168 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc. 



any other industry. For instance, we did get along last 

 year — with some difficulty, to be sure — Avith a very limited 

 supply of coal. There are other ways in which we can get 

 warm, without depending altogether upon coal, because it is 

 perfectly certain that the time will come — I don't know 

 when that will be — when there will be no more coal. By 

 that time, human ingenuity must devise some other human 

 effort in keeping warm, — and we came near doing that last 

 winter. We can get along without a great many manufac- 

 tured products, to be sure with inconvenience ; but the very 

 moment 3'ou strike down the products of the farm, you put 

 man in a position where he cannot exist at all, — he must 

 have food ; he must have food, and his food, to be efficient, 

 must be wholesome. It must be what it pretends to be, or 

 else the farmer's labors are in vain. 



If the farmer prepares food to be offered in a state fit for 

 consumption, as some of it is at the time it leaves the farm, 

 or in the raw material, as it is in most cases, and then after 

 it leaves his hands it is subjected to a process of adultera- 

 tion, the change has altered its value to a certain extent. 

 Agricultural industries are injured to that extent, so that 

 the farmer, I say, holds not onh' the general interest as the 

 consumer in the subject of food adulteration, but a still fur- 

 ther interest as a producer both of the material itself as food 

 and the raw materials from which foods are manufactured. 



Now, right at the beginning let us understand what food 

 adulteration is, because here is a point where there is a great 

 difference of opinion. A great many people think that food 

 adulteration consists simply in adding to foods things which 

 are injurious to health ; that is a very common view. Any 

 other change that foods may undergo, to the disadvantage 

 of the farmer or of the consumer, is not considered an adul- 

 teration. That I consider to be a very narrow view ; as 

 far as food adulteration goes, it covers only a very narrow 

 })ortion of the field. 



Then, again, there is another view, which regards as food 

 adulteration any change at all which ma}' take i)lace in the 

 character of the food to its detriment, and especially any 

 change which deceives the consumer. Now, that I consider 



