The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-03-18
THE LARD INQUIRY.

Professor Wiley Gives the Committee the Re
suit of Number of Analyses.
WASHINGTON, March 1.-THE Senate COM
Knittee agriculture resumed the lard hearing
to-day. Professor Wiley. chemist of the Depart
ment Of Agriculture, appeared and gave the
committee the result of his microscopic exami-
nations of the various samples of lard submitted
TO him. Taking up the samples of lard manufact-
ured by Armour & Co.. he stated that the lard
branded pure refined family lard contained cot
ton-seed oil and stearre; that branded kettle re-
fined lard not aduIterated; ''choice refined
family lard" contained cotton-seed oil and stsar-
ine. A sample of choice family lard, purchased
In St. Louis, contained cotton-seed OIL but
some crystals of stearine we're apparent.
sample of the same brand purchased in New
Orleans gave distinct traces or cotton
seed oil. A brand of superior compound
lard" contained cotton-seed oil. All the samples
of lard manufactured by Fairbanks d Co. con-
tanned cottou-seed oil and beef stearIne. except
that branded prime refined leaf lard" which
contained stearIne. The witness stated that
he had reason to believe that any of the in
gradients contained In the samples were 1nJurl-
tc health. Continuing his testimony as to
lard samples. he took up those manufactured by
Squire & Co. and stated that they contained
neither cotton-seed oil nor stearine.
Csssard g Sons "best refined lard" contained
neither cotton-seed oil nor stearine. but reacted
under chemical tests unlike pure lard. He did
not know what ingredients II contained. as his
analysis had been carried on merely with view
10 discover whether cotton seed oil and stearlue
were used, and the examinations were still in
complete. A sample of lard manufactured by
WHITAKER & Son. branded "pure, unaduiter-
ated, honest refined lard" contained no cotton
seed oil, while sample manufactured By the
same firm, branded "adulterated refined Hlard,"
contained cotton-seed oil At the laboratory be
had rendered the head, entrails and intestnes
of the hog. and found them to make a pure lard.
Mr.. Fox inquired whether the lard SO rendered
could be diatln guished from pure lard.
The witness replied that they we're just alike
Perhaps there was q difference of color, but not
sufficient to base any data upon. Leaf lard had
little less color, but scarcely enough to be dis
fingushable He had found nearly all the lards
examined to be free OF water. One sample
however, manufactured by Fowler 81 Bros, of
Chicago. branded ''choce family lard. contained
62I per cent. of water. Another sample of
Workman e. Co. e lard contained II. 40 per cent
of water. 1t was branded anchor lard"
The chairman suggested that the brand was
very suitable one.
The witness stated that sample of 'choice
family lard" manufactured by c. t. Tietjen, of
New York, contained 80. per cent Of water.
The witness said he did not think there
any way of distinguishing dead-nog grease from
pure lard. The way the hog died had no effect
upon the lard.
Senator Blair-These lards made from the
intestines good as anyq
Professor Wiley-I had just as soon eat COM
pound lard as pure lard.
Senator Blair--Do you eat dead hog lard2
Professor Wiley-I presume / do. 1t is inst
rs good as any other. would lief eat it.
The chairman said it is charged that manu-
facturers of lard take dead hogs and throw them
10, entrails, and hair and heads, and white
nocuousl
Professor Wiley-I think not. There is moth
ing deieterious In decomposng animals In
deed, in some cases they are more innocuous.