The Washington times., 1902-07-14
Mr.. Charles Schneider
Roundly Scores the
District Inspector.
OBJECTS TO PAYING FEE
Believes System Is Observation-Disclosures
1t Neglects Interest and Welfare Of
the Community at Large-Tells Some
of His Experiences.


flour in the District of Columbia is be
lieved to be ineffective and does not at
all protect the citizens against the sale
and use for bread or cakes of impure
and unhealthy flour, those interested in
the sale and wholesale and retail use
of floor have organized in an effort to
either have the law repealed or have
It put in such shape as TO be of benefit
to the citizens.
It is claimed that the law relating TO
the inspection of the staff of life was
originally framed by person who was
in the employ Of a local firm of -four
blenders and mixers. and that this per-
son. in drawing up the various pro-
visors. took care only of the interests of
his employers and firms engaged in SINH
lar enterprises, and entirely neglected
the interests and welfare CT the COM
munity at large.
Should Consult Citizens.
Speaking of the proposed movement,
Mr.. Charles Schneider. president of the
Charles Schneider Baking Company, Of
this city. said yesterday:
II have been in business in this city
since 1868, and l use between fifty and
sixty barrels OF flour every day. | am
large taxpay er, and think that those
who make the laws for the District
should consult it's citizens before put
ting a law on the statute books which
is not only ineffective, but absurd and
malicious.
The -four inspection law is nui-
sance. and the sooner VIC can have a
test case of it the better it will be for
everybody The law as it now stands
actually protects those dealers in flour
who are engaged in the trade of adul-
terating -four. because section 13 of the
act says that all -four blended in the
District of Columbia shall not be liable
TO second inspection.
This gives the mixers a chance TO buy
cheap flour. which. after the inspection.
they blend with meal. buckwheat. and
chalk and other cheap and unhealthy
ingredients, which stuff is put up II
sacks and bags and palmed OF on the
people of this city rs first class Al
flour. Those who are interested In
enterprises of this sort are the very
people who had this obnoxious flour in
spection law passed by Congress. be-
cause il assures them a lucrative busi-
ness.
If the flour inspector understood
his business and would do what he is
supposed to Go. the law would be OF
some benefit. But as IL ii is farce.
Mr.. James H Welch. v.o was sworn
IL
1893, for two years, and whose appoint
nont to the office has never been re-
newed, never knew anything about flour.
Continues in Office.
Notwithstanding the fact that his
term of office has expired and no ap-
pointments have been made since. he
continues to go around and collect fees
for so-called flour inspections. Mr.. Nc
Kenzie, Acting Auditor for the Dis
trict of Columbia, told me on June II
that James H Welch has not been re-
appointed to the post. l cannot under
stand why the District Attorney docs
not handle Welch for acting in an of
his term of office expired on January IS
1901.
Il know what ! am talking about wheI
1 say that Mr.. Welch, on more than
one occasion, collected money from IN
for flour which he never inspected. Th'
law allowed a recompensation OF ! cen
per barrel for inspection. and on man!
occasions / have paid Weich sl.50 for th'
supposed inspection of $50 barrels o
-four. when, in fact. he only inspecte'
FIVE barrels.
Must Make Inspection.
1.-The law prescribes that every barre
or sack of flour shall be subject to ex
animation of the inspector by boring
and searchings with an instrument no
exceeding fye-eighths of an inch In di
ameter for barrels and one-fourth of al
inch for iute or cotton sacks.
Every barrel inspected must SHOW
the boring. plugged up with a round plui
by the inspector. / used hundreds o
barrels of -four which were never in
spected, but for which the Inspector re
ceived his inspection fee. Even If III
had inspected the flour he would no
have known anything about It. Mr.
WeIch says himself that he does moi
know the quality of -four. He told mt
some time ago that he did not intend tC
inspect sack -four because it was toe
much work and trouble.
Another absurd feature of the law il
that it does not provide for the inspec
tion of -four which is used in pies. cakei
or rolls. Another evidence that the Law
was drawn up by some one who did .:o
know anything about laws is that ther,
is no penalty clause attached to 1t. The
law cannot be enforced. and we hav'
come to the conclusion not to pay AM
more fees.
Cannot Be Intimidated
"Of course, there are some few small
bakers and dealers who would rather
pay the small fee than stand the intimi
dation OF the inspector and his threat.
TO take the matter into court. But We
are organizing now and intend to see tn,
thing TO a finish.
THE best protection and inspection
is competition. II l use -four OF an In
ferior grade in my bread my customers
viii, soon find 1t out. and the consequence
will be that will lose my trade
There is no other city in the United
States where there is -four inspec'
ti0n law. ! know OF several cases o
damaged -four which arrived in this city
where II was condemned by the -four IN
spector. AS a rule the millers or ship