The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1899-02-02
RECEIVED BY ALDERMEN TODAY
Has Not Administered His Office According
10 Law, The Committee Says.
PRorEcTIONFROM AOuLTERATED MILK
cEilsns Mare MOI Been Suitable Safeguards BY The
Inspector. According 10 The fIndings---Mr.
Perkins and Ms Cootoachss.

The report OF the special committee
10 Investigate the milk department
made it's report 10 the board VI alder
men this afternoon. IL is the finding OF
khe committee upon careful examina-
Ehon and consideration of the whole
matter that Mr. George T.. Perkins, in
eoector Of milk has neither admins
tered hts office according To law nor In
q manner calculated 20 afford citizens
suitable protection against adulterated
milk.
The report states that ION Dec. 15th
9S9S. John w. Emery, then recently
employed in the office OF the inspector
Uf milk. as a collector of samples. ad-
dressed a communication, To the may
or and board of aldermen. containing
serious charges regarding the admin
sstratton of the milk inspectors Office
by Mr.. George r. Perkins. the inspect
or. On Dec 10Th 1898, Mr. Perkins sent
letter To the chairman OF the commit
tee on milk demanding an immediate
invest igation, whereupon the whole
Z matter was referred To your commit
tee.
Your committee at once determined
that a thorough investigation was inn
perativ,e. and after requiring Mr.. fhn-
cry TO make his charges more specific,
~ the end that Mr.. Perkins might be
fully and fairly advised IA 20 the par
ficular acts or omissions Of which he
was accused and thus afforded every
reasonable facility for making good his
defence, proceeded with the investigu-
rion.
THE charges preferred. which ap-
pear more I'm detail i'm the accompany
ing papers sub~ta ntfally charged MIR.
Perkins I. With an almost total neg
1ect OF his duties from September ist
TO September %. 1898. and with par
uial neglect OF the same from Novem-
ber 2Sth to- December 15 1898. 2. That
he had failed 10 prosecute "a large num-
Der of cases where poor milk had been
found, some OF the cases being against
old offenders. 3. That ne had given GER
tain orders, and had made certain
statements to employees In his office,
showing a predetermined purpose ON
his part TO protect several dealers in
poor milk from prosecution.
Other charges relating solely to the
action Of Mr. Perkins in discharging
Mr.. Emery, az collector OF samples.
were stricken out before the hearing.
the comnlutee believing that Mr.. Per-
l<lne had authority to discharge the
employees under him. In his discretion.
10 the effective administration OF that
Department. For the same reasons. the
committee refused 10 permit the intro
duction OF charges based upon the
diUcmrge of Mr.. Frank Easterbrooks
the chemist, occurring subsequent to
the commencement of the investiga-
tfon-
The report then gives some details
about the time OF the committee meet
SngS and as 10 the attendance OF the
public at the hearings and the fact
shat both parties were represented by
counsel. Then IL continues. Your COM
plittee after "a careful review and con-
eideration OF the testimony. finds:
IL. That from the LIST 10 the 22d of
September, 1898, the duties OF the Office
of Inspector of milk were almost en-
tirely suspended, only four samples OF
milk having been analyzed during that
period.
There IL testimony showing that,
during that time the Office force was
pricipally engaged I'm eradicatng the
rockroaches, which We're quite numer-
Gus: that slight attention was given To
eome detail work upon the official rec
ords and papers. and that Mr.. Perkins
WAS endeavorng to obtain some in
formation. looking TO the procurement
Of additional apparatus for his Office,
hut that his efforts In that direction
were without result. While II may be
admitted that cockroaches are not.
under any circumstances. agreeable
companions, the testimony shows that
they would not seriously interfere with
the necessary work of the Office. and
that IL was entirely feasible TO analyze
milk even In their presence. Your com
mittec feel that the reasons offered by
Mr. Perkins for the almost total failure
90 perform the important duties OF his
ONCE from September LIST 10 22d, are
utterly insufficient.
Your committee further finds (2).
That a large number OF cases. where
The milk. upon analyses. was found
materially below the standard have
mot been prosecuted.
The testimony upon this point H. in
The main corroborated by the records
in the inspectors office. and no sufh-
cient reason appears for the failure TO
prosecute. Mr.. Perkins claims that his
general instructions from the law de-
partment prevented him from bringing
cases. unless the analyses showed the
milk to be considerably below the
standard.
"NIr. william ". Grcenough OF the
law department. who was called a. y
witness. testified that he had never
given Mr.. Perkins any such instsuc-
tons. or advice. and that the law de-
partment had the time and the desire
20 prosecute all offenders against the
law.
1T appears from the testimony that
number OF the storokceners who sell
milk have not been prosecuted and
that II has been and il the policy OF
Mr.. Perkins not 20 prosecute the store
keepers. but 20 devote his efforts 60
reaching the milk dealers by whom the
grocers are supplied and who. he az
sumes. are the real offenders. This i
n sentimental theory which can hardly
be commended or approved. MIX W.
one of the most important factors VA
everyday life IN " the chief nourish-
fnent OF little children. invalidE and
ejck people. III II is adulterated. The
mother. the nurse or the physician src
deceived into depriving the child or the
patient of the proper amount of FOOD.
M uAkes little dinerrnce 10 The sui