The Washington times., 1911-08-17
Continued from First Page)
offered money for q testimonial ol
their side of the case"

CONTINUED from First Page)
offered money for a testimonial on
their side of the case"
Hints At Big Fee.
Then you suspect that opinions were
apt to be influenced by the size Of the
fee offered?" suggested a member OF
the committee.
'I do not say that" replied DR.. Wiley.
! But / do say that I know that they
got about thirty well-known chemists
to give the kind of opinions they want
ed And 1 know that in one case they
offered money for their sort Of an
opinion.
"THEY DID GET AN OPINION ON
| THEIR SIDE OF THE CASE FROM
ONE MAN WHO .AFTERWARD WAS
APPOINTED 4 MEMBER OF THE
The chemist who thus gave his opin-
ion in favor Of the Corn Products con-
| tentiun was DR.. Russell Chittenden, Of
| the Sheffield Scientific School of Yale,
new a member of the Remsen board.
The statements of these thirty chem
lists, got together after a strenuous
campaign bv the Corn Products people,
We're carried to the three Cabinet Off
Under the pure fod law. these Secre-
taries were authorized to make reguia-
tions for administration Of The act. DR..
Wiley and his lawyers fatty deny that
the Cabinet members had any shadow
of legal right to interfere with such a
dc,.ision as this in the corn syrup case,
contendinr their sole business was to
provide rules for administration Of the
act.
However that may be, the three Sec
retaries under the pressure to which
they were subjected by tho Corn Prod
ucts people. actually reversed the rul-
ing that they had been made unani-
mOusly by the food and drug board
and approved by the Secretary Of Agrl-
culture.
WAS TO PERMIT GLUCOSE TO BE
SOLD TNDBB BB THE MIi f1 LABEbtt Edtt,D DCTRE az =
COMMITTEE THAT IT IS BEING
SOLD IN THAT WAY TODAY, AND
THAT THERE IS NO WAY TO PRE-
VENT IT.
Method of Voting.
Next to this revelation about the
abrogation of the law by the Cabinet
officers charged with its enforcement,
the most edifying bit of evidence dur
ing the day related to the method OF
voting in the food and drug board.
This, however, was merely humorous;
1t might have been regarded as pathetic
or tragic a month ago, but the recent
been run by McCabe have eliminated
every element save humor from such
narrative as this:
When the board, composed of Wiley,
Dunlap, and McCabe. was hrst or
ganized, the method of voting was
to send the papers in. each case to
the three members. in succession:
Each, in turn, noted his decision; and
the majority decided the case.
Wiley, chairman, voted hrst Ihen
1o 06 n al
After a time it was observed that
when Wiley and Dunlap voted to-
gether, McCabe sometimes voted
against both Of them.
CGRDING TO WILEY, ALWAYs
WITHDREW HIS VOTE SUISSE
QUENTLY, AND CHANGED IT, so
THAT HE AND McCABE WOULD BE
IN AGREEMENT.
So the order in which the three
board members should vote was
buniap, %mhap1' and tHf McGabe. e. It s Was made made
Wiley, McCabe. and Dunlap.
AFTER FII TII4 THAT CHANGE Cha VAS
FOUND IT NECESSARY TO CHANGE
HIS VOTES SO AS TO AGREE WITH
MCCABE. HE ALWAYS HAD THE
VOTE OF McCABE BEFORE HIM
MADE HIS OWN DECIS1oN AGREE
WITH THAT OF McCABE.
Facilitated Business.
"It facilitated business very much"
commented Wiley, with a saturnine
grin, as he narrated the incident The
audience grinned out loud in a derisive
fashion. 1t was the usual audience for
one Of these hearings; largely composed
of women, and entirely composed of
Wiley supporters. 1t laughed when
Wiley made a point, jeered when the op-
position scored, looked daggers at Rep
resentatives Sloan and Higgins, who
have taken the, pro-Administration side
in conducting the questioning, and was
generally about as thoroughly partisan
as it possibly could have been.
Today's examination of DR.. Wiley
brought put the clearest view thus far
presented of the process by which the
pure food act has been broken down.
In the beginning; the Bureau of Chem
istry-that Is, Wl1ey-examined products
determined. scientifically, whether they
to the Secretary of Agriculture. 1t was
his ministerial duty to. certify prosecu-
tons to the proper district attorney.
That was the whole process.
At that time nobody claimed that the
Secretary of Agriculture had any power
taken to him.
The first slip from the original rigors
of the act was in creation of the board
of foud ard drug inspcrtion-Wiley.
Dunlap. and MCCabe-which presently
proved to have two anti-Wilet, highly
conservative members. Wiley, after
this. seldom got a vote" as he testified
yesterday. And decisions were very apt
to be against him and against the Wig
orous enfor cement of the law.
Next came the assumption, by the
Secretary Of Agriculture. of the right
to sit on an appeal from the board. and
overrule 1t II he chose. This is declared
to be strictly contrary to the laws in
tent. The point will prove important
The Remsen Board.
Following this. the Remsen referee
board was appointed to forestall the
opinion of the food and drug board. so
that it should not be able to force a
prosecution against foods in which ben
zoate of soda was used. The scientific
authority of the Bureau Of Chemistry
was thus abrogated.
Finally, came the abrogation of that
hoard administrative and legal pow
ers, by the order that gave McCabe
alone the full charge OF all prosecrs
tions.
And, as in the corn syrup case. the
three Cabinet members charged with
getting the law PROPERLY EN-
FORCED. used their position and au-
thority to REVERSE the decisions Of
the proper authorities. and prevent en-
forcement.
Through this long process Of reduc-
ton and degradation, the Bureau of
Chemistry at length found itself not