74 MAINE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. I9IO. 



PREPARED MUSTARD. 



According to the food standards and definitions adopted for 

 Maine, prepared mustard is defined as follows : "Prepared mus- 

 tard, German mustard, French mustard, mustard paste, is a 

 paste composed of a mixture of ground mustard seed or mus- 

 tard flour with salt, spices and vinegar, and, calculated free from 

 water, fat and salt, contains not more than twenty-four (24) 

 percent, of carbohydrates calculated as starch, determined ac- 

 cording to the official methods, not more than twelve (12) per- 

 cent, of crude fiber nor less than thirty-five (35) percent, of 

 protein, derived solely from the materials named." 



Five out of the six samples examined contained turmeric. In 

 those prepared by Libby, McNeil & Libby of Chicago, the 

 amount of turmeric present was so slight that it is assumed to 

 be accidental. 



According to the decision of the United States Board of Food 

 and Drug Inspection the addition of turmeric to mixed mustard 

 without declaring its presence constitutes an adulteration. Con- 

 sequently No. 8642, No. 8644 and No. 8641 are misbranded and 

 adulterated under the definitions of the law. No. 8642 is further 

 adulterated in that it contains cereal. In the case of 8642, the 

 company acknowledge the presence of both the cereal and the 

 turmeric and are correcting their labels. The case is being 

 further investigated under the law. 



Some manufacturers justify the use of turmeric in such cases 

 as the above on the ground that it is a spice, and that, having a 

 distinctive odor and flavor, it forms one of the principal ingre-' 

 dients of certain mixtures such as curry powder. Some authori- 

 ties seem to favor this view and therefore we have not as yet 

 made any prosecutions under the State law for such seeming 

 violations. However, when turmeric is used in such products in 

 connection with such material as starch there would seem to be 

 no doubt but that the color produced by the turmeric conceals 

 inferiority and is, in such a case, unlawful. 



In case of No. 8641, the manufacturers claim that they did 

 not put any turmeric into the goods and also claim that in the 

 samples which they obtained at the same place where the Sta- 

 tion samples were bought, they found no turmeric present. 

 Samples in the possession of the Station were re-examined and 

 the presence of turmeric was found without doubt. 



