Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1906-08-24
Brattleboro, VT, Aug. %, 1906


Hon. Charles j. Bell.
Governor of Vermont
Dear sir:-Pursuant to the request OF
ing Your Excellency's absence from the
state, beg leave to report concerning the
published charge that the State of YER
mont is a dealer in diseased meat. On
August IA there first came to my attention
a publication making the charge that the
State of Vermont is a dealer in diseased
meat and specifying therein by way of
affidavit, the case of condemnation of
AZ cows of the herd of Frank T. Hutchin-
son of Worcester by the state cattle COM
mission in November, 1905. The affidavit
of Hutchinson does not directly charge
that diseased meat was sold for food
purposes, but it carries that implication,
and is so construed by the parties pub
fishing it, Immediately upon it's coming
to my notice, | called II to the attention
of the states attorney of Chittenden
county, where the alleged offence is
claimed to have been committed, and
learned from him that no complaint or
intimation of such thing had ever been
made to him. 1 Immediately directed
him carefully and fully to investigate the
matter and report such facts as he could
learn relating to this specific charge
Previous to 1904 it was the law of YER
mont that in all cases when an animal
missioners, its carcass should be buried.
The legislature of 1904 amended this law
by providing that the condemned animal
should be disposed of as directed by the
commissioner in charge (see Act No. 146,
of 1900. 1t seems to have been the con-
temptation of the law from the time of its
first enactment that all cattle showing
any response to the tuberculin test shall
be condemned by the commission and
slaughtered and then, as was provided in
Section 1915 of Vermont Statutes, a post
mortem examination was required to be
made and If the animal was found by
that examination to be affected with
tuberculosis, its carcass was to be de-
stroyed. II not, the carcass of the slaugh-
tered animal was to be returned to the
owner who also received the full amount
of Its appraised value. BY the Act No.
50, OF 1902, a requirement was made that
the carcass should be buried, which act
was amended by the Act of 1904 above
quoted. 1t appears that the state cattle
commission, acting under the last named
law, have caused all condemned cattle to
be slaughtered, at the slaughter house of
some rendering or fertilizing plant, some
times at the plant of the Burlington Rem
dering company at Burlington, and some
times at plants of like character in
Massachusetts,, and that in all cases a
post mortem examination is made, and
any meat and any carcass which shows
disease, is made into fertilizer and only
such as are shown to be free from disease
are permitted to be used for food pur-
poses. The post mortem examination is
made under the regulations of the United
States government.
There has been no evidence brought to
the attention of the states attorney OF
to me, nor has there been any intimation
of any, so far as / have been able to
learn except as hereinafter stated, that
nf N.r. Il
to be diseased has ever been sold or used
for food purposes. On the contrary 1t
appears that the carcasses of all dis
eased animals have been destroyed and
made into fertilizer.
Taking up specifically the charge in
the Hutchinson matter. a careful perusal
Of Hutchinson's published affidavit shows
that he does not claim that the beef
which he suggests as having been in the
cooler ever came from his cattle. He
states that one hindquarter was marked
Paul German, Burlington" A careful
inquiry by the states attorney fails to
show that there is any such person in
Burlington now or was at the time stated
In the Hutchinson affidavit. Hutchinson
and Whitney (the party whose published
affidavit confirms hutchinson now states
to the states attorney that they cannot
say what became of Hutchinsons cattle.
that they do not identify the quarters
inson's herd In fact they say that
they did not, although they say that the
two forward quarters mentioned in the
affidavit showed on the inside of the
ribs that they were diseased. These are
the quarters which they say lay upon the
toor with chunk cut out OF the shoul-
ders of each. Both Whitney and Hutch
inson state to, the states attorney that
they were told by the butcher that these
chunks had been cut out to feed to a
dog. The cattle commissioner In charge,
DIR. +. A. Rich. the manager of the Bur-
lington Rendering plant, Mr.. Brigham.
and Mr.. Heath. the butcher who does the
butchering for the Rendering company,
all state that no diseased meat has been
used for food purposes, that all such has
been used for fertilizer. There seems to
be, therefore, no warrant for the charge
made, based upon Hutchinson's affidavit,
that the state or its officers have sold
diseased meat for food purposes. In fact,
Hutchinson himself. does not state It.
There would seem, therefore, no reason
for prosecuting any one for anything that
appears in the Hutchinson matter.
In the investigation which the states
attorney has made, there has come COM
plant, made now for the first time, from
former employee of the Burlington Rem
dering company, to the effect that the
| company has sold meat which has been
condemned. This complaint does not
charge that the state officers were par
! ties to It,
The widespread publication of the
charge in connection with the Hutchin-
sons affidavit, and the complaints which
have come in consequence of 1t, all tend
to injure the good name of the state
and must inevitably work great harm tC
every raiser and seller of live stock II
| Vermont,
But above all the law must be enforced
and II any one has been selling diseased