The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-01-02
MUST ASK FOR
A GUARANTEE
DEALERS SHOULD PROTECT
THEMSELVES.

No Brand Of Food Products Can Be
Guaranteed by the Authorities, as
Samples of Unscrupulous Manufac-
turers Vary Wholesalers
Should Publish Guarantee.
What protection is there for the
Minnesota grocer, wholesale or retail,
under our pure food laws?" This is
the question asked Of T h J ur n a
by dealer. who wants some light on
the subject, and no doubt his question
has been echoed by thousands Of others.
The dealer is liable to fine for selling
impure articles, but he can never be
sure himself whether the goods he
handles are pure or adulterated.
The question was referred by h e
urnal to w. w. P. Mcconnell,
state dairy and food commissioners,
| who answered 1t frankly, and his in
terview will be of interest both to deal
ers and the general public.
| The main question, and several
others, were asked in the following let
| ter:
To the Editor Of The Journal.
In recent issues of The J urn a l
4 have noticed number of articles in re-
gard to maple syrup and what the Min
nesota pure food department proposes do
ing with that article after Jan. 1, 1904
! In thinking the matter over. it struck
me that it would be of great benefit to
all concerned If you would publish an
article that would give the dealers-both
| jobbers and retailers-more light on the
subject, and, If possible, show them how
they can protect themselves and know for
sure whether they are buying pure or
| mixed goods, as I am informed that just
an ordinary chemist, such as the profess
sors of chemistry in our colleges, cannot
| tell to a certainty when there is nothing
/ h11f 1o,, c.,,rr ,cnI Gov, l1,I4 4{1,&
1 presume you are in position to get
this information from the pure food de-
partment, If it is not now in your pos
session, and trust you will be able to
do so, but in the past they have shown
their unwillingness to give out any in
formation or answer any questions asked
them by individuals or firms that would
be of benefit and keep them from buying
adulterated foodstuffs, and they may be
the same with you. I know Of several
! instances where samples of food products
have been sent to this department, with
a request for the analysis as a matter OF
information so that the party asking
would know whether the sample, If IL
legal, was impure or whether it was i'm
properly labeled, and the only reply re-
turned was card bearing the word
legal or illegal as the case might be-
1t would appear to me that as this de-
partment is a public institution and fol-
the benef1t OF the pubic, II 1t is run or
the square they should be willing to give
!. out their analysis to interested parties
on any article of food that is, or is abou,
;, to be, sold in the state, and it would be
very little additional work for the de-
partment, as they have to analyze such
, samples before they pass on them. But
!. it appears they are not; neither are they
willing to answer inquiries made by either
retailers or jobbers. A few days after
!, they issued their maple syrup circular
dated Dec. 1,s19O3; a Minnesota jobbel
addressed a letter to the commissions
| asking the following questions:
:, What is adulterated maple syrup, ant
4 how are we to know what is pure ant
| what is adulterated when it is billed t.
us as pure? Would it not be working
an injustice to prosecute us for selling
$, adulterated goods when we are absolutel,
unable to determine what is pure ant
what is adulterated and unable to under
Il stand the pure food law as it nov
) stands?'' - 10 s
:. At o'clock Saturday, Dec 10, no re
3 ply had been received to these questions
$ Isn't there difference between tn
| words pure and genuine as applied t.
r a maple syrup, and is not a maple syru
l made from maple and cane sugars a
Y pure as one made from a genuin
e maple?
= An article in T h e J u I'm al covering
. answers to the above inquiries would b
!. appreciated by both jobbers7 and retailer