The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-03-08
70 the Editor Of The Republic.

u 40 the Editor OF The Republic.
Jefferson City. March 6.-I have read your
Shticle of yesterday in relation TO my cast
y ing the tie vote in favor of compelling man
ufacturers of baking powder to label their
products and state upon each can the in
gradients of the compound.
: Kindly note that the substitute providing
Tor labelling was reported favorably by the
l. committee. and that where the vote is a
tie that it is a courtesy which the presid-
ing officer owes to the committee which he
has appointed to sustain its recommends
ton II he consistently can.
I PUBLIC POISONING.
= I could not only do so consistently. but
s consdentiously. i am the publisher, and
: have for years been the editor, of two
trade papers in the food-product line, have
s studied the subject carefully and believe
: that / know it. I have maintained for
:. many years that alum harmful and
unwholesome food admixture, and voted to
put label on the cans, so that those who
: believe as I do, that alum in any quantity
J? introduced into the human stomach. is a
- poison, can know what they are buying
NAnd eating. IL We must continue TO at all
y hermit public poisoning for profit
y Your Jefferson City correspondent, who
=, is usually accurate, reliable and fair. mis-
J understood me as to statement published
yesterday morning. l did not say that AZ
= believe there was corruption on both Sides
did say that believed thai there was as
much corruption on one sideIas the other.
1 did say that any one who would manu-
/, facturs and deceptively market a food prod
c uct containing alum was away from home
every day he was outside OF the Peniten-
tiary.
INJURIOUS EFFECTS.
Many seem to share my views, and es-
pecially those competent to judge. No enc
Is so capable of estimating the effect of
: an article of food upon the human system
: as practicing and experienced physician.
They are much more competent in that
respect than analytical chemists. for the
Z physician almost daily diagnoses conditions
!. of Injurious effects OF food products while
3eaemists give their opinions from knowl-
i edge OF probable effects. The one is the
oretical. the other practical.
- Knowing that this question was coming
: up at this session. l concluded last August
10 ascertain the sentiment of the physi-
clans OF Missouri on this subject. From a
medical directory / selected one physician
in each county who, from the Information
given in the directory. had graduated at
well-known and reputable medical college
ana usually man of some years practice,
without any knowledge of his politics
wrote a circular letter to Ia physicians,
there being that many counties In Missouri
asking their attention to the law, which
was IN effect prohibiting the use of alum in
baking powder or any other food product,
ana ASKING whether or not they thought
Il should be repealed.
Among many others I received the fol-
lowing replies. of which publication wac not
prohibited: Out OF The entire number of
replies received only one or two vaguely
stated that they thought the law should be
repealed for political reasons.
OPINIONS OF PHYSICIANS
- The following replies are from ply sicians
Of Missouri, men in whose hands the lives
and health OF our citizens are constantly
placed. and in whose judgment have alb
solute confidence, and in whose honesty and
sincerity most earnestly believe:
ss avs NJ N d CONWAY: NJ D. ;oo Columbia. Mo-,
Alum is undoubtedly dsleterious to the
human system. Some individuals resist its
will gradually impair the healthfuI func-
lions 1t Is powerful astringent and, there
FORE poisonous. would, therefore, recon-
mend that the law be not repealed"
7. ". Foster, N. D., Butler. Mo-. under
date August q, 1902, says:
Alum In baking powder Is deieterious and
harmful to the health. i would suggest that
YOU attempt to defeat the repeal of the
present Jaw, believing ii to be for the well
fare and health Of the people"
Carl Brockhausen. NJ. D., of Hermann. Mo-.
of date September 3, 1909, says: Alum 10
considered by all good authorities one of
the mineral poisons- Its total or partial
substitution for cream of tartar in baking
powder Is an adulteration and an injury to
I health, and should be prohibited by law"
date September s. 1909. says: 1.-The bill pro-
hibiting the sale of alum baking powder
meets my hearty approval
The eating of bread containing alum for
a protracted time will certainly produce
constipation. as well as numerous other dis
eases"
7. v. Baldwin, NJ. D., Forsyth. Mo-, of
date September TO- 1900. says:
In my opinion. alum in baking powder
Is INJURIOUS l indorseN the action Of the
Legislature in prohibiting the admixture of
alum In baking powder compounds, and
trust the law will not be repealed"
J. r; Boyd. N. D.. Springfield. No., head
physician for the Modern Woodmen of
America, of date November 2S. 1909. saws:
In Ispfy to your letter, received some time
ago. would say that the law should stand.
Alum, even in minute doses. is an irritant
TO healthy tissues. Some people consume a
large amount of bread. especially the poorer
class Of people and they would be, from
obvious reasons. the greatest sufferers 1
trust that you will be able to prevent the
repeal of the law"
e. c. Parish. NJ. D.. Memphis, No. of
date October q. 1902, says:
Alum. according to Potter. an editor
OF therapeutics and materia medica, is an