Morning journal and courier., 1882-07-24
ENew York Times. July p, 1882. Dr. Cutters. Analyses.
o the Editor of the New York Times

To the Editor of the New York Times:
 In minor editorial which appeared in your columns several weeks since you quote and accept with approval the published state ments of Dr. Ephraim Cutter as to the value of certain Hours and prepared foods, the rela- tive proportions of gluten and starch ln which he claims to have accurately deter mined by the use of the microscope. Assert ing the infallibility of this instrument In his hands he assumes to denounce some Hours as containing little or no gluten, and to extol others as very rich in that albuminoid The IInaes characterizes his statements as revela- tions of fraud and pretense on the part of manufacturers of foods, and declares that if they ''shall serve to protect mothers from further betrayal eud to rescue infant life from quack articles of nutriment, his work, though giving tremendous shock to our sensibilities and to our faith in medical cer- tifcates, will not have been done in vain"
 After having given prolonged attention to the microscopic and chemical investigation of several of the foods favorably and unfavor- ably mentioned by Dr. Cutter, I am justified in saying that the ''work'' of which you speak is without value, either for the protec- tion of mothers. the rescue of infant life, or as 8 useful starting point for further researches.
 That your readers may be able to judge as to what reliance should be placed upon Dr. Cutters microscopy, beg to be allowed to append some notes of my laboratory work upon some of the foods mentioned by him.
 Fine granulated wheat, said by Dr. Cutter to ''contain no -gluten": Analysis shows 1t to contain 13. 62 per cent: of albuminoids, chiefly gluten. Franklin flour: Highly ex- tolled by Dr. Gutter. "A blessing to man. kind" It contains 9.55 per cent. of albu- minoids, chiefly gluten, together with very large proportion of cellulose or finely ground bran. It is greatly lacking in nutritive ele ments. Cold blast flour: Said by Dr. Cut ter to contain no gluten. It contains 16 "A per cent. of albuminoids, chiefly gluten, and is very rich in nutritiye elements.
 Arlington wheat meal (manufactured by Cutters brother in law), said by Dr. Cutter to be ''rich in gluten and all the elements of entire wheat'': I have found no wheat flour so poor in albuminoids as this. One sample contained 779 per cent. another O9 per cent. Gluten four In this, as in most other cases, the name of the manufacturer is given by Dr. Gutter. The honse Is highly respectable one and in reputation and promi hence probably stands at the head of the man. ufacturers of cereal foods. In this instance the product is unsparingly denounced: Ills microscope finds mo gluten cells" He de- clares that Git cannot be distinguished from common flour" I have analysed many samples, procured procured .soaa at different sa5 find it to contain not less than 23.18 per cent. of albuminoids, chiefly gluten. 1t proves to be 20 per cent. richer than the purest glutens manufactured in Europe It IS readily distinguished from common flour by it's color and all other physical character istics. Barley four (made by the same house) said by Dr. Gutter to ''contain no gluten'': It proves to be unusually rich in albuminoids, containing 13 83 per cent. there of. Patapsco flour, said by Dr. Gutter to "contain no gluten": It contains S.O4 per cent. of albuminoids, chiefly gluten. I will not trespass upon your space for the purpose of further showing the wide difference be- tween the statements of Dr. Cutter and the actual facts. Suffice it to say that chemical analysis of 8 large number of the prepared foods which he claims to have analysed" with the microscope-whatever that may mean-invariably prove the fal- lacy of h1s conclusions While assert ing that the value of food is to be determined by it's richness in nitrogenoids, he manages in every instance, so far as I have examined, to extol the poorest and denounce the best To the extent that his statements have been believed he has done great wrong to reputa- ble business men. His wild and wholly un- tenable assertions are unworthy of one lay ing claim to scientific knowledge, and serve to place him in the ranks of those pseudo-scien lists whose sensational utterances have brought upon them the well deserved repro bation of thoughtful men. '' ALBERT H. LEEDS, Ph. D., Professor of Chemistry i'll the Stevens 1nsti
 tute of Technology and Public Analyst of
 the State of New Jersey