78 MINERAL WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES. 



fictitious sample of the water. Two facts stand out beyond a doubt: 

 (1) In this particular case consumers are paying for a water that is 

 not true to label, and (2) it is a misnomer to term such a water a lithia 

 water. Following is the letter received from the spring owner: 



A sample of this water was submitted to Professor , of Baltimore, and the 



analysis as he furnished it to me was published in my pamphlet. In this connection 

 I beg to state that spurious water is sold as "Buffalo lithia" in many of the large 

 cities in this country. As evidences of this fact I beg to call your attention to the 

 records of the New York supreme court: Myself against Reid, Yeomans & Cubit, 

 druggists at 140 Nassau street, New York City; also to the records of the court of 

 general sessions of the peace for the city and county of New York; myself against 

 Charles F. Hanson, president of the Hanson Drug Company and proprietor of the 

 drug store at 244 Sixth avenue, New York City; also to numerous other cases in dif- 

 ferent parts of the country. You will note that in each of these instances the parties 

 were convicted of filling my bottles with spurious water and selling same as the gen- 

 uine Buffalo lithia water. Some years since our representative bought some hun- 

 dreds of thousands of the paper seals which we put over the cork of each bottle of 

 Buffalo lithia water from a party in your city. Presumably this party was selling 

 these counterfeit seals to bottlers there for the purpose of refilling Buffalo lithia- 

 water bottles with spurious water. 



HATHORN WATER, SARATOGA (No. 901 I. & W.). 



The authors were unable to obtain the advertised analysis of this 

 water. In Crook's work on Mineral Waters of the United States, how- 

 ever, is an analysis which is given in the table. It will be seen from 

 this that although the analyses vary considerably from each other, yet 

 in such heavily mineralized samples this variation is hardly more than 

 would be expected from two samples taken on widely different dates. 

 That these springs at Saratoga give every evidence of varying naturally 

 to a very large extent in their mineral content, from time to time, will 

 be brought out later in this bulletin. 



CONGRESS WATER, SARATOGA, N. Y. (No. 902 I. & W.). 



The same comment may be made in regard to this spring as on the 

 Hathorn water, although here the variation between the advertised and 

 the Bureau of Chemistry analyses is greater than in the previous case. 

 The following letter was received from the spring owner: 



We are unable to account for this difference in the analyses, unless the sample 

 analyzed by you was bottled at a time when fresh water had found its way into the 

 spring, which will occur occasionally. 



VICHY WATER, SARATOGA, N. Y. (No. 903 I. & W.). 



The variation in this case between the advertised and Bureau of 

 Chemistry analyses is %ry great, the former analysis claiming over 

 6.3 grams of total salts per liter and the latter analysis finding only 

 about 2.6 grams. It would appear that this spring has grown weaker 



