter. James Duncan. 5 “ Millwright. H. H. Shook..7 “ Millwright. Wm. H. Tierney.18 “ Millwright. James Jenkins.5 “ Machinist. Wm. Jackmann.6 “ Sieves. Geo. Cyle.5 “ Carpenter. Chas. Karl.2 “ Foreman Warehouse. A. F. Swanson.7 “ Millwright. Rush R. McCoy. 6 “ Foreman Oil House. R. L. Mutton.5 “ Electrician. W. Siger...9 “ Carpenter. John Metzer.8 “ Tank Builder. Dan Kussy..25 “ Machinist. G. G. Wright.2 “ Chemist. James Edwards.7 “ Millwright. Phillip Meister..17 “ Starch Supt. A. W. H. Lenders.9 “ Chemist. D. D. Schienholtz. 5 “ Miller. R. S. Martin.7 “ Carpenter. MARSHALLTOWN FACTORY. NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. Herman E. Franke.9 years. Ass’t. Miller. Chas. Nelson.10 “ Miller. Jas. Mehulka.6 “ Foreman Wet Starch House. Alva Hausafus.4 “ Asst. Foreman Liquor Dept. F. P. Brechtbill.3 “ Ass’t. in Filter Dept. 24 LIST OF EMPLOYEES SIGNING AFFIDAVITS. Marshalltown Factory—( Continued.) NAME. YEARS EMPLOYED. OCCUPATION. Jas. Duticker. 7 years. Foreman Filter Dept. John Rouska...11 “ Pan Man. John Erikson. 11 “ Foreman Starch House. T. Larson.11 “ Ass’t. in Refinery. John Herschel. 9 “ Ass’t. Shipping Clerk. Albert Stephon..9 “ Night Foreman Dry Feed. Jos. Mikschl. 7 “ Foreman Starch Kilns. Michael Yaw.17 “ Millwright. Jos. Watko.12 “ Foreman Starch Set. House. Peter Waren. 6 “ Foreman Char Filters. E. S. Hausafus. 5 “ Supt. Liquor Dept. F. W. Mills __.7 “ Supt. of Construction. Theo. H. Kraft.8 “ Superintendent. Theo. G. Jacobs__4 “ Agent. REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. 25 STATEMENT OF DR. ARNO BEHR. Dr. Arno Behr has been actively engaged in the manufacturing of Starch and Glucose from Corn since 1882, as the following at¬ tested to statement will show, as Superintendent and Chemist at Chicago, Ill., and Davenport, Iowa. I, Arno Behr, Chemist, have had practical experience with the manu¬ facture of Starch and Glucose from Corn] since 1882. In 1883 I intro¬ duced at the Works of the Chicago Sugar Refining Company a process for drying and preparing Starch for the market which was new at the time, but which has since been adopted and is now practised by all the starch factories operated by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company as well as many outside works. With full knowledge therefore of the process I affirm that this starch is not only perfectly wholesome, but must be classed among the purest articles of human consumption. In the course of 13 years experience as superintendent of starch and glucose works I have had ample occasion to observe the effects of their occupation on the workman. No case of sickness has come to my notice that could be traced to conditions peculiar to this manufacture. The men, as a rule, like their work and are not eager to change. The following outline of the process should convince even those un¬ familiar with this manufacture that the result can only be as above stated, viz., a pure starch, perfectly adapted to be used as a human food. The shelled corn as it leaves the cars is passed through cleaning machines which remove from it various impurities, such as dust, stones, pieces of cob, etc. It is then immersed in a warm dilute solution of sul¬ phur-dioxide in water for the purpose of softening the grains. The sul¬ phur-dioxide is a gas obtained by the burning of the sulphur in air. It is soluble in water and the main advantage of the use of this solution is that it keeps the mixture of corn and water perfectly sweet during the softening. The grinding is carried on in two stages, first coarse, then fine, and allows an intermediate separation of the corn germs which form a valuable by-product and furnish oil and a press cake for cattle feed. The ground corn is then washed on fine silk screens. The part re¬ maining on the screen is more or less dried and sold as cattle feed. The part passing through the screen which contains all the available starch of the corn suspended in a large amount of water is run over long slightly inclined planes, so called starch tables, whereon, by a process of settle¬ ment and washing, the clean starch builds up in a solid layer in the bot- 26 REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. tom, while the lighter ingredients, viz. oil, gluten, fiber, etc., are carried off in the current of water and over the end of the starch table. These substances are ultimately recovered and manufactured into a cattle feed. It remains now only for the wet starch to be removed from the starch tables and to be dried. The latter operation is carried on in kilns pro¬ vided with steam heat, exhaust fans and such other appliances as are in common use for this purpose. Care is taken to keep the starch as clean and sweet as possible. For certain purposes the dry starch is ground in the mill and is then sold as powdered starch. The small proportion of sulphur di-oxide which is used in softening the corn is washed out and removed by the large quantities of water with which, during the various manufacturing operations, the starch of neces¬ sity comes in contact. ARNO BEHR. Sworn to before me this 11th day of April, 1898. ISAAC W. BROWN, Notary Public. STATEMENT BY JOHN L. FUELLING, CHEMIST. I have been notified that there is a bill before your Honorable Com¬ mittee, advocating the taxation of corn-starch or flourine, and the restric¬ tion of its sale as a food in the market. Furthermore, I am informed that it has been claimed that corn-starch or flourine is manufactured with the aid of powerful corrosive and deadly chemicals, and therefore is injurious to the human system. In view of these statements, the importance of the corn-starch in¬ dustry, the well-known value of the product as a human food, and the necessity of contradicting any erroneous statements of the nature and the method of making corn-starch or flourine, I take the liberty to bring myself before your Honorable body. I would also add, that in consequence of my experience in starch manufacture, from a theoret¬ ical, chemical and practical point of view, I feel that it will be no pre¬ sumption on my part to approach your Committee in the cause of this product. In order that you may have some warrantable grounds for giving my statement consideration, I would say that aside from my regular University training, I have been directly or indirectly connected with the sugar industry in the capacity of Chief Chemist, Superinten¬ dent, etc., for the past ten years. I was in the employ of the U. S. Government at Washington as Assistant Chemist in the Agricultural Laboratory, under Dr. Wiley, for several years, during a part of this time being in charge of the beet and sorghum experiments carried on in the West by the government. From there I went to Louisiana, was REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. 27 engaged for one season in sugar work, introducing the diffusion pro¬ cess in cane sugar manufacture, and carrying on other chemical work. After a return to the department at Washington, I was employed by Messrs. Brooks & Co., of the Island of Cuba, as Chief Chemist for their five sugar estates. Finally, I accepted an opening in the glucose and starch industry at Peoria, Ill., and have been since then constantly en¬ gaged in the capacity of chemist in this industry. As a result of these years of experience as an industrial chemist, covering almost every branch of applied chemistry, I can say without hesitation that corn-starch or flourine is one of the most wholesome, nutritious and carefully prepared food products in the market. That this is true is only too apparent. What physician but prescribes corn starch as one of the most wholesome foods for the most delicate stom¬ achs? Where is there a mother who hesitates to give to her infant child one of the many corn-starch preparations? Who is it that has not eaten corn starch in one of its thousand preparations found on every table? Finally, is there any one who can recall injury to himself, or can bring evidence to show where corn-starch has ever done any harm, even when given to invalids and infants. Therefore, I would reassert, without fear of contradiction, that corn-starch is one of the most nutritious food products prepared for human consumption. Finally, the fact that this general and necessary food can be manu¬ factured and put on the market at such a price as to render it available to the masses, makes any increase in its price by taxation, and any re¬ strictions in its legitimate sale, a piece of class legislation that would be a crime against the masses, and a stigma upon the present Congress. In order to prove that the finished product contains none of the in¬ jurious properties attributed to it, and that you may be able to deduce your own conclusions, I append a brief description of corn, the process of its manufacture into starch, and an analysis of the finished product and such authorities as I found available at this time. The Successive steps are as follows: 1. Corn. 2 3 1 . /* A. The selecting and the cleaning of the corn. B. Steeping or Softening, preparatory to milling. C. First grinding, preparatory to the removal of germ and oil. D. Removal of germ and oil. E. Second grinding of the germ and oil-freed residue. F. Separation of the starch from hull or shell. G. Concentration of starch solution and separation of gluten. H. Drying and packing. I. Analysis of starch. , J. Authorities. Corn is so well known in America that it will suffice to say that it REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. is composed of seven principal ingredients: Moisture, shell or fiber, glu¬ ten, germ, oil, ash and starch, in the following proportions (average of 80 analyses by Dr. J. Koneg): Moisture_ 13.35% Fiber_ 1.67% Gluten_10.17% Oil_ 4.58% Ash_ 1.40% Starch (by diffusion)- 68.63% (The germ is included in the above constituents.) The fiber and gluten form the structure or frame-work of corn in which the starch is stored in small microscopic globules. The germ, on the other hand, is the store-house of the oil found in the corn. It also contains fiber, a large proportion of the ash, and some un¬ developed starch. II. (A.) The corn is purchased on the Board of Trade by experts, and is composed almost wholly of grades Nos. 2 and 3. It is received at the factory shelled, and in closed cars. After running it through a duster or cyclone machine, it is passed over a set of screens for the removal of stones, cobs, leaves, etc., thence to the magnets for the removal of iron. (B.) The corn is run into large closed steeping or soaking vats, where it is covered with warm water charged with T 3 Tr % of sulphuric dioxide. In order to prevent the fermentation of the corn, and consequent damaging of the starch, it has been found necessary to use sulphur-dioxide as a preservative. Sulphur-dioxide is made by burning sulphur in air and passing the gasses into water. The effect of using this gas in the steep water, is to leave the finished starch in a sweet and wholesome condition. As soon as the corn has become sufficiently soft to permit removal of the germ, the steep water is thoroughly drained from it. (C.) The softened corn is now mixed with dilute starch water and passed through a set of buhr mills, so set as to facilitate the loosening of the germ. After passing through one or more sets of threshers to com¬ plete the loosening of the germ, the semi-ground mass is run into large mixers. ( D.) These mixers are filled with a solution of starch at such a gravity as to cause the germ to float, while the residue or unground mass settles to the bottom. The germ containing almost all of the oil is removed by a mechanical device or floating, and after an additional washing for the complete removal of the adhering starch, it is dried, ground, and con¬ verted by the usual processes into oil and oil cake. The starch liquor re¬ maining from this process will be discussed further under “G.” (E.) The settled semi-ground mass is removed from the mixers and passed over a set of silk sieves or shakers to remove the surplus of starch REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. 