1^7 



The reference in the postscript is to an excellent article by Mr. 



Arthur Morris, which appeared in The Epicure of March, 189!>; 



though the whole article is eminently readable, we can give but one 



or two extracts : — 



"All commercial sugars, in fact, are the chemical compound C12 H22 Oil, 

 plus certain commercially inseparable chemical impurities. 



The difference between cane and beet sugar is thus due to two distinct 

 causes. The more important consists in the proportiou of extractives, many of 

 which have a powerful and characteristic taste, found in the molasses, and some 

 of these cling to the refined sugar. It is beyond the refiner's power to prevent it. 



The other circumstance influencing the taste of the beet sugar is the large 

 amount of carbonates of potash and soda which it contains as compared with 

 cane sugar. These carbonates exert indirectly a distinct effect upon the flavor 

 of the sugar. 



That cane and beetroot sugar are practically identical seems to be the very 

 general opinion of well informed men. There is a difference, and it is all in 

 favor of the product of the cane. A single instance will show that it is not 

 merely a question of prejudice. Alkaline carbonates, even in very small quanti- 

 ties, have a marked effect upon the flavour of many beverages, which it is usual 

 to sweeten with sugar. For example, two samples of the same blend of tea, 

 brewed under exactly the same conditions, with the single exception that one is 

 infused with pure water and the other with a solution of carbonate of soda in a 

 thousand parts of water, give beverages differing widely in taste and hi aroma. 

 It follows that tea sweetened with sugar containing an alkaline carbonate will 

 not be the same beverage as that made with a sugar free from such admixture. 

 The same effect is noticeable in coffee, and in several other sweetened drinks. 

 Thus it is not merely the fancy of the epicure (and that is important enough) 

 that tells him that cane sugar is the superior article." 



While it would be folly to deny that for some purposes refined 

 beetroot sugar is possibly as suitable as cane sugar, especially where 

 merely weight, bulk and color are the only requisite qualities, yet at 

 the same time it can hardly be doubted that cane sugar is superior to 

 beet where sweetness and purity of flavor are valued, where the 

 delicate aroma of tea and coffee may be affected, where the color and 

 keeping properties of preserves are an object, and where the brilliancy 

 and cloudlessness of syrups are essential. 



This seems to be tacitly acknowledged through the fact as men- 

 tioned above that certain dealers find it is to their advantage to 

 advertise their beetroot sugars as " containing 99 per cent, cane 



sugar. 



" For ways that are dark 



And tricks that are vain 



The heathen Chinee is peculiar," 



but some English traders seem to run the Chinaman pretty closely for 



"They palter with us in a double sense : 

 That keep the word or promise to the ear, 

 And break it to our hope." 



Surely if they themselves really believed that beetroot sugar was 

 equal in every respect to cane sugar, they would not cloak it in the 

 guise of cane ! 



It is manifestly un-English for importers of Continental beetroot 

 sugars to take advantage of a misnomer in a technical term for the 

 purpose of deceiving those less well-informed than themselves, but 

 we hope that Mr. Richardson's exposure of the trick may lead to a 

 withdrawal of this subterfuge. — Denier ar a Argosy. 



