known or reported where sulphur dioxid consumed in dried fruit had caused 

 injury to health." 



Against the attitude of Dr. Wiley, of the Bureau of Chemistry, and his 

 opinion stands the opinions of eminent chemists both in the United States and 

 foreign countries. If there exists a doubt in respect to the effect of sulphup 

 dioxid in fruit dried by the use of sulphur, fruit growers should be entitled to 

 the benefit of it, until the fact is indubitably established, particularly as the 

 custom of drying fruit by the use of sulphur has been almost universally fol- 

 lowed in this State for many years, without any known injurious results. 



But laying aside the matter of opinions and preference, the National Pure 

 Food Law it seems has clearly set forth a condition under which examinations 

 of dried fruit should be made. The Act of June 30, 1906, in reference to food, 

 says: 



"That when in the preparation of food products for shipment they arc 

 preserved by any external application applied in such manner that the pre- 

 servative is necessarily removed mechanically, or by maceration in water, or 

 otherwise, and directions for the removal of said preservative shall be printed 

 on the covering, or package, the provisions of this Act shall be construed as 

 applying only when said products are ready for consumption." 



It has been fully and satisfactorily demonstrated that by washing, soak- 

 ing and cooking, the sulphur dioxid contained in dried fruit almost entirely 

 disappears, at least the percentage is very greatly decreased. If ruling 76 had 

 prescribed how tests of fruit should be made, as producers and packers claim 

 was clearly intended, according to the language of the Act, viz., by examina- 

 tion of the cooked product, "when ready for consumption" no controversy 

 would have arisen and no doubt would have been entertained of the intent 

 of the Bureau of Chemistry or of the justice of the Act. 



Another feature of Decision 76 open to fair criticism is, that it fixed an 

 arbitrary unit of sulphur dioxid as permissible, viz., 350 milligrams per kilo- 

 gram, or thirty-five-one-thousandths of one per cent, prior to a determination 

 of the unit of safety, or without attempting, so far as any public utterance of 

 the Bureau of Chemistry is concerned, to establish such safety unit. 



If the unit fixed is made to apply after an examination of the cooked 

 product, it is entirely reasonable and satisfactory. If it is applicable only 

 to the uncooked product it is manifestly too low. The unit of .035 of one per 

 cent appears to reflect a theory rather than a determination on examination 

 and inquiry based on a comprehensive view of conditions incident to actual use 

 of the product as food. 



I am satisfied that reference to the Referee Board of the issues involved 

 iimthe sulphur question, and the action of that Board, have the approval of 

 Secretary "Wilson, who has exhibited a disposition to protect the fruit industry 

 of this State. Dr. Wiley maintains a defiant attitude. His endeavor seems 

 now to be to demonstrate that sulphur is an unwholesome ingredient and 

 should not be used, because its use produces sulphur dioxid, "an added sub- 

 stance which may render the fruit deleterious." He openly says it is the fight 

 of his life to maintain the position he has taken in the use of sulphur. 



Aside from all scientific considerations it may not be out of place to con- 

 sider the sentimental question involved. It is no exaggeration to claim that 

 there is in the disturbance over the use of sulphur a serious menace to the 

 present prosperity and future development of California, which only those 



