The Washington herald., 1911-08-17

entative Sloan as to whether he had ever
appealed to Secretary Wilson in cases
where his judgment had been overruled.
| DIR. Wiley said:
In two or three such cases I did.
But 1 soon learned that 1t was useless
for me to appeal to the Secretary against
the decision of the solicitor. In all cases
he was upheld by the Secretary.
Il appealed from a decision regarding
the branding of gluten -four. which I
regarded as a threat against human life.
Gluten flour, the doctor explained, is
used for making bread for diabetic pa
tients. In its preparation nearly all the
starch is removed from wheat flour. A
preparation was on the market that was
called gluten flour half strength" BY
a decision of the board such a prepara-
ton might be made and sold. But the
sample in question did not have a par
ticle of the starch removed, but only
percentage of the protein. When called
haif-strength gluten flour any one using
it might properly think that the starch,
or at least half of it, had been re-
moved from the wheat flour. But 1t was
shown that 1t was just as injurious to
diabetic patients as wheat flour would
have been.
Poison Allowed In Food.
"At another time 1 objected to the
use of sulphur dioxide. or sulphur fumes,
IN the preparation of foods. principally
fruits and fruit juices. without the pack
ages being branded so as to make this
fact known. This substance is a poison,
and the three secretaries of Agriculture,
the Treasury, and Of Commerce and La
Dor recommended that this rule of
branding the packages be followed in
this case. The majority of the board
of food and drugs rescinded the rule in
my absence and without notifying me of
their intention.
THE day that rule was rescinded I
was in my Office until o'clock in the
afternoon. when 1 left for Boston. Be-
tween 4 and 4:30 a meeting of the board
was called without notifying me and
passed the order resembling the rule of
the three secretaries.
"On my return 1 learned of what had
been done, and wrote to the Secretary
protesting against the action of the other
members of the board, both on the
grounds of health and on the course
that hal been taken to do 1t without
my knowledge.
in my letter I asked the Secretary to
hear me. 1 have that letter here"
Have you the Secretary's reply to
your letter."
"I never got ope."
Did you ever discuss the matter with
the Secretary?''
'I never was given any opportunity to
do So The incident was closed"
Representative Floyd then asked DR..
Wiley whether DR.. Dunlap was over or
under him, and called sthe committee's s
attention to the fact that he had asked
the same question of DR.. Dunlap.
"As the Secretary wrote me that DR..
Dunlap would overlook the work Of the
Bureau of Chemistry. and as was asked
to supply him with such accommodation |
as he should. require, have regarded
him as my superior.
This information was conveyed to DIR. |
Wiley by letter. He was asked to pro- |
duce that letter, which he promised to |
do to-day.
Referee Board Works Slowly.
It came out in discussing the alum |
case that, by a decision of the board Of
food and drugs, the decision was re-
ferred to the referee board. as the Rem
sen board of national food experts is
called. 1t was shown that the referee |
board Is of extremely slow action and |
that when a question is referred to 1t
there is slight hope Of a decision being |
by II before two or even three |
years after the question Is submitted to II.
The alum case has gone to this board
along with the copper salts question. and |
some others, upon which no decision Is
rendered.
Then 1t was that the full effect of the
methods now rracticed in the food and
drugs questions Is calculated to tie the
Bureau of Chemistry hand and foot. so
far as prosecution is concerned.
: In answex. to questions by Representa-
tive Floyd, Dr. Wiley said that when a
decision of the Bureau Of Chemistry had
been overruied by the majority of that
board, or question had been. referred
to the referee board, there is no method
Of law known to him by which any prose-
cution can be made or whereby that mat
ter can reach the court for trial.
s.Tf the Bureau OF Chemistry sends a
eS>>to the Solicitor recommending prose-
cutfon and he decides against It. or II
the prosecution 10 not ordered by the
OF Agriculture, there is no
way that know OF that prosecution un-
Ter the pure food and drug acts can fol-
low"
Suppose the Buresu ef Chemistry