The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-10-21
HE WON'T GIVE UP
Food Inspector FarnsWOrth
Says He Isn't Worried.
will Combat the Charges of Mr..
Howard.
STANDS BY ITS USE.
Says That a Little F0rmalde-
hyde Isn't Injurious.
Filed Giving Facts
About Adulterated Milk.

| In speaking of the charges which
have been filed against him by H. b.
Howard. City Food Inspector Farms
worth said today:
Il have read these documents over
carefully. and I am not a bit worried
for fear 1 shall lose my job. At the
proper time will make my answer
am not going to say anything new.
There is nothing in the charges"
One of the afidavits filed to show
that Mr.. Farnsworth has been neglect
| ing his duties is sworn to by c. E.
Gray, the Continental Creamery com
pany chemist. 1t gives the names OF
dairymen from whom samples of pre-
served" milk have been obtained. The
portion of the affidavit giving the
names is as follows:
1.-TWO sam0les of milk from Mr..
Packard. near the corner of Tenth and
| Topeka avenue showed strong formal
dehy6e.
'-One sample from J. E. Nissley & Co.,
Sixth and Topeka avenue, showed the
presence of boron compound.
"One sample from Orchard Hill dairy,
corner Sixth and Clay, showed stro.~ -.
1 formaldehvde-
zone sample of milk from Heinz &
Co, on East Eighth street, showed for
mal6ehyde.
Zone sample of milk received from
John Elliott, 91S Topeka avenue, stated
by him to have been received from
Heinz & Co, showed strong Tornado
hide.
"One sample of milk from the Olive
dairy, Sixth and Topeka avenues,
showed no Dreservative whatever.
"One sample Of milk from the O'Brien
dairy South Washburn avenue, showed
no DreSeryative whatever.
! "One ice cream sample from SCOTS
lice cream factory and one ice cream
sample from Heinz & Co. showed no
! DreseSvGtiVe-
"On July % 1908. a sample of skim
milk from J. E. Nissley & Co. showed
the presence of formaldehyde.
&C. E. GRAY
Mr.. Gray has been represented as be-
| ing connected with the United States
department of agriculture 1t is said
that this claim will be disputed, and
that evidence will be produced to show
that Gray has no connection with the
department of agriculture. and is simply
an employe of the Continental cream
cry
Mr.. Farnsworth's friends will make
an effort to show that the fight is in
spired by the Continental creamery for
the purpose of injuring the J. E Miss
/ ley Creamery company. They will as
sert that the real object of the fight on
Mr.. Farnsworth is not to get Farms
worth out, but to make a case against
Nissley on the charge of putting for
maldehyde in the milk which he sells
They think that H B. Howard though
sincere in his fight, is being used as a
tool by the Continental creamery
There is no doubt that Howard is be-
ing backed up by the Continental
creamery people, and all of the afffdavits
have a tendency to single out Nissley
for punishment The following is one OF
these affidivits which is directed espec-
tally against Nissley:
MY name is John Sheetz; 1 live al
512 Chandler street / started to work
for J. E. Nissley about April 1902 and
continued working for him until about
Christmas, 1902. During that time the
employees of the NissIey creamery plant
were familiar with the use of preserva-
tives in milk The kind that was used
during the time I was employed there
was made man named o. G. Matthew
son, Topeka, who made deliveries peri
odically and would take away the empty
bottles when he delivered the fluid The
name of this preservative went by tbs
name of milk purifier The directions
for use were placed on the back of the
bottles. We used about two ounces tc
each 25 gallons of milk Mr.. James