29 liquor. (See“G. ”) It is again mixed with dilute starch water and ground in a second set of buhr mills for the complete separation of the starch from the hulls. ( F.) This ground mass is thrown upon enclosed silk sieves or shakers, kept in constant motion, for the separation of the starch from the fiber. The fiber in passing over the sieves is thoroughly washed by a number of small streams of water to remove adhering starch. The fiber or residue in the shaker is then pressed, dried, ground, and sold as cattle feed. (G.) The starch liquor remaining from the process “ F,” together with those remaining from “ D ” and “ E,” generally speaking, are brought together, and after passing over a third set of shakers, carrying a finer mesh of silk, the mixed starch liquor is sent to the tables. In some cases the starch liquor is taken from the starch process “ F ” and utilized for the making of dry starch. The starch liquor on entering the tables is composed of starch, gluten and approximately 98% of water. Tables re¬ ferred to are inclined gutters ranging from 18 to 36 inches in width, and from 50 to 125 feet in length. In consequence of the greater specific gravity of the starch, it settles to the bottom of the tables, while the gluten passes off with the water. After removing the surplus water from the settled starch by means of rubbers or squeezers, it is ready for the kiln. In some cases this starch is again mixed with water and re-tabled, in order to still further purify it previous to drying. (H.) All of the starch resulting from “ G ” is now removed from the tables and placed in shallow wooden trays, which in turn are placed on wagons and run into kilns or drying rooms. These kilns are heated either by closed steam coils or hot air forced in by means of fans. The starch after remaining in the kilns until air dried, is removed and packed either in paper lined barrels or sacks for shipment. For food purposes the starch is powdered and passed through bolting cloths before packing: Following is the analysis of the starch product: Moisture___10.534%- Fats or Ether Ext_ 0.045% Ash_ 0.140% Fiber__ 0.007% Protein or gluten_ 0.474% Starch (by diff)_88.700% i From the above it will be seen that after deducting the starch, only 0.666% of matter not starch remains, or in other words, the starch is 99.14% pure. III. Following I quote from various authorities: Food Materials and Their Adulterations, 1886, By E. H. Richards, Instructor of Sanitary Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “ It is an excellent food, easily digested and very nutritious.” 30 REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. Fruits and Farnacia, the Proper Food of Man, 1854, Smith & Trall, Hydropathic and Hygienic Institute, New York. “ One pound of starch appears to supply the place of four pounds of meat.” Jahresbericht uber Agriculturchemie, Volume 14, 1892. “ In the addition of starch to bread, we cannot recognize an injury to its nutritive value.” JNO. L. FUELLING, Chemist. STATEMENT OF HENRY C. HUMPHREY, CHEMIST. I, Henry C. Humphrey, of Peoria, Ill., first became interested in the manufacture of starch by being concerned in the starting of the Chicago Sugar Refining Company, in the year 1878. I assisted as Chemist in making a careful and exhaustive study of all patents taken out in the United States, France, Germany and England, bearing on this subject. I conducted experiments on a large scale to test the various methods then in use. No expense was spared in getting this information, skilled workmen being brought from Germany and elsewhere, to give the benefit of their knowledge. I have taken out a number of patents for improve¬ ments in the manufacture of glucose, starch, etc. I continued with the Chicago Sugar Refining Company as Chemist; I helped to start that man¬ ufactory in employing the new processes, which were the results of our experiments. I also for a time was consulting Chemist to the Glen Cove Starch Company, at Glen Cove, N. Y. I am at present Assistant Chemist of the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, having charge of the chemical department of the factory at Peoria, Ill. I feel, therefore, conversant with the subject of starch manufacture. In my opinion, the starch now produced by the Glucose Sugar Refin¬ ing Company is of the purest quality and absolutely free from all harm¬ ful ingredients. In the old process of the manufacture of starch the corn was first steeped in warm water for a longer or shorter time, until a slight putre¬ faction had taken place. It was then ground and washed over silk screens. The portion passing over the seive was sold as cattle food, in the wet state. The portion passing through the screen, “ The Raw Starch,” was run down long inclined planes or tables. Here the solid starch settled and was removed and dried. Over the end of the tables passed the gluten, oil, etc. In some factories, during the winter this liquor was caught and sold at retail by the barrel, but during the summer it ran into the neighboring stream. This gluten, as well as the cattle feed mentioned above, being largely nitrogenous, easily putrefied and became REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. 31 a source of great annoyance and danger to the health of the neighbor¬ hood. A starch factory was known by its intolerable stench. At Glen Cove, which was one of the best equipped factories using the old process, there was a continual fight between the town Health Authorities and the factories. Now in starting the works afterwards built at Chicago, we had in view not only the doing away with a system so deleterious and obnox¬ ious to the health of the neighborhood, but also to the saving of various by-products which had formerly been lost, namely, the oil and gluten. To accomplish the first of these, we soaked the corn in warm water con¬ taining a minute proportion of sulphur-dioxide, a well known and harm¬ less, healthful sweetener, used by every brewer in washing out and clean¬ ing his kegs before running in the beer, by all sugar refiners, and in vari¬ ous manufactories where it is needful to keep the products from fermenta¬ tion and putrefaction. We were entirely successful in this, not only being able to save the various by-products but also in rendering the whole manufacture perfectly odorless. I fully believe the starch prepared by this new process es far purer and more healthful as a food than the product of the old factories, reek¬ ing as they did with foul smelling stenches. I have never noticed that the health of the workmen in search works was affected injuriously. In fact I believe quite the contrary, that they are in better condition than in most factories, on account of their health¬ ful surroundings. H. C. HUMPHREY, Chemist. Sworn to before me this 9th day of April, A. D. 1898. H. A. PRATT, Notary Public. STATEMENT OF DR. EDWARD GUDEMAN, CHEMIST. I, Dr. Edward Gudeman, Superintendent with the Glucose Sugar Refin¬ ing Company, since its incorporation, have had about eight (8) years experience as chemist and as superintendent in charge of various glucose works. I am perfectly familiar with the process in use for the produc¬ tion of glucose, starch, grape sugar and all other corn products manu¬ factured at such plants. I have been educated at Columbia University, New York, and universities in Germany for the chemical profession, and have made a special study of foods and feeding stuffs. Before going into the glucose business I had several years’ experience as an instructor in chemistry at the Columbia University and in the City of Philadelphia, besides being assistant to Professor Charles F. Chandler, of New York 32 REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. City. I consider myself fully qualified to speak on the subject of corn products, from glucose work, as an expert, having manufactured the products and having personally analyzed them at all stages of the pro¬ cesses, as used in the factories with which I was connected. A brief and superficial outline of the process as used by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company is : Shelled Corn is the raw product for this industry. The corn is cleaned and separated from all impurities, such as cobs, dust, dirt, stones, etc., by means of cleaning machines and air blowers. The clean corn is then soaked in warm water containing a small quantity of sulphur-dioxide. The object of the sulphur-dioxide is to prevent fermentation or souring and to keep the corn in a sweet condition. After a certain time the corn is soft and ready for grinding. The water used for the soaking is drawn off, and the corn containing only the absorbed and adhering water is conveyed to the mills. The grinding of the corn is done in two steeps, first a coarse one and which actually only cracks the corn sufficiently to loosen the germ. The germ is then separated by floating it away from the coarse material. During the grinding fresh water is added constantly. The germ is treated by itself for the recovery of the adhering starch, corn oil and corn cake. The coarse material, after the germ has been separated, is ground very finely in a stream of fresh water. This ground corn con¬ tains over 90% water. This now passes on fine silk sieves, where all the starch is washed out with clean water, being carried through the sieve as a starch milk, while the unground portions, the bran, remains on the sieve. This bran is sold for cattle feed, either in a dry or wet condition, or it is mixed with gluten and sold as Gluten Feed. The starch milk which has passed through sieves is concentrated by settling. The excess of water being run directly into the sewer. The concentrated starch is again sifted through very fine silk sieves and then run on the tables. On these tables the starch settles down, while the gluten and soluble substances, impuri¬ ties as considered with the starch, run off of the end of the table. This gluten is settled and then either pressed, dried and sold as Gluten Meal, or it is mixed with the bran (above mentioned), dried and sold as Gluten Feed. The starch is taken off the tables by mechanical means and treated in the following way : Production of Corn-Starch. The starch is taken from the tables, thinned out with fresh water and run over a second series of tables to separate any impurities that might still be adhering. This gives an absolutely clean and pure corn starch. This is taken from the second tables and dried in kilns, and is then ready for the market and sold under the name of Pearl Starch. This same Starch powdered and sifted goes into the trade under the name of Pow¬ dered Starch. REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. 