The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1899-01-11
Due In Many Instances TO the Advice Of The
City Law Department.
SOME SAMPLES NEAR THE STANDARD
In Such Cases Il Was leemed lnsdVlsabIs 10 Pros
scuis POIlcJ Adopted Vas 10 Bring Only
Strong Gases 10 The Court

The investigation into charges made
by John w. Emory against Inspector OF
Milk Perkins was resumed last evening,
in the Municipal court room. City Hall,
at 1880 o'clock, the members of the
committee on milk, Aldermen Lowe,
Vincent and Mccarthy being promptly
on hand 10 hear the evidence adduced,
while Assistant City Solicitor Green
ough was present as advisor. There was
a large attendance of the public, much
interest having been aroused over the
affair. Among those present were sew
eral members of the Board Of Aldermen
and Common Council.
Chairman Lowe of the committee re-
quested the gentlemen to proceed, and
Mr.. A. j. Cushing. attorney for Mr..
Perkins. requested the inspector Of
milk TO take the stand.
At this point Robert w. Burbank
of counsel for Mr.. Emory, stated that
Mr.. Emory desired to say a. few words
before Mr.. Perkins gave his testimony.
Mr. Emory said he would like to make
an additional communication To the
committee, which while not new evil
dence, was in the nature of an elabo-
ration OF evidence already given. Mr..
Emory then handed to Chairman Lowe
a type written statement.
The committee, after examining the
paper. stated that the facts contained
I'm IL were subsequent TO the time which
the committee was appointed TO inves-
tigate, and the paper could not be ac-
cepted.
Mr.. Perkins then commenced his tes-
timony, stating that he had taken
charge of the office on September 8
last and when he took charge he found
the office very filthy. the place being
full of cockroaches and water bugs, and
the sinks were in "a very unseemly con-
dition. He spent a good deal OF time
outside the office looking for a collector
and in looking into recommendation
made to him. Up 90 September % two
samples of milk were taken. During
the entire time he devoted himself to
the work OF his office. He had made
certain changes in the system used Tor
analysis cards. He had also devoted
three days To count business, and had
occupied himself with correspondence
in relation To new tester and a coil
boiler.
Between November 2S and December
15 he had taken 32 samples from milk
wagons, having collected them himself
between the hours OF "a. m. and "a. m.
He had also prepared n statistical re-
port for Incorporation in the mayors
message. He had to look into the lists
of stores and restaurants that had not
been looked up for several years. There
was about 1000 such stores and restau-
rants In the city, and approximately
500 milkmen. He also used quite deal
or time in looking for competent col
lector of samples.
Mr.. Cushing then turned to para
graph five. when Mr.. Emory wanted To
know why the paragraphs We're not
taken in order. and he said that he
might desire TO cross-eXamine Mr.. Per-
kns.
Mr.. Cushing replied that Mr.. Emory
could not talk all the time. and that
when he (Mr. Cushing) was all through
Mr. Emory might examine.
This caused a slight debate between
counsel. and then Mr.. Perkins resumed
his ACKNOWLEDGMENT five was taken
up. He stated that on September 2S.
two samples were taken from j. New
man, and one taken from him on Sep
tember %, and the samples being below
standard two cases for prosecution
were brought against Mr.. Newman. on
October %, a sample below standard
was taken from w. T.. Smith, and the
for prosecution. The reason that IL had
not been brought was because an anal
ysis made by Dr. Davenport of Boston
differed from that made by the witness
aud Mr.. Easterhrooks, and under the
circumstances he deemed IL best not to
bring the case at present.
After another interchange of opinions
between counsel Mr.. Perkins stated
that when he had assumed the office
Assistant City Solicitor Greenough had
told him 10 bring none but strong cases
for trial, and that all milk cases would
henceforth follow the regular docket OF
the law department. That was the rea-
son he had not brought the cases i'm
question. on October ., he took sam
pies from j. Mass. but the case was the
same as Smiths. on October 3, he took
samples from L. s. Jacoy. and after
consulting the law department he was
advised not 10 bring the case. The case
against John King, from sample taken
on October y rs pending. The ease of j.
T.. Jordan WaT nrI put In because not
deemed advisable to do so.Several other
cases were spoken Of which had not
bcen prosecuted because the milk was
too high or because the law department
said no.
Mr.. Perkins said that some store
Keepers cid not intend TO sell poor milk,
but owing 20 their failure 20 mix the
milk thoroughly. the cream was thus
allowed TO rise. and the poor milk re-
manned. These persons he did not deem
proper TO prosecute without first see
ing and warning them TO be careful His
plan was 10 intercept milkmen as they
were leaving milk M these stores. and
in several eases he secured evidence
which he believed showed that watered
milk had been sold 90 storekeepers. The
result OF certain seizures was the pros
ecution OF w. II. Hill. a mi'kman. who
left milk with a storckceper named
Troy. Another milkman named G.. T.
Eempden, who sold milk To n store
Keeper named Healcv has also been
prosecuted. Cases on October IL. 16. 20
and November rs and q were still being
looked up