SCIENCE. 



[Vol. XVI. No. 393 



opening-up of new lands, has also helped to swell the num- 

 ber of the deaf, — there is certainly something to glory in, 

 that we have still a much smaller percentage of deaf-mutes 

 than the ideal countries we are invited to take as our models. 



BUTTER AND OLEOMAEGAEINE. 



Thb wholesomeness of artificial butter has been affirmed 

 by eminent chemists and physiologists, both in Europe and 

 in this country, who have devoted attention to this subject, 

 when it is prepared from carefully selected and sweet fat of 

 healthy animals, and the process conducted in a proper and 

 cleanly manner. (See in this connection the statements of 

 Dr. C. F. Chandler of the School of Mines, Columbia Col- 

 lege, New York; Professor Henry Morton, Stevens Institute, 

 Hoboken, N.J. ; Professor G. F. Barker, University of Penn- 

 sylvania, Philadelphia; Professor G. C. Caldwell, Cornell 

 University, Ithaca, N.Y. ; Professor S. W. Johnson, Shef. 

 field Scientific School, Yale College, New Haven, Conn. ; 

 Dr. J. W. S. Arnold, University Physiological Laboratory, 

 New York, submitted to the Senate Committee on Agricul- 

 ture and Forestry ; and by Sir F. A. Abel, Mr. Herbert P. 

 Thomas, Mr. A. H. Allen, president of the Society of Public 

 Analysts; Mr. Otto Hehner, secretary of the Society of Pub- 

 lic Analysts ; Dr. James Bell, principal analyzer to the Com- 

 missioners of Inland Revenue, and others before the Eng- 

 lish Select Committee.) 



Mr. Herbert P. Thomas, principal clerk of the Local Gov- 

 ernment Board in charge of the Public Health Department, 

 stated in his testimony before the Select Committee' that 

 they had no evidence that butterine was injurious to health. 

 "It is a very curious thing that our inspectors have con- 

 nected epidemics with a very large number of substances; 

 for instance, epidemics have been supposed to be connected 

 with milk, with cream, with hams, and with cheese, but not 

 with butter or butterine." 



The most scrupulous cleanliness should be observed in the 

 manufacture of oleomargarine. Even a small amount of 

 fat, if allowed to adhere to the apparatus and utensils used, 

 is liable to decompose in such a way as to spoil the succeed- 

 ing batch of materials worked up. Fats can undoubtedly 

 be deodorized by means of chemicals, but it is very ques- 

 tionable whether they could be used as butter substitutes, 

 owing to the increased expense involved to make them per- 

 fectly tasteless, as it is very hard to get rid of the tainted 

 taste. 



That there is a remote possibility, especially when the 

 cattle and hogs are not inspected by a competent veterinarian 

 before slaughtering, of the fats used containing parasitic or- 

 ganisms may be granted, but the remedy is self-evident. 

 The chance of disease being conveyed in this way is very 

 small, but not yet proved to be non-existent. 



Against oleomargarine there has been a large amount of 

 legislation directed, with a view of controlling its produc- 

 tion and sale, and with the unexpected result of increasing 

 both. 



Whatever may have been the production of oleomargarine 

 in this country before the national law went into effect, we 

 have no reliable statistics ; but since the 1st of November, 



' P. 9, Special Report Irom tue Select Committee on the Butter Subttltutes 

 Bill, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, Jul; 4, 1887. 



1886, we have the monthly statements of the manufacturers, 

 duly attested under oath, of the quantity of oleomargarine 

 made and removed from the factories, tax paid for domestic 

 consumption, or in bond for export, each day of the month. 

 These statements also give the quantity and kind of mate- 

 rials employed in the manufacture, and the name and ad- 

 dresses of the parties to whom the oleomargarine is sold or 

 consigned. 



Table IV shows the quantity of oleomargarine produced 

 in this country from Nov. 1, 1886, to Nov. 1, 1889. 



Table IV. — Showing the Quantity of Oleomargarine pro- 

 duced, withdrawn Tax paid, for Export, and Lost or 

 Destroyed in Manufactories, from Nov. 1, 1886, to 

 Nov. 1, 1889. 



These figures are interesting because oleomargarine is the 

 only food substitute about whose production and sale we 

 have positive knowledge. 



During this period the number of factories decreased from 

 37 to 21, notwithstanding which fact the production and sale 

 increased steadily. Oleomargarine is produced by expensive 

 machinery in the large factories in such quantities that it 

 can be sold nearly the whole year round at a less price than 

 butter, although the high rate of tax paid by both the manu- 

 facturers and dealers, which is, of course, ultimately paid by . 

 the consumer, necessarily increases the market price. In 

 the spring and early summer months dairy butter is generally 

 cheaper than oleomargarine, and consequently less of the 

 latter is made and sold during that time. In July the pro- 

 duction of oleomargarine reaches its lowest limits for the 

 year, and obtains its highest in March. 



The system followed by the Internal Revenue Bureau is 

 such that each manufacturer's package can be traced from 

 the time it leaves the factory till it reaches the hands of the 

 retailer or consumer, or leaves the country. 



The high rate of tax demanded from the manufacturers 

 and dealers was undoubtedly intended to be nearly or quite 

 prohibitory ; when compared with tiiose paid by other special 

 tax-payers, rectifiers, brewers, etc., as shown in Table V, 

 the amounts are from three to ten times as high. 