33 An analysis of the finished products, sold by this Company will show that they are all over 99% pure figured on water free substances. I know of no case or ever heard of any claim of any injury to health due to the use of any of the products as manufactured by the Glucose Sugar Refin¬ ing Company. DR. EDWD. GUDEMAN. Chicago, Ill., April 10th, 1898. ANALYSIS OF STARCH MADE BY DR. EDWARD GUDEMAN. Chicago, III., April 11, 1898. Mr. Thomas Gaunt, Ge7il. Supt., The Glucose Sugar Refining Co ., Chicago, Ill. Dear Sir —Following you will please find the average samples of starch taken from the Chicago and Peoria Plants and submitted to me for analysis: Peoria Starch Chicago Starch Average from Average from 15 daily samples. 14 daily samples. Water__ 9.885 10.902 Ash_ 0.157 0.128 Fiber_Trace. Trace. Ether Extract (or Fats)_ 0.062 0.080 Protein___ 0.467 0.525 Starch (N. free) (by diff.) ...89.429 88.365 Total . 100.00 100.00 Respectfully, DR. EDWD. GUDEMAN. STATEMENT AND AFFIDAVIT OF AUG. WEDDERBURN. Chicago, March 30, 1898. Mr. Thomas Gaunt, Ge?ieral Superintendent The Glucose Sugar Refining Co ., Chicago, Ill. Dear Sir —I have been informed that there is a bill pending before Congress to prohibit the unrestricted use of corn-starch or flourine as a human food. I am also informed that it has been stated that corn-starch or flourine has been pronounced injurious, and that it is made by means of powerful and poisonous chemicals. In my position of Assistant Chemist to the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, I am in a position to say that I am familiar with the process employed by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company in making corn-starch or flourine, and that in my judgment, as a Chemist, the corn-starch placed on the market by this company is 34 REPORTS OF CHEMISTS. absolutely wholesome, free of any deleterious properties and in every re¬ spect a pure starch. I would further say that I have made a chemical examination of the starch made by the Glucose Sugar Refining Company, and find this to be absolutely free of harmful properties and in every respect a normal and wholesome corn starch. Hoping that this brief statement and the subscribed results may be of service to you in correcting the erroneous and vicious impression circu¬ lated by interested parties, I remain, Yours respectfully, AUG. WEDDERBURN. Subscribed and sworn before me this 11th day of April, A. D. 1898. WM. J. GORMAN. ANALYSIS OF STARCH BY AUG. WEDDERBURN. Chicago, March 30, 1898. Per Cent. Chicago Aver, of 14 Samples. Peoria Aver, of 15 Samples. Rockford Aver, of 1 Sample. Marshall¬ town Aver, of 1 Sample. Moisture. __ -.10.295 9.150 9.685 13.005 Ether Extract (Oil) 0.040 0.035 0.055 0.050 Ash __ _ __ __ 0.150 0.120 0.150 0.140 Fiber _ _ _ .Trace Trace Trace Trace Gluten.__ _ 0.495 0.350 0.583 0.466 Starch (by Diff)____ _ .89.020 90.348 89.547 86.339 Subscribed and sworn to be¬ fore me this 11th day of April, A. D. 1898. AUG. WEDDERBURN. WM. J. GORMAN. DR. J. B. MURPHY’S LETTER (FLOURINE.) 35 COPY OF LETTER, DATED MARCH 26 , 1893 , ON THE SUBJECT OF FLOURINE BY DR. J. B. MURPHY, L.L.D., M.D. Professor of Surgery, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Medical Department of Illinois University; Professor of Surgery, Chicago Post Graduate School and Hospital; Attending Surgeon Cook County Hospital, Chicago; Professor of Sur¬ gery, West Side Clinical School, Chicago; Attending Surgeon, Alexian Brothers and West Side Hospitals, Chicago; Consulting Surgeon of St. Joseph’s Hospital for Crippled Children, Chicago; Life Member Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Chirur- gie, Berlin, Germany; Fellow of Society of Surgery of Paris, France; Member of the International Medical Congress, Moscow, Russia; Member American Medical Association; Fellow of the American Obstetrical and Geneological Association; Ex-President of the International Association of Railway Surgeons, etc., etc., etc. The scientific study of the appropriation of foods in the process of digestion is at present far advanced. Modern chemistry has taught that many of the articles used as foods are practically" useless as energy or heat-producing substances. They are in reality fillings, and are not only useless in the animal economy, but are a detriment in the process of digestion and assimilation of other substances used in conjunction with them as foods. The nitrogenous constituents of plant food are not so easily absorbed as the nitrogenous elements of animal food. Carbo¬ hydrates, starch and sugar, are very completely absorbed. The more fat present in the cereal or vegetable food, the less the carbo-hydrates are digested and absorbed. If the fat could be removed from wheat flour as it can from corn, the nitrogenous substances would be more completely absorbed. Cereals are the most important vegetable foods; they contain proteids (albumen), starch, salts and water. Gluten is composed of four different albuminoids—gluten casein, gluten-fibrin, mucedin and gliadin. Of 100 parts of gluten (vegetable albumen) taken into the system, only 46.6% is digested; 53.4% is un¬ digested and passes away as excrement. Of 100 parts of carbo-hydrates (vegetable starch) taken into the system, 90.3% is digested and 9.7% undigested. Of the same substances in animal food taken into the system albumen, 81.2% is digested and 18*8% undigested. Of animal fats, 96.9% is digested and 3.1% undigested. From the above table, supplied by Hoffman, in his physiology on the 36 DR. J. B. MURPHY’S LETTER (FLOURINE.) absorption of food products, it will be seen that from an economical standpoint, not to speak of a health standpoint, the albumen needed in the body should be supplied from animal food, as only 18.8% of it remains undigested, while of the gluten (vegetable albumen), 53.4% remains undigested and is waste. It is in the elimination of this large amount of proteid material that the emunctories of the body are over¬ taxed, as the kidney, the liver, etc. The ideal foods, from a physiologic standpoint, are those that leave the least amount of undigested product. If a bread could be produced that contained but a very small percentage of vegetable albuminoid (gluten) and a very large percentage of starch, it would be the ideal bread of the physiologists. A palatable bread cannot be made from gluten alone or from starch alone, but by the action of the yeast the pro- teids when heated are decomposed and they divide the swollen starch, converting this starch into alcohol and carbonic dioxide; the latter causes the bread to rise, makes it porous, spongy and palatable. The quantity of gluten necessary for this change to take place is very much less than that found in the average wheat flour. This is understood by millers, as they know that Spring wheat has an excess of gluten and Winter wheat has a smaller amount of gluten. It is a matter of indif¬ ference to the miller whether the purchaser of Spring or Winter wheat flour appropriates this gluten or not. To the physiologist and the con¬ sumer it is of paramount importance, as the former recognizes and the latter consciously or unconsciously obtains benefit from only 46.6% of the gluten consumed; that is to say 53.4% by actual weight is worse than useless, as it neither produces tissue, heat or energy. What miller would purchase coal for his own consumption that had 53.4% of ashes or refuse? Still he is anxious to force upon the public a flour, a large percentage of which is not appropriated by the system. The miller is evidently more solicitous for his trade or industry than he is for the consumer, in whose defense he is making such loud proclama¬ tions. The chief benefits of fruits as food are from the sugar and salts which they contain. Sugars, and by this I mean cane sugars, are converted in the process of digestion into glucose. Starch is converted in the process of digestion into glucose and is utilized in the system as glucose. A part of the digestive process is equivalent to a miniature glucose factory. Flour is not the chief food supply of man. It is one of the many fillings or auxiliaries in the process of digestion. If wheat flour contained only materials that were appropriated and used by the system when taken into the body, it would be an ideal food, but as it contains an excess of gluten, 53.4% of this amount is waste. If we could reduce the proportion of gluten and increase the proportion of DR. J. B. MURPHY’S LETTER (FLOURINE.) 37 starch, we would render the flour more valuable to the consumer. Flourine is a pure starch and when added to the flour in which there is an excess of gluten, it not only does not damage the flour but increases its value as a food product. Starch is absolutely necessary in the animal economy. This starch in the system is converted into Glucose. Glucose is absolutely necessary, and if it is not admitted into the system as Glucose, it must be taken in as starch. If we supply the system with Glucose direct in jellies, syrups, preserves, etc., we save the digestive tract from the amount of work necessary for its production within the system. If the addition of Flourine (corn-starch) to wheat flour cheapens the product, and at the same time increases its value as a food, it should be welcomed by every consumer, for it is he who receives the benefit. If we can put a more nutritious, palatable and healthful flour upon the market than that produced by wheat alone, we will displace in the world’s competition simple wheat flours, and “American flour” (Wheat Starch and Flourine) will become the most desirable article of com¬ merce. The quotation from the Journal of Hygiene, and the Herald of Health, New York, is decidedly in favor of the addition of corn-starch to wheat flour if the article be properly analyzed, for the following reasons : 1. It cheapens it for the consumer. 2. It contains a smaller percentage of gluten, therefore less waste material for the consumer. 3. It is a fat-producing product for the consumer. 4. It is a Glucose producing product for the benefit of the consumer; it will produce abetter, cheaper flour. It will not bring the honest miller under suspicion if he brands his product honestly. The mixing of Flourine is not an adulteration, but an addition. J. B. MURPHY, L.L.D., M. D. 38 DR. W. J. BUTLER’S LETTER. LETTER OF W. J. BUTLER, M. D. Chicago, III., February 21, 1898. The Glucose Sugar Refining Co., The Rookery. Gentlemen —Referring to your inquiry concerning glucose; as to whether same might have any injurious effects as a food, beg to say that a consideration of the chemistry of glucose and that of the physiological products of digestion fail to furnish me any tenable grounds upon which to base an objection to glucose as a food product. , We might speak of glucose as a prepared food, founded on the follow¬ ing chemico-physiological facts ; Starch (which represents chief part of the carbo-hydrate portion of our diet) is, through the series of processes belonging to digestion, ultimately converted into its final product of digestion, which product is glucose or dextrose, the two latter terms being synonymous for the same compound. Starch is first acted on by the saliva, the ptyalin (a ferment) of which converts a portion of the starch taken, into maltose and achroodextrin, which are immediate products in formation of glucose from starch. These products, with the remaining unconverted starch are next acted on to some extent in stomach, but chiefly in intestine, in which latter por¬ tion of digestive track, the amlopsin (a ferment) of pancreatic juice con¬ verts maltose and achroodextrin, referred to above, and the greater por¬ tion of the remaining starch into glucose which is the final product in the digestion of starch, and which is directly absorbable by the blood vessels of the mucous membrane (lining) of the digestive canal. We would therefore, not only not be justified in offering an objection to glucose as a food during health, but really acknowledge for it a de¬ cided efficacy in conditions of deranged digestion, in which the digestion of starch is interferred with, just as we employ peptonized foods (pep¬ tones) in disturbances of stomach digestion or conditions requiring an avoidance of much waste product. Under certain conditions of disturbed digestion, fermentation of re¬ sulting products of starch digestion may occur. During this time their use must be limited, as would also that of glucose which represents as previously stated the final product of starch digestion. It will be evi¬ dent, however, that this could not be urged as an objection to starches or glucose, occuring as it would only under certain circumstances and also from the fact that they are essential to our diet. LETTERS. 