Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-09-21

respect to cleanliness has no sig
nificance. 1 don't know whether GER
titled milk containing less than 10000
bacteria is any better than milk con-
tanning $4,000, 1000"
Taken off his guard. he said: I'm
the milk of dirty unwashed COWS l
found 100000 bacteria per cubic cent?
meter. In the milk of clean COWS i
found only 200 bacteria per cubic CEN
In few minutes he again said:
Bacteria in milk have no significance.
Nobody pays any attention to the law
in Boston. which limits bacteria to
100000. There are no prosecutions
there"
DR.. John d. Hird's testimony in
cluded the following:
Cows manure passing into milk Is
perfectly purified. The portion that
goes into solution with the milk is per-
fectly pure. There is nothing objec-
tionable in that. 1t is the same ma
terial' salts, you would get IN a drug
store. You cannot call any food de-
composed unless it smells bad. tastes
bad, or both"
Reminded that many poisonous
ptomaines have no odor and no flavor,
he continued: "'I say that COW maunre
in milk up to the point of giving it
rotten ducks are good food. You can't
say when decomposition Is bad"
The testimony of Gregg himself,
the prosecuted dealer. included the
following:
"I serve 1,70O gallons of milk day
All this milk comes to me from fifty
five shippers in different states. 1t is
all dumped into a vat and pumped up
stairs into a pasteurizer. The pas
teurizer is always in operation except
when 1t is out of order. l am in no
position to refuse dirty milk If the
fn n chinnino Thara-
fore, | have never tried to find out If
it is good by meteorological ex-
animation"
AS the jurymen filed out of the box
the writer said to one of them: Now
that you have been discharged, you
are at liberty to speak. Do You care
to tell me if the jury's attitude of mind
is in favor of dirty milk as described
by the experts or against 1t?
To the CONSERVATION of DR.. w. c.
Woodward, health commissioner of
Washington, and Prosecuting Attor-
neys Howe and Cobb. of the United
States Department of Justice. who
were with me, the Juror replied:
These experts have shown us very
clearly that this question of dirty milk
is purely academic one. 1t is per-
fectly plain that we are now drinking
dirty milk and will always continue to
drink dirty milk. We now understand
the folly of these scientific bacteria
tests and certainly under the circum-
stances We would not have convicted
the defendant, one of our own towns
men, on any such misleading evidence
as that which the authorities ad-
vanced."
1t is evident from the private re-
mark of the juryman that the verdict |
would have been in favor of dirty milk |
If the trial had been permitted to go |
to a conclusion.
These facts, of deadly significance to |
the cause of public health, are suf-
ficient in themselves to arouse the |
people to an appreciation of the neces-
sity of honest milk legislation honestly !
enforced.
Notwithstanding the manner in |
which they throw brilliant light upon |
conditions the very existence of which |
is not even suspected by the average |
housewife. they are as nothing COM
pared with the facts about to follow.
Before considering them it must be |
noted that Gregg, despite the vast |
array of expensive talent called upon |
to defend him, came into court July is, |
1914, entered a plea of guilty and was |
fined SIS.
Thus vanished for a short time the |
character of testimony which had been !
invoked to prove him not guilty.