No. 7. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 57 



ploys the most sanitary and careful methods in his preparation, and 

 his name and brands are always a sufficient guarantee. The other 

 individual is not always straightforward and honest with the public 

 or pure food representatives, as he often endeavors to sell inferior 

 goods, containing chemicals, fillers, coloring matter and other cheap- 

 ening ingredients concealed under, perhaps, a gorgeous label and 

 high sounding name. 



LEGALITY OF HOME-MADE CIDER VINEGAR. 



During the past year scores of letters from farmers, country mer- 

 chants and others made inquiries as to the legality ot sale of "home- 

 made cider vinegar." From these letters it was inferred that the 

 vinegar in question was the legitimate product of pure apple juice. 

 or vinegar free from foreign substances, drugs or acids, and that it 

 was wholly made from apples, grapes or other fruits. As the Dairy 

 and Food Bureau has no fund available for the payment of the 

 expenses that would necessarily be incurred by making analytical 

 examinations of samples of food or drink for private information, 

 he could only call their special attention to the law regulating the 

 manufacture and sale of vinegar in Pennsylvania. If the cider vine- 

 gar Avas the genuine product of fruit, and free from all forms of adul- 

 teration, including added water, it is reasonable to infer that it 

 would meet the requirements of law. If not properly matured, or 

 if it has been tampered with, the conditions would very likely be 

 otherwise. 



The nature of the vinegar is commonly made known if it be a 

 pure product of its kind, by its distinctive flavor and odor, the fruit 

 quality of apple vinegar being pronounced and characteristic. A 

 study of the chemistry of home-made cider vinegar is interesting and 

 useful, and several publications detailing such investigations are 

 available to those interested. 



USE OF SUBSTITUTES FOR SUGAR. 



Saccharin, one of the many coal-tar derivatives that enter largely 

 into the problems incident to the enforcement of pure food laws, is 

 being used more or less extensively in canned sweet corn and other 

 articles, such as soft drinks, etc. This product is said to be fully 

 five hundred times sweeter than cane sugar; consequently its in- 

 tensely sweet taste can be better imagined than described. Another 

 product of a similar nature is said to possess still greater sweeten- 

 ing powder, while more free from the drug taste or mawkish flavor 

 which is attached to saccharin. Although saccharin is quoted in 

 drug journals as selling at wholesale at one dollar for three ounce 

 tin cans, its use is more general than was supposed. Our laws pro- 

 hibit the use of saccharin and similar substitutes for pure sugar, 

 since eminent authorities regard their continuous use as harmful. 

 In fact, it is believed that some manufacturers employ this article 

 as a food and drink preservative, although fully cognizant of its true 

 character. So far as known, a majority of those entrusted with the 

 enforcement of pure food laws throughout the United States have 

 either decreed against its use, or will only tolerate it within very 

 narrow limits. That it is a food adulterant no one can truthfully 

 deny, while it may have its legitimate sphere in medicine. 