39 The suggested possible objection to glucose on account of its injurious effects as a result of its too rapid absorption has, so far as I am aware, not received any clinical proof. From the foregoing it will be evident to you that the word “injurious,” has no place in discussing the merits of glucose as a food, which sub¬ stance is absolutely essential as food whether it be given in pure state, or derived by digestion of starches of cane sugar. W. J. BUTLER, M. D., Instructor in Chemistry and Assistant to Clinic of Diseases of Children , Rush Medical College . LETTER FROM A. C. COTTON, M. D. Chicago, III., February 21, 1898. The Glucose Sugar Refining Co., The Rookery. Gentlemen —In reply to your inquiry as to my opinion concerning the use of glucose as a food, I would say that I believe glucose to be the best form in which saccharine matter can be introduced into the stomach on account of its ready absorption and assimilation. The physiological chemist tells us that glucose is identical with dex¬ trose, and therefore one step in advance of maltose in the digestive pro¬ cess. Hence, theoretically, as well as clinically, the admixture of glucose with any substances should enhance their value as food. Very respectfully yours, A. C. COTTON, M. D., Professor of Children 1 s Diseases LETTER FROM WAHL & HENIUS. Report No. 44161. Chicago, April 1, 1898. The Glucose Sugar Refining Co., City. Gentlemen —The sample of cornstarch received from you has been carefully examined by us and found pure and of high grade. We are not aware of any objections to pure corn starch or cornmeal as food products and can find none. The commercial name “Glucose” is a rather elastic one, including as it does, not only the glucose of chemistry, or the pure grape sugar, but also several more or less completely inverted products of starch, some containing as high as 40% of dextrine. All such products that came under our notice, have, however, been found free from any deleterious substances. Respectfully yours, WAHL & HENIUS. 40 LETTERS. No. 44161 — Starch. Moisture... 9.53% Starch...88.92 Ash. 0.30 Nitrogenous Matter. 0.43 Oil . 0.05 Cellulose. Trace. LETTER FROM MAGNUS SWENSON. Chicago, March 28, 1898. Mr. C. H. Matthiessen, President, The Glucose Sugar Refining Co ., Chicago, Ill. Dear Sir —I am thoroughly familiar with the various processes em¬ ployed by your company in the manufacture of starch from Indian Corn, and hereby certify that no sulphuric acid is used in its manufacture. The separation of the starch and its subsequent preparation for the market, consists of purely mechanical processes, and involves no use of chemicals. The corn is first thoroughly cleansed by screening, and then steeped until soft. The corn is then ground, and the starch milk, or the small grain of starch suspended in water, is separated from the hulls, and coarse particles by screening through fine silk sieves. The gluten and other light impurities are separated from the heavier starch by simply flowing the starch milk down long troughs in which the starch settles and the light impurities run off. The starch now in a pure condition has only to be dried to be ready for the market; and at no stage of its manufacture does it come in con¬ tact with anything that can be injurious to either the health of the con¬ sumer or the workmen engaged in its manufacture. Yours very truly, MAGNUS SWENSON, Secretary and Manager , Walburn-Swenson Co.; Formerly Chemist, Univer¬ sity of Wisconsin; Agent U. S. Department of Agriculture , etc. LETTER FROM DR. J. M. DODSON. I heartily endorse all that is said by the committee of the Academy of Sciences, which is incorporated in this article. There can be no room for doubt as to the absolute wholesomeness and value of glucose, prop¬ erly manufactured, as an article of food. There is not a vestige of evi¬ dence to show that it is not, in every way, as healthy, pure and useful an article of diet as cane sugar. Any legislation which should hamper its LETTERS. 41 manufacture or interfere to prevent its use as one of the most wholesome healthful and economical food-substances at present available in our markets, would be a direct and positive injury to that large class of our population to whom the cost of food is the most fundamental and absorb¬ ing question of existence. JOHN MILTON DODSON, A. M., M. D., Professor of Physiology Rush Medical College . This letter was also signed by the following members of the Faculty of Rush Medical College: Arthur Dewes Bevan, Professor of Anatomy. A. C. Cotton, A. M., M. D., Professor of Diseases of Children. Henry M. Lyman, A. M., M. D., Professor of Theory and Practice of Medicine. LETTER FROM DIRECTOR E. DAVENPORT. College of Agriculture and Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Illinois, Urbana, III., April 20, 1898. Mr. S. L. Fraser, The Rookery, Chicago. Dear Sir — In reply to yours of the 15th will say that our Mr. Fraser is in charge of the dairy manufacturing work, but the herd is in my hands. We are glad at any time to learn everything that is possible about feed for either horses or cattle, but anything in that line you may address to me. Regarding the sample of mixed corn and wheat flour, I will say that I have just written an article for the Dixie Miller, Nashville, Tenn., in which I have said that a mistake is being made in the discussion of this whole subject. The public ought to know that a mixture of corn and wheat is not unwholesome, but the buyer of the article should know the proportions of these two ingredients in the mixture. The evil consists in selling the mixed article for wheat flour, in falsifying as to its exact nature, and in selling under names that imitate the more expensive product. Every bag of fertilizer must bear the analysis as to its ingredients, so every sack of mixed flour should state the proportions. It is simply nonsense to say that any mixture made of corn or wheat is injurious to health, but it may be fraud all the same if it is put upon the market under a false name. I have said and I here repeat that this kind of traffic engaged in would ruin our export trade and ultimately the entire wheat and corn 42 LETTERS. interests, unless it is carried on upon terms perfectly frank. Beyond this I do not see that anyone has a right to object. I am Very truly yours, E. DAVENPORT, Dean and Director . REPORT OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY. 43 REPORT MADE ON GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNAL REVENUE OF THE UNITED STATES. On the 27th day of April, 1882, the Hon. Green B. Raum, Commis¬ sioner of Internal Revenue, addressed a letter to Prof. W. B. Rogers, at that time President of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Sciences is a body incorporated by Act of Congress, approved March £[, 1863, and is composed of fifty members, comprising those among the most eminent in every branch of science and of art. The Academy is a Government institution, and its duty is, whenever called upon to do so by any department of the Government, to investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or of art that shall be submitted to it. The Commissioner’s letter referred to on preceding page was as follows: Treasury Department, Office of Internal Revenue, Washington, April 27, 1882. Professor W. B. Rogers, President of National Academy of Sciences, 117 Marlboro Street, Boston, Mass. Sir —There is now pending before Congress a bill (H. R. 3170) “to tax and regulate the manufacture and sale of glucose,” which bill pro¬ poses to so amend the Internal Revenue Laws as to impose a special tax upon the manufacturers of and dealers in glucose, and to levy a tax on the article in its solid, liquid and semi-liquid form. In view of this, I have respectfully to request the appointment of a committee of the Academy to examine as to the composition, nature, and properties of the article commercially known as glucose or grape sugar. This office desires to be informed as to the saccharine quality of this product as compared with cane sugar or molasses, and also especially as 44 REPORT OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY—( Continued.') to its deleterious effect when used as an article of food or drink, or as a constituent element of such articles. Numerous specimens of the article in question are in the possession of this office, which will be placed at the disposal of the Academy. Any expense necessarily incurred in conducting this inquiry will be paid upon the presentation of a properly prepared bill for that purpose. Very respectfully, (Signed) GREEN B. RAUM, Commissioner. The Academy accordingly appointed the following eminent gentle¬ men from among their number to make the desired investigation : Chairman, Prof. George F. Barker, of the University of Pennsyl¬ vania. Prof. William H. Brewer, of Yale College. Prof. Charles F. Chandler, of Columbia College. Prof. Walcott Gibbs, of Harvard College. Prof. Ira Remsen, of Johns Hopkins College, Md. These gentlemen, having recently concluded their work, have for¬ warded their report to the present Commissioner, accompanied by the following letter : Yale College, New Haven, Ct., January 7, 1884. Hon. Walter Evans, Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Sir —I have the honor to transmit to you herewith a report on Glucose made by a Committee of the National Academy of Sciences, in response to a request of your predecessor, Hon. G. B. Raum, dated April 27, 1882. Very truly yours, O. C. MARSH, President National Academy of Sciefices. The report is voluminous and exhaustive, and gives in detail the methods followed in making the examinations. The extracts given below will serve to show the general results attained, and prove how groundless have been the charges against glucose and grape sugar manu¬ factured from corn, as to their healthfulnesss and purity, etc. The fourth question submitted to the Committee was: “Is the use of ‘glucose’ or ‘grape sugar’ injurious to health?’’ In reply to this, the report states the results of experiments made by Dr. J. R. Duggan, of the Johns Hopkins University, “who,” it says, “has for some time past been occupied in experiments upon fermentation, and who was hence fully familiar with all the precautions necessary to secure reliable results.” The report continues : “The experiments described above occupied about two months, during which time Dr. Duggan repeatedly took large REPORT OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY — ( Continued. ) 45 quantities of the extracts. At the end of the experiments, and during the entire period, his health continued excellent. There was nothing whatever to indicate that the extracts contained anything injurious to health, and the conclusion seems to be fully justified that the samples examined by us, and which we have every reason to believe were fair average samples of the substances found in the market, contained nothing objectionable from a sanitary standpoint. In the experiments, the ex¬ perimenter took into his system everything that could possibly be objectionable contained in from 120 grains to 160 grains of the glucose or grape sugar, i. e., from a quarter to a third of a pound. It must be borne in mind further, that the extract which was taken into the stomach must have contained any objectionable mineral, as well as organic sub¬ stances, present in the glucose employed. Hence the results seem to be final as regards the injurious natures of glucose or grape sugar made from maize.” The report also states that similar experiments were made by Dr, Duggan upon others than himself, and with similar results. The Committee conclude their report as follows : “ Summary and Conclusion. —The results which have been obtained by the Committee, and which have been presented in the foregoing pages, may be briefly summed up as follows : “First .— Starch sugar, as found in commerce, is a mixture, in varying proportions, of two sugars, called dextrose and maltose, and of dextrine or starch gum. Dextrose was discovered in grapes by Lowitz in 1792, and was first prepared from starch by Kirchoff in 1811. In 1819, Bra- connot prepared it from woody fiber. Maltose was first recognized as a distinct sugar by Dubonnfaut, in 1847, in the product of the action of malt on starch; no dextrose is thus produced, according to O’Sullivan.” * * * * * * “ Fifth .— Starch sugar represents one distinct class of sugars, as cane sugar does the other—the former being obtained naturally from the grape, as the latter is from the cane and the beet. Starch sugar, which is a term chemically synonymous with dextrose and glucose, when pure, has about two-thirds the sweetening power of cane sugar. By the action of the dilute acids, both cane sugar and starch yield dextrose. In the case of starch, however, dextrose constitutes the sole final product.” ****** “ Seventh .— Of mineral or inorganic constituents, the samples of starch sugar examined contained only minute quantities. The total ash formed in the ‘glucose’ was only from 0.325 to 1.060 per cent. And in the ‘grape sugars’ only from 0.335 to 0.750 per cent. No impurities, either organic or inorganic in character, other than those mentioned, were detected in any of the samples examined.” 46 REPORT OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY—( Continued .) “ Eighth .—The elaborate experiments upon the fermentation of starch sugar would seem to be final on the question of the healthfulness — not only of glucose itself, but also of the substances produced by the action of a ferment upon it. Large quantities of a concentrated extract from the fermentation, representing from one-third to one-half a pound of starch sugar, were taken internally by the experimenters, and this re¬ peatedly, without the slightest observable effect. This result, rigidly applied, holds, of course, only for those sugars which, like this, are made from the ^starch of Indian corn, or maize.” “ In conclusion, then, the following facts appear as the result of the present investigation : ” “First .—That the manufacture of sugar from starch is a long-estab¬ lished industry, scientifically valuable and commercially important.” “ Second .—That the processes which it employs at the present time are unobjectionable in their character, and leave the product uncontam¬ inated.” “ Third .—That the starch sugar thus made and sent into commerce is of exceptional purity and uniformity of composition, and contains no injurious substances.” “ And, “ Fourth. —That, though having at best only about two-thirds the sweetening power of cane sugar, yet starch sugar is in no way inferior to cane sugar in healthfulness, there being no evidence before the committee that maize starch sugar, either in its normal condition or fermented, has any deleterious effect upon the system, even when taken in large quan¬ tities.” “All of which is respectfully submitted.” GEORGE F. BARKER, Chairman. WILLIAM H. BREWER, CHARLES F. CHANDLER, WOLCOTT GIBBS, IRA REMSEN, Committee. DR. CYRUS EDSON’S REPORT. 47 COPY OF REPORT, DATED OCTOBER 12, 1894, FROM DR. CYRUS EDSON, COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH, STATE OF NEW YORK, TO HON. THOS. F. GILROY, MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY, N. Y. Health Department, New York, October 12, 1894. Hon. Thos. F. Gilroy, Mayor , New York City. Sir —I have the honor to acknowledge your communication relative to the wholesomeness of Glucose as an article of food. This question is best answered in a report made by the committee appointed by the National Academy of Sciences at the request of the United States Com¬ missioner of Internal Revenue, in 1882. This committee consisted of Professors Chas. F. Chandler, G. F. Barker, W. H. Brewer, Wolcott Gibbs and Ira Remsen. These eminent scientists made an exhaustive investi¬ gation of the subject. Based upon their researches, they arrive at the following conclusion : “ That starch sugar is in no way inferior to cane sugar in healthful¬ ness, there being no evidence before the committee that maize starch sugar (glucose), either in its normal condition, or fermented, has any deleterious effect upon the system, even if taken in large quantities.” This opinion is so sound and so well founded that the light of science of today, twelve years later, has only served to show its wisdom more clearly. I understand it has been alleged that glucose or starch sugar is liable to cause diabetes. This is not true, and is based upon a mistaken knowledge both of glucose and the disease diabetes. In addition to certain nervous varieties, due solely to disturbed nerve functions, dia¬ betes is divided by the best authorities into two classes, of which the one is due to excessive sugar formation in the blood, and the other to dis¬ eased digestion, which prevents sugar from entering the circulation in the condition to be utilized by the system. The first of these classes is caused by disease of the liver; the second, by disease of the pancreas. The latter form is by far the most dangerous and rapidly fatal. The former variety, on the other hand, may last many years. In neither of 48 DR. CYRUS EDSON’S REPORT. these varieties can the ingestion of glucose under any circumstances be considered a cause of the disease, and I know of no authority who at¬ tributes to glucose such an effect. It is true that in the liver variety of diabetes glucose does harm, but so also does starch or sugar in any form. Starch cannot be used by the human system until after the digestive organs convert or change it into glucose; consequently, if glucose is condemned, as causing diabetes, potatoes and any other starch foods must also be condemned, for they must become glucose before they can be assimilated. To eat potato is to consume glucose; to eat bread is to consume glucose. Honey is but another form of glucose. Glucose is the basis of a multitude of infant foods. Malt is practically but another form of glucose. A health officer who condemns glucose cannot consistently fail to condemn bread, pota¬ toes, malt, honey, and most of the infant foods now on the market. This is “reductio ad absurdum.” In the form of diabetes due to disease of the pancreas, the highest authorities advise the administration of glucose for the amelioration of the disease. Kulz, an eminent German physician, recommends a starch sugar called laevulose, which is the exact analogue of diabetic glucose (International Medical Annual, 1894, page 178). An excessive amount of glucose or cane sugar or of starchy foods taken into the system may, of course, appear in the urine; so, also, may an excessive amount of albuminous food; but these phenomena are physiological and not disease. Glucose may be justly called pre-digested starch, since, as I have said, it is starch in the exact condition that we find it prepared by the digestive organs for assimilation. Glucose is pre-eminently a fat-form¬ ing, heat-producing food. Under a diet of glucose a man can perform more muscular work than under any other single article of food. Glucose not only is not injurious, but it is an essential article of food without which, in some form, man cannot enjoy life. Chemistry has shown man how to imitate exactly the products of nature. The honey of the flower and numerous other products of nature’s laboratory cannot only be imitated by man, but exactly repro¬ duced by him through the agency of chemistry. It seems a pity that we should, instead of welcoming such glorious results of science, receive them with such distrust and suspicion. Yours respectfully, (Sgd.) CYRUS EDSON, Commissioner of Health. LETTERS FROM EMINENT PROFESSORS. 4-9 LETTERS FROM PROFESSORS BARKER, BREWER, CHANDLER, GIBBS AND REMSEN TO DR. CYRUS EDSON IN 1894 , REAFFIRMING THEIR REPORT TO THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 1884 . University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, December 12, 1894. As chairman of the Committee appointed by the National Academy of Sciences in 1882, I had occasion to give especial attention to the ques¬ tion of the wholesomeness of glucose as an article of food. The com¬ mittee went carefully over the whole subject, examined the recorded opinions of the best authorities known to them, and made actual experi¬ ments to ascertain the dietetic value of this form of sugar. No facts were developed by this exhaustive investigation going to show that glu¬ cose is in any way injurious to health. On the contrary the evidence proved that this sugar itself, as well as the products of its fermentation, are eminently healthful and nutritious. In the ten years and more which have elapsed since the committee made its report, not a single fact has appeared, I believe, tending to invalidate its conclusions in the slightest; and this although the consumption of the material has increased ten fold. I see no reason therefore for modifying the opinion expressed in the report maintaining the desirability and excellence of glucose as an article of food. GEORGE F. BARKER, M. D. Sheffield Scientific School of Yale University, New Haven, December 13, 1894. The investigation of glucose in 1882 to 1884, by the Committee of the National Academy of Sciences, of which Committee I was a member, convinced me, that in the light of our knowledge at that time, glucose was a healthful food and that nothing deleterious had been found in the products of its fermentation. I had already been investigating its manu¬ facture in its economic and agricultural relations, and believed that its manufacture should be encouraged in the country. I was then and have been continuously since, a member of the Board of Health, and have watched the subject in both its sanitary and economic effects, and my opinion as to its wholesomeness is the same I then proved, and I am even more impressed with its economic importance to the country than I was then. WM. H. BREWER, M. D., Ph. D. 50 LETTERS FROM EMINENT PROFESSORS. School of Mines, Columbia College, New York, November 30, 1891. I fully concur with Dr. Edson in the opinion above expressed with regard to the healthfulness of glucose. And I want to say further that since 1882, when I carefully investigated the subject, as a member of the Committee of the National Academy of Sciences, appointed at the request of the United States Commissioner of Internal Revenue, I have not been able to learn anything which would lead me to modify the opin¬ ion we then expressed in that report, with regard to the healthfulness and value as an article of food of glucose. C. F. CHANDLER, Ph. D., M. D. Newport, R. I., December 14, 1894. In signing my name to a report presented to the National Academy of Sciences, Jan. 5, 1884, upon the subject of the healthfulness of glucose I did so with a perfect conviction that glucose is at least as healthful as cane sugar, since no facts showing the contrary had, after diligent search and more careful experiments by the Committee of the Academy, been put in evidence. Since that report was presented to the Academy, and by the President of the Academy to the Commissioner of Internal Rev¬ enue, no facts of any kind even tending to show that glucose made of corn starch is any way injurious to health have been brought to the knowledge of chemists. My opinion therefore remains unchanged. It may be worth while to state in this connection that one of the two chief constituents of glucose known as laevulose is now manufactured in Germany for the express use of diabetic persons. WOLCOTT GIBBS, M. D., LL.D. