Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-02-09
PURE LARD.
CONGRESSIONAL INTERROGATION AS TO
ITS COMPOUNDS.
Evidence Before the Senate Committee on
Agriculture-IntereSt Statements
by Manufacturers and Experts.
rBr Telegraph TO the pi.ps,eh.l

quiry with regard to lard and It's com
pound begun two weeks ago by the Sen
/ ate Committee on Agriculture. before
which is pending bill to require lard
compounds TO be stamped and their
manufacturers to be licensed. was con-
tinued to-day, and interested parties to
/ the number of twenty-five or thirty,
comprising manufacturers, attorneys,
and experts, were present.
Mr.. Hill OF Boston, an employee OF
/ Squire & Co.. who are the proponents OF
the pending bill, produced samples OF
various compounds in tin pals, which be
/ had purchased in open market and
caused 10 be chemically examined. lie
/ testified as to the compound of each spe-
cimen, but the same matters were more
| fully covered by the next witness, FRO
+ fcssOr Sharpless Of FosiOn, who made
/ the examination. The sample bearing
/ the stamp of ArmourG Co., Pure, Re-
/ fined Family Lard, was found TO contain
about co per cent. of hogs lard, with ~
per cent each Of cOttOn-seed oil and beef
| fat. The sample OF Farbanks& Co., Chr
cago, Prime. Refined Family Lard.
was made of the same elements, but had
greater proportion Of beef fat and
cotton-seed oil The sample bearing
/ stamps Of Halstead d Co., "Fure tami-
/ w Lard" and another from the same
firm stamped in Spanish "Pure Lard
Registered, &C., contained, 50 far as the
tests had been carried, not a particle of
/ hogs lard. but were made entirely OF
beet fat and cotton-seed oil. Dir. Hill,
who produced these samples, said he
had never heard Of the firm OF Halstead
& Co. before, but he had purchased
samples in a respectable neighborhood
III New York.
Squres attorney produced package
Of Pure Leaf Lard put up by Squire
d Co. and purchased in open market by
Professor Sharpless, which the latter
testified was entirely hog product and
contained no trace Of anything else. He
was questioned at length about the me-
thods of the test and the comparative
healthiulness of hogs lard, beef fats,
and cotton-seed oil With regard to
/ cotton-seed oil, he said its healthfulness
rs an article of diet was still lnooted
question; it was not matter Tor
chemists, but for medical men to decide.
Messrs Hill and Shafpless. being cross
examined, testified that the bulk OF
Squire's product was quality Of lard IN
ferior to that produced, but bore the
stamp Pure Lard in contradistnctlon
to - Pure Leaf Lard 1T was entirely
hog product, derived, however, from the
trimmings Of the hog including pOr-
/ ton of the leaf.
Mr.. Fairbanks. of Fairbanks Il Co.,
| Chicago, took the witness-stand and
| described to the committee the history OF
modern lard product. Twenty-Five years
| ago lard oil was pressed from hog pro-
duct. leaving stearine, hard waXy, sub
/ stance, for whichthere was little demand.
Then firm III New York conceived the
idea of mixing this stearine with ordinary
| lard, and formed acompOund which gave
better satisfaction, especially IN warm
countries, than pure lard. Then packing
houses in making lard got to dumping
into the pans everything heads, feet,
| intcstines, etc.-and made a product
which was offensive, having, as the wit
ness said, ga hoggy taste" The re-
fuers cast about for something to neu-
tralize this, and found it III cotton-seed
ell. Out Of hundred tlerces Of pack
ers lard the refiners got about one tierce
of mud and filth "as black as your
coat" To the product thus refined aud
purified they now added - per cent. Of
cotton seed bland 10 percent. OF stearinc,
which compound comprises seven eighths
/ of the lard now on the market. Once
or twice, when the compound ran short,
pure lard had been supplied to customers
| and the witness was overwhelmed at
once with complaints that consumers
were dissatisfied. The trouble with
Squire, Fairbanks said, arose from the
fact that his (witnesss) firm had secured
large part Of Squres trade, especially
in New England, and that the gentleman
had a9itated the passage OF the bill be-
cause small dealers would not take out
license to sell the compound, rs required
| bv the bill. and as no license would be
required to sell pure hog-fat lard they
would resume the purchase of lard manu-
featured by Squire. The demand for
legislation did not come from the
people The constantly increasing
rates of lard made by witnesses firm
proved that the public wanted their
lard. If his lard should be adulterated
with injurious substances the effect would
dnickly be communicated TO him in
reduced sales. He asserted the superior
healthfulness of the compound lard as
compared with the pure hOg-fat lard,
and when asked why he did not label it
as compound lard he then said that the
American people were not educated up TO
theuse of oils yet. He objected to being
compelled to change the brand OF ere
fined Lard. " because that label was part
of his stock in trade the result of TWEEN
ty-fve years attention to business.
Senator George: And especially in
obedience to the condemnatory law"
Witness assented to this He had pro-
posed to send statement to dealers
stating what the components Of the pro-
duet were, but his partner had natural
dislike to doing anything that might dis
turb the even course III which things
were running.
The cross examination was conducted
especially with view to showing that
witnesses objections to the passage Of the
law arose from the fact that it would re-
quire him to let the public know the ma
ture of his product, but he in general re-
iterated his statements that the article
was healthy that large trade had been
built up upon that particular name, and
that the public, after using his lard,
could tell whether it was good or not
without any legislation stigmatizing it as
a product which the United States Con-
gress had thought it necessary to guard
the people against.
The hearing is to be continued to-
morrow.
CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA.
A brilliant wedding Residence