Daily Los Angeles herald., 1881-01-23

Plaintiffs Counsel Offers said can Of Dpol.
ey's Baking Powder in evidence.
Z. Now, sir, have you made any expert
ment in the bread made from Baking Pow
der, to see whether there was any soluble
alumins in the bread itself?
A. have; took portion OF this pow
der and mixed.with -four In the directed
proportions, and baked . small loaf with
II; then soaked this loaf-the interior
part OF it-in cold water, and made an ex-
tract in which readily detected, by the
usual tests. alum-that Is alumina in a So
luble condition.
Q. Docs any Baking Powder in which
any alumina salts enter, contain alumina,
in your opinion, which can be absorbed in
the process Of digestion-are not such OBJ
jectionable
a. Very decidedly Objectionable. in my
opinion.
q. Why do you say-from what system
OF reasoning do you make it 0ut-that alum
is injurious, alumina IL injurious
A. Because the Injurious effects of alum
acts on the organs, are the same; this hy-
drate OF alumina meets in the stomach the
gastric juices, and reacts with them the
Same as alum would; it forms, in fact, Q
kind OF alum in the stomach with those
acids, and whatever alum would do, it
would do.
Dn. SAMUEL W. JOHNSON, Professor Of
Chemistry in the Scientific School. Yale
College, being duly sworn, testified as
follows:
Q. You have had much to do in the ex-
animation Of substances that enter into
food. and the adulteration of food?
A. More or less; yes, sir.
q: After tho use Of alum with soda, in
baking powder in your opinion, is there
any injurious substances left2
substance left.
Q. What, sir, two years ago, was the pre-
vailing opinion among scientific men, as
to the effect Of the use Of alum in baking
powders?
A. A. far as my acquaintance with scien-
tific men is concerned, my personal opin-
ion is derived from my investigation and
from reading; should think the opinion
was that alum, or any compound Of alumni
ma, would be decidedly injurious.
2. Do understand you to say that any
baking powder in which there are alumni
ous salts, or any resultant from alum
which could be absorbed in digestion, is
objectionable and injuriousp
A. Extremely so.
and testified as follows:
@. Would you be good enough to state
your profession?
A. I am physician, sir. and Professor
Of Physiology.
Q. You also were, and have been for
sometime, Sanitary Superintendent in
Brooklyn-is not that SO?
A. have, sir.
Q. Now. sir. will ask you your opin-
ion, from this experience, whether the use
Of alum with soda, in baking powder, ia
injurious or not, in its physiological ef-
fecs2
A. I consider it to be dangerous.
@. You examined this question for the
Board Of Health in Brooklyn, some years
ago, did you not =?
a; 4, Two J., years. years ago, sir. in December.
@. What was the result Of your investi-
CATION as to the use Of alum in Baking
powder?
A. The result of my investigation at that
time, was this: that the changes which
took place between the time that alum
baking powder was put in the bread, and
the time the bread was eaten, the chemical
change, were so little understood by chem
lists, that as physician and Psychologist,
l considered it dangerous experiment.
DR.. Mott, the Government chem.
ist, in his review Of the subject In
the Scientific american, makes
special mention of having analy-
zed the Royal Baking Powder, and
found 1t composed Of pure and
wh0lesome.materials. He also ad.
vises the public to avoid purchase.
ing baking powders as sold loose or
in bulk. as lie found by analysis of
many samples that the worst adul-
terations are practiced In this
form. The label and trade mark
of a well known and responsible
manufacturer, he adds, is the best
protection the public can have.