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., December 12, 1894. When, as a member of the Committee of the National Academy of Sciences I undertook in 1883, at the request of the United States Com¬ missioner of Internal Revenue, an investigation of the healthfulness of glucose, I reached the conclusion stated in the report of that Committee, viz: “that starch sugar is in no way inferior to cane sugar in healthful¬ ness, there being no evidence before the Committe that maize starch sugar (glucose), either in its normal condition or fermented, has any del¬ eterious effect upon the system, even if taken in large quantities." Since the date of the report, I have not learned of anything that has caused me to change my opinion on the subject. IRA REMSEN, M. D., Ph. D. LETTERS FROM EMINENT PROFESSORS. 51 Johns Hopkins University, Chemical Laboratory, Baltimore, Md., April 4, 1898. C. H. Matthiessen, Esq., President of The Glucose Sugar Refining Co. y The Rookery, Chicago, Ill. Dear Sir — I have received your letter of April 1 in reply to the one I sent to Mr. Ulysses S. Glick. I have now read over a part of the report which the committee of the National Academy of Sciences made to the Government of the United States some years ago, and I see no reason for changing the opinion expressed in that report. The experiments on the effects of glucose on the animal system were performed in this laboratory under my personal supervision, and as stated in the report, the conclusion was reached that the substance glucose was not harmful. I do not see how the experiments could be made more thorough, more convincing, than those experiments were. Certainly no experiments have been made since that time that tend in the least to invalidate our results, and I therefore again say without hesitation that in my opinion the products known as glucose and grape sugar, as found in the market, are pure and healthful, and legislation against these products is not called for in the interest of the community. I am Yours respectfully, IRA REMSEN, M. D., Ph. D. Columbia University. Department of Chemistry, Havemeyer Hall, 116 th Street and Amsterdam Avenue. Prof. C. F. CHANDLER, Telephone 289 harlem. New York, April 11, 1898. Thomas Gaunt, Esq., General Manager, Glucose Sugar Refining Co., Chicago, Ill. My Dear Sir —In reply to your favor asking me if I have seen any reason to change the opinion which I expressed many years ago as a mem¬ ber of the special committee of the National Academy of Sciences appoint¬ ed at the request of the Treasury Department to investigate the subject of Glucose or Grape Sugar, I would say that although I have kept myself in¬ formed upon this subject, nothing has occurred and no facts, chemical, physiological or sanitary have been published, which in any way indicate that the opinion arrived at by our committee was not absolutely correct. 52 LETTERS FROM EMINENT CHEMISTS. You will remember that our committee carefully investigated this subject, examined the different factories where Glucose or Grape Sugar is manu¬ factured; studied carefully all the processes in use ; made analyses of all the products and made experiments upon the use of the products in dif¬ ferent ways, and we could not find the slightest reason for supposing that under any circumstances Grape Sugar or Glucose is in any way objection¬ able as an article of human food. I would say further, that the same statement applies to starch whether made from corn or made from wheat. The old story alleging that Glucose or Grape Sugar is unwholesome be¬ cause “deadly acids” are employed in its preparation is simply ridiculous. I have never known of any reputable chemist finding any such acids in either Glucose or Grape Sugar. In conclusion I would say that in my opinion there are no articles of food to be found in commerce that are less liable to suspicion than the Glucose or Grape Sugar manufactured and sold in the United States. Very respectfully yours, C. F. CHANDLER, Ph. D., M. D. The Ledoux Chemical Laboratory, (Inc.) Analytical and Consulting Chemists, Albert R. Ledoux, M.S., Ph.D., Pres. 45518 9 Cliff Street, New York, April 2. 1898. Mr. C. H. Matthiessen, The Glucose Sugar Refining Co., Chicago, Ill. Dear Sir —Having been instructed by you to obtain a sample of your product known as “Flourine” and analyze same, we beg to report that we purchased a five-pound bag on March 22d from retail dealers in this city, not stating to them the object of our purchase. The sample was carefully analyzed by us, and contains : Moisture_11.81 % Upon drying the sample shows : Starch_ 98.83 % Albumenoids_ 0.34 % Ash_ 0.15 % Undetermined matter__ 0.68 % 100.00 % There was no free acid or other deleterious substance present. Under the microscope the material is shown to be Maize Starch, and the anal¬ ysis shows that it is of standard commercial purity. In answer to your inquiries, we would say, that it is ridiculous to expect in starch any mineral acids of any kind as the result of the LETTER FROM DIRECTOR C. S. PLUMB. 53 ordinary process of manufacture as employed in this country; and the above analysis compares favorably with the usual results in the analysis of commercial starch. Yours truly, THE LEDOUX CHEMICAL LABORATORY, A. R. LedouXy Pres STATION STAFF C. S. Plumb, B.S., Directc r.‘ PURDUE UNIVERSITY, W. C. Latta, M.S., Agriculturist. Tas. Troop, M.S., Horticulturist. AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION H. A. Huston, A.M., A.C., Chemist. J. C. Arthur, D.SC., Botanist. OF INDIANA. A. W. Bitting, D.V.M., Veterinarian. LaFayette, Ind., March 25, 1898. The Glucose Sugar Refining Co., Chicago, Ill. Gentlemen — The two-pound sample of powdered corn starch, which you sent to my address, was duly received. I do not think that it is necessary or desirable to make a chemical analysis of this material. It appears to me that it is mainly a question of starch. As I understand the situation, when an amount of starch exists in food beyond a certain point, it does not agree with some people as well as it does with others. In my own family, corn starch pudding is a great favorite of my own and I relish it greatly, while my wife has a positive aversion to it and cannot digest it at all. It seems that there is no question about the wholesomeness and desirability of this as a human food and its use must be very largely based upon its adaptability to general digestion. If you have any special recipes for the use of this flour either for mixing with wheat flour or for puddings, I would be glad to get them for special trial in my family. Very truly yours, C. S. PLUMB, Director. Dictated. 54 GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR. WHAT IS GLUCOSE OR GRAPE SUGAR ? BY PETER T. AUSTEN, Ph.D., F.C.S., Professor of Analytical and Applied Chemistry in Rutgers College, and the New Jersey State Scientific School, Consulting Chemical Expert. The term “Glucose” and “Grape Sugar” are but different names for the same thing, the former designating its solution in water and the latter its solid condition. Both are produced from starch, which, by a simple chemical process, is converted into sugar. The change is but a slight one, as the chemical elements of starch and of sugar are identical in kind, varying only, and that to a very small degree, in their proportions. The formula of starch is CgHj 0 O 5 , while that of glucose (or grape sugar) is C 6 H 12 0 6 . It has been found that starch can be converted into grape sugar by a simple process. It is called “Grape Sugar” because it is precisely the same as the sugar of the grape, as well as of all other sweet and wholesome fruits, and is the chief natural component of honey. Honey often runs as high as seventy per cent, of pure glucose, and the juice of the sugar-cane, sor¬ ghum, beet, and water-melon contains a considerable percentage of it. The starch intended for conversion may be derived from any source that is convenient or economical, whether it be from fruits, grains, roots, or plants. In this country, corn is the most available, being not only abundant, but exceedingly rich in starch of a most pure and excellent quality. The starch being given, which is itself a most useful and univer¬ sal product of nature, being a constituent of all vegetable growth, and forming a large proportion of the food that we eat, the next step is to convert it into the sugar to which is already so nearly allied.' This is done by simply submitting the starch, in liquid form, to the action of a minute percentage of dilute sulphur acid, which quickly pro¬ duces the required change. As soon as this is accomplished, the acid is completely neutralized and eliminated by the addition of a little chalk, which combines with it, forming the insoluble and harmless sulphate of lime, or gypsum, which GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) 55 in its turn is entirely removed, after settling, by drawing off the clear, supernatant saccharine liquid. This is then filtered and refined precisely as in the case of cane-sugar, so that the most searching chemical test can discover no trace of the acid or any harmful impurities. We then have, when properly evaporated, a pure, sweet, and colorless syrup called “ Glucose,” or by further evaporation, the concentrated, white, and solid substance called ‘‘Grape Sugar.” “ Glucose ” is from the Greek glukus , signifying sweet. The origin of the term “Grape Sugar” has already been given. These commercial titles have served to mystify the public, and have misled people, or, per¬ haps, permitted others to mislead them, as to the true character of these products. Were they simply called “ Corn Syrup ” and “ Corn Sugar,” their names would truly indicate just what they are, and the mystery would be dispelled. Glucose and grape sugar are no new things. In 1792, nearly one hun¬ dred years ago, the sugar of the grape was discovered in Germany, by two chemists, Lowitz and Proust, who