ON BEET-ROOT PULP. 
467 
On the occasion of our journey to Belgium I brought home 
with me a sample of old pitted pulp which had been kept for 
about one year, and submitted it to a general analysis. When 
it w T as analysed it yielded 6174 per cent, of water; but as it 
no doubt lost some water on the road, it will be more appro- 
priate to represent its composition in the same state of mois- 
ture as the specimen of English pulp, which, in round 
numbers, contained 70 per cent, of water. 
This specimen of old Belgium pulp accordingly had the 
following composition : 
Composition of Belgium Beet-root Pulp, one year old. 
Moisture . . . . # . . 70*00 
* Albuminous compounds (flesh-forming matters) . . 243 
Digestible fibre, pectinous compounds, &c. . . 18*67 
Woody fibre (cellulose) . . . . .648 
Mineral matter (ash) ..... 2*42 
10000 
# Containing nitrogen . . . *39 
Like all old pulp, it contained a sufficient amount of lactic 
acid to give it a strongly acid taste. 
In all other respects the Belgium pulp did not differ mate- 
rially in quality from the specimen of English pulp, the 
analysis of which is given above. 
Some years ago I published in this journal two analyses of 
the pulp from common mangold-wurzel, which was obtained 
as a residue in the distillation of spirit from mangolds. One 
of the distillery pulps yielded 9078 per cent., and the other 
91 ‘84 per cent, of water, and both were much inferior in nu- 
tritive properties to the residual pulp from beet-root sugar 
manufactories. In preparing spirit from beets, the soluble 
constituents are more thoroughly removed than in sugar 
factories, and, in consequence, distillery pulp has not the 
same feeding value as the pulp from beet-root sugar works. 
In the opinion of several French authorities beet-root pulp 
is equal, if not superior, in nutritive properties to the roots 
from which it is obtained. On the other hand, there are 
many persons who doubt the correctness of this view, because 
in the presses of the sugar manufacturer the sugar, which is 
the most fattening constituent of the roots, passes almost 
entirely into the juice, and is lost to the pulp. Beets without 
the sugar, it is said, surely cannot be so fattening as with it. 
This is self-evident; however, the statement that pulp is 
more nutritious than the roots from which it is obtained as a 
refuse, does not imply that a ton of sugar-beets is less nutri- 
tious than a ton of the same roots minus the expressed sugary 
juice, but it means that weight for weight beet-root pulp is 
