The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-03-14

and We're killed under the supervision
of the city inspectors
DR.. Dyson said that cattle condemned
at the ante mortem examination in the
yards for various causes, if they passed
the post mortem inspection, might be
brought into the packing house and
used. He had never seen chemicals
of any kind used except borax and
things of that sort around the hog
houses. He said that case of lumpy
Jaw does not necessarily condemn the
meat unless the disease is generalized.
DR.. Charles E. Mcneil, bureau in
spector at the beef and sheep house of
Nelson Morris &, Co., was the next wit
ness. He was not aware of any chem
icals having been used in that estab-
lishment, and had no reason to believe
or suspect that they were so used.
Charles H. Emery, superintendent of
the Libby, Mcneil & Libby packing
house, testified next.
Our business is principally can
ming" he said. We do not do any
slaughtering directly, but animals are
killed for us by Swift & Co. No chem
icals are used or relied upon by us to
preserve canned beef. A very small
quantity of salt is used. In a two
pound can we use one-half ounce of
salt in solution
James s. Morrow, assistant superin-
tendent at Libby, Mcneil & Libby. cor
roborated the testimony of the pre-
vious witness as to the process of can
ming roast beef. He said there was
scarcely any difference between grades
of roast beef, and that the distinction
was made mostly. he supposed, to
compete with others in the business.
There was very little difference as to
quality. He did not know whether
there was any difference in the price
to the government. He said that about
so per cent. of COWS were used in can
ming.
The first witness at the afternoon
session was Arthur Meeker, manager
of Armour & Co.'S packing house who
had previously been questioned at
Washington. He said the accumulation
of canned goods was held in Chicago,
hut the firm had also a large stock in
Europe They had on hand at the out
break if the Spanish war 100000 pounds
of canned roast beef in Chicago and
100000 pounds in New York. They sold
1000, 900 pounds to the government, and
also 250,000 pounds of corned beef.
The witness stated that no chemicals
We're used to preserve the beef either
in transit or in storage in an agency.
The witness stated that two ounces of
jelly We're put into two-pound can of
roast beef, but no salt The jelly gave
an attractive appearance to the meat
and added to the nourishment. About
one and one-half per cent of the nour
ishment came out in the first boiling
process-one and one-half per cent Of
soluble albumen. An extract of beef
was made out of it. No date was put on
the label on the roast beef cans, the
contents being good Meat thus pre-
served six, eight and nine years was
just as good as if put up last summer
The French government required date
on the can. The same kind of mea was
used in the cans furnished the United
States government
How do you account for this dis
satisfaction that lis alleged on the part
of the soldiers on the use of canned
| roast beef?"
Il think there were several reasons
the heat which caused the fat and jelly
to melt, and instead of a nice attrac-
tive looking piece of meat coming out
| of the can. the meat would separate
come apart--in pieces There was no
salt in it, no pepper, no condiments and
in many cases no condiments were
used
In reply to General Gillespie, the
| witness stated that Powell was a meat
dealer. he understood. in New York
| city. He had no connection whatever
with Armour & Co. He visited the
New York office and said that he had
a process for preserving refrigerated
beef for a period without ice. 1t was
quite proposition to handle beef in
the warm country, and the New York
office sent Mr.. Powell to Florida to eX-
pertinent. The experiment was not sat
isfactory to the government and that
was the end Of it.
S. S. Conway. general superintendent
of Armour & Co, and II. T. Walton,
superintendent of the canned meat de-
partment of Armour & Co. gave in de-
tail description of the process of can
ming and the method of detecting swell
lers and faulty cans.
The last witness of the day was w.
E Pierce. in charge Of the slaughter
ing. cooling and loading of cattle at
| Armour & Co.'S. He was asked if any
discussion or dispute had ever arisen
| between the firm and the government
| inspectors with reference to the pro-
priety of condemnation.
Yes, sometimes; but very seldom
IF prime steer Is condemned, what
is the loss to Armour & Coz
Forty dollars or more
Has any matter ever been removed
! from the tanks during your connection
with the establishment"
| Only after it had been thoroughly
Gisintegrated,
| Have you ever had any reason to
suspect any tampering or foul play
with respect to condemned meat?"
mo"
| "Are any chemical salts or acids used
| in connection with preservation?
mo, sir: cold alone is relied upon
Cd