advocated the cultivation of the grape for the purpose of obtaining this sugar for the home market. In 1811, or more than seventy years since, Kirchoff, an eminent Rus¬ sian chemist, made the discovery that starch could be easily converted into sugar, and that such sugar was, not merely similar to, but identically the same as the sugar of the grape. The vast importance of this great dis¬ covery was at once and universally acknowledged. Upon it was founded an industry that has flourished and grown in Europe with ever-increasing strength, for more than half a century, and is still extending. In 1880 the consumption of this article in France, Holland, Belgium and Ger¬ many, reached the enormous quantity of eight thousand tons per annum. In the United States its manufacture is of comparatively recent origin, but already the factories for its production employ thousands of people, and represent an investment of not far from twenty millions of dollars, consuming an immense quantity of our great staple, corn, and turning it into glucose (corn-syrup), of a quality that is not surpassed by any pro¬ duced in the world. But, as might have been expected, the introduction into America of this manufacture, so old in Europe, coming in contact, as it inevitably would, with established interests, created alarm and aroused opposition in some quarters. Some of those whose interests were threatened have unscruplously maligned and misrepresented glucose and grape sugar. They have pro¬ nounced them adulterants, and denounced them as poisons destructive to health, and have relied upon the lack of public information in regard to them to propagate an adverse opinion among the masses. They have used the press unsparingly. They have invoked Legislative aid, and have even besought the Congress of the United States to crush for them this 56 GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) great and growing business. But investigation furnished such over¬ whelming proof of the great value of this manufacture to the people and the country, that no official prohibitory action has been taken. It has been stated briefly and simply, and without the use of any technical terms, just what glucose is, and how it is prepared. As will be seen, there can be no poison in it, or anything in the least degree un¬ wholesome. It is true that the employment of acid is used as a bugbear by its antagonists to frighten credulous people; but, as has already been stated, no acid remains in it, not a particle, any more than there does in the soda water we drink, which is prepared from sulphuric acid and carbon¬ ate of lime. It is so easy to remove the acid, as every chemist knows, that any failure to do so would be the result of slovenly manufacture, which would leave upon the manufacturer’s hands an unmerchantable article. The merits of glucose may be briefly summed up as follows: It is one of the most wholesome sugars, far purer in every way than many kinds of molasses, which is really a side-product, or residue, in the manufacture of cane sugar. Molasses is the liquid from which no more cane sugar can be crystallized, and which contains frequently a large amount of the chemicals added during the manufacture. A large percentage of its saccharine substance is glucose, and, in fact, in many cases, it could be called an impure glucose. Secondly: Glucose is the most natural sugar consumed by man, and the evidence of this is that (1) the juices of all sweet fruits contain it, e. g., the grape contains fifteen per cent, of it; and (2) that cane-sugar is largely converted into glucose in the system by the secretions of the mouth and the liver before it can be assimilated into the system. Thirdly: Glucose is entirely absorbed into the system, and no part passes from it unchanged. Fourthly: The testimony of the countries where it has been used for years is in favor of its healthfulness, harmless¬ ness, and purity; and in the nation of the most advanced chemical dis¬ covery it has received the most ample protection and unqualified endorse¬ ment. I have recently examined samples of pure crystallized grape sugar made from starch which were as pure and free from impurities as crystallized cane-sugar, and which demonstrate to what a state of perfec¬ tion the manufacture of this article has been brought. If glucose which is impure or imperfectly made is put upon the market, it can only be the result of careless or ignorant manufacture, and my remarks do not apply to it, any more than a statement of the healthfulness of pure cane-sugar would apply to pure, unrefined cane sugars. When grape-sugar and glucose were only produced in small quantities in this country, or were imported at great cost from foreign parts, nobody ever dreamed that either of them was injurious to human health; or that they possessed any deleterious quality whatever, but when they assumed an importance that brought them into direct competition with GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) 57 cane-sugar and malt, the cry of poison was heard. The result of the attacks and misrepresentations led to a great hue and cry in the newspapers in regard to the use of glucose in beer. In Ger¬ many and England, beer and ale are the most popular beverages, and in Germany its manufacture is deemed of sufficient importance to have it regulated by the most stringent laws. Beer is not regarded by the peo¬ ple of Germany as a luxury, but as a necessity, and an article of whole¬ some food. The Germans are among the first chemists in the world, and yet using, as Germany does, nearly a thousand tons of glucose a week, most of it being used in the manufacture of beer, not one line is to be found in German law prohibiting its use; though the Germans have used it more than any other nation for nearly seventy years. In regard to its wholesomeness in beer, “Cooley’s Encyclopedia,” p. 1585, speaking of glucose, says: “In the brewing of beer, and pale and sparkling ales, grape sugar is more esteemed than cane-sugar and malt, and it is said to yield a more sound and wholesome liquor. One free from the acidity, impurity, and treacly sweetness frequently found in beer brewed from raw and inferior sugars.” The Journal of the English Patent Office, in the special department of sugars, 1871, says, in speaking of glucose: “Grape sugar, although found in a great number of substances, es¬ pecially fruits, is not known to exist in any one of them in such quantity as to render its manufacture from fruits of any value; but chemistry has stepped in and supplied this deficiency, and the production of grape sugar or glucose, by acting upon starch or such like substances with a dilute acid and heat, has now become a manufacture of some considerable importance, especially on the Continent, and this has arisen partly from the fact that this article can be brought into this market (as nearly as maybe) colorless and without any flavor but its sweet taste, and these properties make it highly valuable for confectionery purposes, and like¬ wise from the important fact that malt liquors to which a portion of cane- sugar has been added do not keep so well as those to which a like por¬ tion of grape or glucose sugar has been added; consequently, it has now come into considerable favor with brewers who are in the habit of using sugar along with malt in the brewing of their beers. It has found con¬ siderable favor with a large number of brewers in England, who employ a portion of it along with the malt, and by so doing are said to obtain from this mixture a malt liquor of a more permanent character than when brewed with malt alone, or a mixture of malt and any cane-sugar, however pure the cane-sugar may have been.” The brewing of beer, like many other branches of manufacture, is but little understood by the public. One of the points that the brewer wishes to accomplish is to introduce a small amount of alcohol into the beer. 58 GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) This is done by fermentation. Barley is allowed to germinate, or sprout, and in so doing there is formed in it a peculiar substance called “diastase,” which converts the starch of the grain into glucose and sugars of a simi¬ lar nature. When this has taken place, and sufficient starch has been converted into sugar, the barley is heated, to prevent the germinating seed from assimilating the sugar which has been formed, and then ex¬ tracted with water. The solution thus obtained, or the “wort,” as it is called, is then fermented with yeast, which converts the glucose and other sugars into alcohol. Very often the brewer finds it more conven¬ ient, instead of making a small amount of sugar from the barley by this roundabout process, to add directly some pure glucose and ferment it. As the glucose made from corn-starch by the process already de¬ scribed ferments as easily and satisfactorily as the sugar made with diastase, and has the advantage of being obtainable at any time, and more easily managed in hot weather, it is easy to see how valuable it must be to the brewer. On what grounds objections can be raised to its use, it is difficult to see. Much hue and cry have been made lately about the presence of glu¬ cose in candy. And yet what is there against its use here? All that is demanded of confectionery is that it should be wholesome and satisfac¬ tory to the taste. I am not aware that when I buy candy, I am demand¬ ing cane-sugar, especially when I know that many of the articles, even if made from pure cane-sugar, must consist of substances very different from it, owing to the changes which that substance suffers in the course of the manufacture of candy. The mere boiling with the addition of a small amount of fruit-acids is sufficient to convert cane-sugar into glucose and allied sugars. What is, then, the objection to glucose in confec¬ tionery? I have seen exhibitions of samples of candy labeled as con¬ taining glucose. It would be more interesting to exhibit candies that do not contain glucose ; for, with perhaps the exception of rock-candy, which is pure cane-sugar, it would be difficult to find many candies that do not contain more or less glucose either made from cane-sugar or starch. Here, again, these somewhat premature polemists stumble over an awk¬ ward matter. How will they dispose of raisins , which contain nearly thirty per cent, of grape sugar, and which are so often found in confec¬ tions and cake? Would they abolish the use of maple sugar and honey because they consist mainly of glucose? Still more troublesome does the matter become when preserved fruits are mentioned. The well-known fact that cane-sugar breaks into glucose and allied sugars when its water solution is boiled with a small amount of an acid, is a difficult matter to dispose of. The slight amount of acid which is contained in fruit converts the sugar with which they are boiled into glucose and kindred sugars. Are these, then, also to be condemned because they contain glucose? GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued .) 