The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1911-07-26
Because BE Dared to Express bis Hon-
est Opinion About Article
THAT The TRUSTS USE
For Declaring That Bescate Of Soda
Is Injurious, Wiley's Assistant in
Bureau of Chemistry Loses Favor
With Higher Powers and Is Dis
missed ''for Good Of the Service"

Shall an expert chemist employed
by the department of agriculture be
subject to dietation as to his scien-
tiic opinion when it is asked of him
on the witness stand, and can he be
legally dropped "for the good of the
service" because he does not under
such conditions render testimony in
opposition to his actual views? asks
the Washington correspondent Of The
News and Courier who says:
AS a result of the attack On DR..
Harvey W. Wiley, chief of the bureau
of chemistry, whose technical error
in engaging the services Of an ex-
pert chemist caused the Attorney
General of the United States to rec
ommend that he "be allowed to re-
sign," it has leaked out that Floyd
W. Robson, one of the principal as
sistants Of DR.. Wiley in the bureau,
was dismissed from the service on
the 30th of last June on account
Of his testimony in Indianapolis that
benzoate Of soda Is an injurious food
preserVative, in his opinion.
In spite of the decision Of the Rem
sen board that benzoate Of soda isn't
harmful, the prosecution of concerns
which use it has been continuing
in the Court; and it was in one
If these cases that Dr. Robson was
summoned to testify before the Court
in Indianapolis. He gave his hon.
est opinion, which Is the same now
as it has always been, and is In
agreement with that held by DR..
Wiley. Without consultation with
Dr.. Wiley or notification to him,
Robinson was dropped from the pay
rolls of the agricultural department
at the end Of the last fiscal year.
What was Robson to do? Evi-
dently, the department Of agriculture
expected him to go on the stand at
Indianapolis and give testimony dfa-
metrically opposed to his true belief,
simply because the Remsen board has
expressed an opinion contrary to that
held by DR.. Wiley, who has recently
been upheld by the findings of the
Prussian board3of scientists, to which
the identical question was submitted.
Since the verdict Of the Prussian
board, it is illegal to import into
Germany food products preserved
with benzoate.
The bullying attitude of the agri-
cultural department towards its
scientific help in the pure food and
drug fight is to be made subject
of searching Investigation by the
House of Representatives committee
on expenditures in the department Of
agriculture. While the department.
in order to please "big business" is
trying to club its subordinates into
acquiescence in the use o. benzoate,
and into approval of it, the commit
tee will bring to the country's atten-
tion the doubtful legality of the sac,
red Remsen board itself.
It is well known that this board
was created without any specific war
rant of law, and that when the first
provision was made for its support
there was not single member of the
agricultural committee of the House
who knew, or who was willing to
admit that he knew, that the money
was to be used for any such purpose.
Representative Lever, Of South
Carolina, brought out that fact in
attempted to defeat the appropriation
when it came up on the floor Of the
House the second time. He asked
any member Of the committee who
had been aware of the purpose of the
provision the first time it was made
to rise. Not man rose.
The committee on expenditures In
the agricultural department has in
formation that Assistant Attorney
General Fowler rendered an opinion
that the Remsen beoard has no legal
existence, but that Attorney General
Wickersham turned down his own as
sistant's opinion in favor OF a con-
trary one from Solicitor McCabe, OF
the department Of agriculture-who,
by the way, is one Of the members
of the personnel board which has just
recommended the dismissal Of DR..
Wiley.
There is no disposition to claim
that DR.. Wiley has not gone to ex-
tremes at times in his pronounce
ments. But it is held that most o.
the instances in which he has been
subject to- criticism or ridicule have
been merely in declaring mis- lndivid-
ual views. He has denounced chew
ing gum and tobacco, but he has new
er undertaken to interfere officially
with the sale of either of these arti-
.cles. His supporters claim that where
he has used the machinery Of his
bureau against a product, he has
rarely failed to show strong scienti.
fic authority for his course.
For years, it is said, Ia systematic
campaign Of obstruction and haras-
ment has been in progress against
him, including the pestering Of the
experts he has employed, by delaying
their paw and by making it person