Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1912-09-20

al tHo aDoVe partlCulaI0, among
others. State Pure Food Inspector
James H. Wallis, under oath in the
district court. charges that the Central
Dressed Meat company was violating
the laws Of the state upon the day
when the reporter of the Capital News
visited its slaughter house and saw
conditions which were made the basis
of an article, which. compared with
the sworn evidence Of Mr.. Wallis,
mildly states conditions existing at the
slaughter house OF that company in
which it slaughtered and dressed it's
meats for sale to customers In this
city and surrounding territory
Mr.. Wallis was clear and lucid in
his declarations to the jury and upon
cross examination by the attorneys for
the plaintiffs, who are seeking to re-
cover $4,000 damages claimed to have
been unjustly and maliciously caused
their business by reason Of the publ
cation Of the article, his evidence upon
direct examination was strengthened
rather than shaken
The attorney for the Central Dressed
Meat company demanded to know OF
Mr.. Wallis why he had taken q re-
porter with him to inspect the slaugh-
ter house. Mr.. Wallis gave his reply.
He said Il was because he had been
informed that an organization had
been effected among certain manufae-
turers Of food products for the purpose
Of opposing him In tho enforcement Of
tho pure food laws. "lt sessms that I
have never been able to get the pso.
pie to understand the obstacles I have
to encounter" he said, "in enforcing
the pure food laws nor to understand
the conditions | have 70 meet, and
wanted disintersstsd witnesses with
me upon this case for my own protee.
ton, and wanted q reporter along 20
that he could give the facts to the pub.
lic."
"The slaughter house at the time Of
the inspection was in no fit condition
for the preparation Of meats" declared
Mr. Wallis at one time. but this evil
dence was stricken out by order Of the
court because 1t was an expression Of
opinion instead OF a statement Of the
facts showing the conditions.
On Cross Examination.
The questions upon the first part Of
the cross examination tended to estab-
lish the apparent claim that II makes
no difference about the conditions un-
der which hogs are scalded, whether
the water Is clean or dirty, greasy,
stale and stinking.
@. II hog had been scalded under
the conditions you describe. It wouldn't
affect the flesh or make It unwhole-
some. would it?
rha mlrg - h,Sp
had been left there from previous
scalding under such conditions Is sani-
tary. but would affect the meat.
Q. Files do not remain on the meat
after night, do they?
A. Yes. on warm nights they will
roost there and be busy until late and
get busy again In the morning.
Speaking Of the lard rendering
room. the attorney inquired:
Q. Do you expect a rendering room
to be mice proof?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you think II practical for q
lard rendering establishment to be
mice proof?
A. Yes. reasonably so: approx
mately, anyway. so that they won't be
found In the lard
The hogs. Mr.. Wallis said, IN an
swer to a question. were gaunt from
lack of both water and food-they
were starving.
@. l see you object because there
were no toilet accommodations.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you think II II necessary in
place like this to nrovidA ,,rina II
fContinued ON Page Ten,