New-York tribune., 1902-03-19
MEAT ADULTERATION.

MEAT ADULTERATION.
The Division of Chemistry Of the Department
of Agriculture has for some time been making
an investigation of preserved meats, the re-
suits Of which summed up in Part Y Of
Foods and Food Adulterants," just issued from
the Government Printing Office The chemists
have made extensive examination Of the canned
roast beef. corned beef and dried beef, as well
as of various potted meat foods put upon the
market. Their conclusions are not set forth in
form which will give the average reader in
formation sufficient to protect himself from
adulterated goods The findings tabulated
in chemical terms, telling percentages of fats
and meat bases, and only by careful study can
the meaning of the figures as respects adultera-
ton be learned. a little palmer and more spe-
cifc Interpretation of analyses would be a boon
TO consumers. Then they could go TO their
grocers and say that they did not want one
firms hams canned chickens because of
adulteration, and ask for the product of some
other firm because the chemists reported 1t
pure. So only can frauds be prevented. A few
consumers may study out the significance Of
the report as presented, but only few
The canned beef which much talked
about during the Spanish war is said by the
perts TO be generally free from preservatiyes.
they being unnecessary in the process. Preserva-
tiyes are, however, used IN some bulk as well
as some canned corned beef and packers say
they find It necessary In order TO obtain a uni
form product Nevertheless there is nc note
OF preservatives in the samples reported upon
1t is different with canned dried and smoked
beef, however Borlc acid was found in goods
from the Armour Canning Company Libby, Nc
Ne & Libby. the J. c. Ergood Company, the
Armour Packing Company and c. d. Butt In
} : Of r,,ir
to have been abundant" In that of J. b.
Beardsley's Sons some is reported, but with
the explanation that this firm purchased cured
beef for canning and was not aware that il
contained the bOric acid. Libby Mcneil &
Libby protested that they did not use the pre-
servatiye, and, while 1t certainly found in
one sample in another purchased in the open
. market it could not be detected. One Of the
Armour Canning Company's samples was also
free and so were the goods OF q. ii. Hammond
& Co OF 359 canned articles of various kinds
examined 800 were American and Of these 6 >
per cent were treated with preservatives while
400 per cent Of the imported goods were so
treated
No meats are more adulterated than what
processes TO be canned fowl, especially pottcd
and deyilled goods Often the meat is mae
Grated, beef and pork are used in place of fowl
anu even hItu lllt meat Is iPlt III large pieces
turkey, pheasant. woodcock and expensive
meats are simulated with cheaper chicken The
analytical reports suggest such substitution in
almost all the samples reported upon by the
chemical characteristics Of the meat. but no
positive statements made from which the
reader can more than infer adulteratiOn and
himself act accordingly. With regard to potted
fowl more specific statements are made. The
chemists say: There is no field In canned
meats which offers more opportunities for
"adulteratiOn than the pOtted meats of the more
expensive grades" Some packers say that
some smoked meats are used to give the flavor
desired by consumers, but analyses often indi-
cate "a very small admixture of fowl which
would seem TO be ineXcusable." OF ten samples
of potted chicken and turkey examined five
We're found to contain pork. four Of them in
large quantities. The manufacturers were the
Curtice Brothers Company, the Armour Canning
Company the Armour Packing Company and
the Mullin- -Blackedge Company. The goods
of Richardson & Robbins, the Van Camp Pack
ing Company and the turkey as distinguished
from the chicken of the Curtice Brothers Com
pany seemed TO he free from such adulteratlon
OF seventeen samples of potted tongue three
those from Maconachie Brothers. the Jacob
Dole Canning Company and \. Weber & Co.
were found to have pork substituted for beef
AS for pates the expert says:
1t would appear from the results OF the ex-
animation that the fat contained in samples
examined was chiefly derived from beef or porlx
II is something of a surprise to find that even
in high priced imported pate de fOie gras the
traditional diseased goose livers have been re-
placed by beef and pork. There certainly
be no objection to such a substitution on
hygienic grounds. but a matter of interest
and fair dealing IT IS most reprehensible.
At the same time. II is not the writer's inten-
ton TO criticise goods OF this class other than
! pate de foie gras. on account of the fact that
pork ana beef fat USED in their prepara-
/ ton. There are manufacturers who do not use
fat pork basis for pates but the practice
is almost universal. The ordinary pates are ad-
mitted by their manufacturers to consist largely
or pork, and in the absence Of official standards
10 guide US 1t would seem wise TO place them In
the same class sausages, where all that is ex-
pected is that only sound. wholesome meat shall
be employed.
Aside from this, the results OF the analytical