The record-union., 1899-03-19
Several Witnesses Testify as to the Beef
Rejected at Southern Camps.
All Were Employees Of the Armour
Company, and Declared That the
Meat Returned From Those
Points Was in Fair Condition,
and After BeirG Inspected by
the Company Was Replaced in
Stock,

KANSAS CITY. March 1S-The army
beef court of inquiry concluded the TAX
ing of testimony in Kansas City at
O'Clock this afternoon, when an ad-
journment to meet in Fort Leaven-
worth, Kansas, at 7:30, in the evening
| was taken.
The court began its sessions at its
headquarters in the Midland Hotel at
10 O'Clock in the morning. Several wit
nesses were examined as to the condi-
ton of the two lots of beef rejected at
Mobile and Jacksonville and returned
to the company's plant in this city in
June and July last. The witnesses, alb
of whom were employees in this city Of
the Armour Company, declared in ef-
feet that the meat so returned from the
South was in fair condition; that most
of it had apparently not been inspected
at the camps before returning, and that
after reaching here and being rein-
spected by the company it was replaced
| in stock. 1t was declared that all meat
furnished the army during the Spanish
war was dated and prepared with the
utmost care.
| Frank S. Hastings, in charge of the
salt meat department, told of submit-
| ting samples of bacon to the Govern
ment officials as an emergency ration,
and stating that but little of it was
| purchased.
| The court started for Fort Leaven-
worth at 4:30 in the afternoon. They
will leave there for Chicago ON, Sunday
evening
! l.. A. Rambo, who formerly worked
in the canning department at Armour's.
and who had previously testified that
m io1, hi - -
canned meat had been rejected after
being prepared by his firm, was re-
called. He said that while he was
employed in that department two carr
loads of spoiled canned beef were re-,
| turned from the army. When the cars
We're opened many Of the cans were
FOUND bursted open, and magg-ots were
EcraWling everywhere. About two cans
out of each case were spoiled.
William Richey, who had worked in
the canning department, said that a.
| daily average of fifty cans of roast beef
were rejected while the Government
| order was being prepared The usuaI
precaution in its preparation was taken.
He helpel unpack two carloads returned
from the army. Some of the cans were
bursted. No great amount of damages
was apparent. The rejected meat was
returned to the cookroom, ueinspected
and the good repacked in new cases
James Talbot said out of about 800
cases handled in day from 40 to 100
cans were rejected, generally because
or the cans leaking. The average re-
lection at the time of filing the Cow
ernnlent order was about the same as
at either times. He also helped unpack
the meat returned from the army Nonet
Was had
accidental injury to the cans.
In reply to a question from Major
Lee, witness stated that it appeared to
him that the meat returned from the
South had not been inspected before
being returned: that the boxes did not
indicate any inspection had taken place
after the meat had been shipped from
the packing house originally.
Henry NJ Campbell an employe OF
the canning department, said that out
of about 5000 cases packed daily under
his supervision, an average of about 30
to 10 cans were rejected. OF the two
carloads returned from the army but
20 to so cans were finally rejected after
reinspection at the plant. The rest was
put back in stock
Gerald Miles, who worked in the label
room and had helped unpack the re-
turned army beef. gave practically the
same testimony on receipt from the
South Replying to a question directed
by Major Lee, Miles said that the labels
on the meat furnished the Government
We're dated
A. J. Bowie Of the packing departs
nent stated that out of from 10000 to
$4,000 cans of meat of all kinds there
was daily average rejection of from
200 to $50, mostly because Of leaky
cans. The rejected meat was REIN
spected, the bad going to the refuse
tank and the rest into stock. The
canned roast beef delivered the Cow
ernment, witness said, was dated May,
1893.
In reply to a question by Major Lee,
witness stated that the cases containing
the meat returned from the army did
not bear the name of the United States
purchasing officer. The meat was in
fair. condition, and he believed it had
been improperly rejected.
S. L. Cowtz, a packing room en-
ploye, testified that an average of 20
cans out of 500 cases were rejected
daily because of defective cans.
K. L. Antoine, foreman at Armour's
canning department, who was yester-
Uay instructed 10 DTlnS 10 court the
records of cans rejected during May
and June, 1898, was recalled. His rec
ords were offered in evidence. One, for
May 11th, read by Recorder Davis
showed that of 2, 600 cans of meat of alt
kinds up that day, 23S were rejected;
because Of leaky cans or for other minor
causes.
Antone went on to state that extreme
precaution was exercised in filling the,
Government orders. The meat for tho
Government was shipped as soon as,
canned. He said that it is consequently
the case that fine leaks in the cans doi
not develop for three or four days after,
packing Meat furnished the Govern;
ment was put up in two and six-pound
cans, and all were dated. He was un-'
certain as to the exact dates on which