59 There is not the slightest foundation for the statement that grape sugar is unhealthy; on the contrary, it is one of the healthiest substances known, and has always been, and will always be, one of the chief articles of human food. Every time we eat ripe fruit, we eat glucose, precisely the same as made from starch, except that one is made from starch by nature, and the other by human agency. Every time that we eat food containing starch, as potatoes, for instance, the digestive organs make grape sugar out of it. Even in the mouth the change begins. Chew for a few minutes the end of a starched pocket-handkerchief, and it will soon begin to taste sweet, the ferment of the saliva turning the starch into glucose. Surely no one could say that glucose can have an unwholesome effect on us, when it exists in our most favorite articles of food, and in those in which it does not exist in its pure state, the digestive organs produce it. We see, therefore, that not only is glucose a perfectly harm¬ less article of food, but it is perhaps the most natural food that exists. It is a perfectly wholesome article of food, for, as has been stated, the grape sugar from starch is the same as that existing in nature, in fruit, and is an established article of food. Professor Chandler, President of the New York Board of Health, writes of syrups in Johnson’s Encyclo¬ pedia: “One or two establishments prepare a syrup made by combining sugar-house molasses with glucose prepared from Indian Corn, which is entirely harmless .” Concerning glucose, Professor Wayne, M. D., of Cincinnati, writes as follows: “ Glucose has of late been the subject of several communications from Washington, commenting upon the article as one of serious danger to the health of the people, and, besides, a substance mainly or to a great extent used with fraudulent intent. The above are very grave charges to make against a substance so harmless as glucose, and emanating from Wash¬ ington, and published in the papers of the land, are well calculated to in¬ jure and cripple an industry that has grown to be a very large one. “Glucose is simply starch, changed by chemical agency into a variety of sugar ; a change which, to digest in the stomach, it must undergo. Through chemical agency this change is made by the chemist outside of the stomach, and the starchy matter converted, so to speak, into a new, palatable, nutritious food, comparable to that of ordinary cane-sugar, and as harmless. The charges made above are against an article that has been so long in use in France and Germany, nations famous for the strict scrutiny with which they examine and test all articles sold for food, that they have not discovered the unhealthy character of it and forbidden its sale. But I am not aware of any such restraint upon the sale of it either in France or Germany. Nor have I read of any acute or chronic ailment resulting from its use in this country. 60 GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) In regard to the use of it as an adulterant of cane-sugar and syrup, that is no reason why the manufacture should be crippled by special taxation, for the sugar so mixed is sold at a price, and the buyer is aware of the fact, and if ignorant people are deceived by it, a tax on adulteration of food should be the remedy. The charge also is made that it is used largely in the manufacture of imitation wines. So is cane-sugar; and sugar, for the same reason, should be placed in the same category. It is charged that it contains a large per cent, of sulphur acid, lime, and salts of tin—the latter used as a bleaching agent, and that it is poison¬ ous in consequence of containing these. I find that it contains no free sulphuric acid. The small amount of ash, which it yields, consists of sulphate of lime, magnesia, and oxide of iron in not much larger quan¬ tity than in many of the spring waters we use and in the food we eat, and is hence not worthy of attention. Such being the character of glucose, a substance that we have par¬ taken of all our lives in the fruits, jellies, pies and tarts, to say nothing of the starchy food which we eat, and which is changed to glucose during digestion, it cannot be dangerous or unhealthy.” I can substantiate Professor Wayne’s remarks. I have also examined samples of glucose, and have found them to be perfectly free from sul¬ phuric acid and any harmful impurities. The amount of ash yielded by the glucose is so small that a considerable quantity has to be burned to get enough to examine. The ingredients of the ash are the same as found in corn, and plants in general, being minute amounts of gypsum, or sul¬ phate of lime, magnesia, oxide of iron, phosphates, potash, and soda. All of these are necessary constituents of food. The manufacture of glucose is worthy of all the protection and all the encouragement that this nation can possibly give it. It is one of the great productive industries of the land. The consumption of sugar in the United States in 1879 was, in round numbers, 743,000 tons. Of this sum, 631,000 tons were imported from foreign ports. The sugar from corn raised on our own soil, no doubt, materially affects the foreign importation; but it adds to one of the most productive and flourishing industries which we now have in the United States. To show how the American manufacture of glucose and grape sugar has affected the foreign importation, in 1879 there were imported into the United States nearly nineteen millions of pounds. In 1880 it had fallen off nearly three millions of pounds, while the exportation of glucose and grape sugar from the United States, which in 1879 amounted to 2,507,572 pounds, in 1880 had increased to the enormous sum of almost thirteen millions of pounds, divided as follows : GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued.) 61 Exports of Grape Sugar and Glucose for Years 1879 and 1880. COUNTRY. 1879. 1880. No. of Pounds. Value. No. of Pounds. Value. To Australia.. 189,201 $7,534 1,084,880 469 11,250,759 566 57,940 1,804 263,183 $39,066 15 377,440 25 1,950 90 9,722 To China . To England .. 2,277,486 73,725 To France.. To Germany. To Italy_ To Scotland.. 40,885 1,614 Total exports_ 2,507,572 $82,873 12,659,601 $428,308 And the exports of 1881 were double those of the preceding year. In conclusion, the manufacture of glucose adds largely to the national wealth. It enhances the value of the farmer’s staple crop at his own door. It gives employment to thousands of people. It distributes mil¬ lions of capital in the purchase of corn, machinery, coal, and other sup¬ plies; besides employing thousands of cars on all our railroads, and add ing largely to our foreign exports. If this industry is encouraged, such vast improvements have been made within the past few months as to warrant the belief that the day is not far distant when corn will be the chief source of supply to the world of not only a cheap but most whole¬ some sugar. The corn crop of the United States in 1880 exceeded seventeen hun¬ dred millions of bushels, of an aggregate value of nearly one thousand millions of dollars. So abundant was the crop that it became a very im¬ portant question to the nation how it could be utilized and turned to the most profitable account. In its natural condition it would scarcely pay, in some districts, to gather the crop; but if it could be converted into an article of prime necessity and world-wide demand, it promised to make corn one of the most profitable as well as one of the most abundant crops that could be raised in the United States, thus making the great corn¬ fields of Illinois and Iowa the sugar plantations of the world. PETER T. AUSTEN. In a recent report on Glucose, or Starch Syrup, Dr. W. H. Pitt, Buf¬ falo, N. Y., says : “ Physiologically considered, glucose, pure and uncon¬ taminated with other compounds, is certainly a good and wholesome food .”—From The Brewers' Journal. Prof. Sharpies, Boston, Mass., says : “ I know no reason why a well- made starch syrup should not be as healthy an article of food as any cane syrup .”—From The Chicago Bulleti?i. 62 GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR—( Continued .) Prof. Harvey W. Wiley, of Purdue Institute, Ind., says: “There is no reason to believe that glucose or grape sugar, properly manufactured, is any less wholesome than cane or maple syrup /'—From Popular Science Mo?ithly. Office of Iowa City Board of Health, Iowa City, Iowa, March 3, 1882. T. C. Carson, Esq., Iowa City, Iowa. Dear Sir —In answer to your question if I deemed “Glucose” as an article of diet injurious in any way to the animal economy, I answer, without hesitation, No ! As an article of diet, it enters more largely into general use than is supposed; and I do not believe that it enters as a factor into any disease, directly or indirectly, as the cause of the same. ENOS F. CLAPP, M. D. Professor of Anatomy , Medical Dept., S. U. I. [From the Chicago Tribune, Sunday, March 20,1881.] GLUCOSE. Its Relation to Health and Adulteration. At a meeting of the Philosophical Society last night at the Palmer House, Prof. W. S. Haines, of Rush Medical College, read a deeply in¬ teresting paper on that much-talked-of subject, “ Glucose.” He said that the apparently popular idea that this article was deleterious and even poisonous was a pure fallacy, just as it was a fallacy to believe that hard water was more nutritious than soft, or that beef tea, as ordinarily made, was strengthening to the body. Glucose was made principally from corn, or, rather, from the starch to be found in corn. It was made by extracting the starch and then submitting that starch to the action of sulphuric acid. After the chemical action had taken place, the starch being converted into glucose, the acid was neutralized by adding chalk or marble dust to the general compound, which would then be composed of glucose and sulphate of lime, the latter a perfectly harmless article. But, harmless though the sulphate of lime was, the glucose would not mix with it, but remained at the top, and could be drawn off. As to the glucose itself, it was composed of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon—just what cane sugar was composed of—though in slightly dif¬ ferent quantities. The difference between cane sugar and glucose, so far as the body was concerned, was this : Glucose, when eaten, went directly into circulation throughout the body, giving it flesh and strength; but cane sugar, when eaten, had first to be converted into glucose before it could circulate. In other words, the body demanded glucose, and the chemical acids of the stomach made glucose in large quantities from bread, fruits, and almost every variety of food. GLUCOSE AND GRAPE SUGAR —{Continued.) 63 But it is claimed by the alarmists that quantities of the sulphate of lime were to be found in glucose. Sulphate of lime is perfectly harmless, and could be found in large quantities in all waters used in the manu¬ facture of the great English ales and beers. Any one who drinks a glass of Bass’s or Allsop’s ale takes into his system a larger quantity of sulphate of lime than can be found in the same quantity of glucose syrup. Again, it has been claimed that sulphuric acid in a free state has been found in glucose. Chemists who claimed this did not know their business. In the first place, the presence of the free acid would injure the apparatus of the manufacturer to a frightful extent, and would color the glucose and greatly deteriorate from its commercial value. Therefore, selfish mo¬ tives alone induced the manufacturer to use about twice as much marble- dust to neutralize the acid as was really necessary. The conclusion was, then, that glucose was very valuable as a nutritious article of food, and the time would come, or should come, when it would be used for ordi¬ nary purposes instead of sugar. It would cost only three or four, or perhaps two cents a pound, and was fully half as sweet as pure cane sugar. \