Prof. Cochran states that in six samples obtained from a grocer in West Chester, he found the specific gravity to be as follows:

When coffee was higher priced than at present, the adulterations detected by our chemist were more frequent, but it is found that, largely owing to a cut in prices between two large firms, the prevailing low prices have diverted the cheapening process into the use of lower grades, and the mixture of the lower grades with the better brands. This species of adulteration is somewhat difficult to meet, and the difficulty of meeting it is increased by the fact that there is no established standard for coffee, and, hence, no line can be drawn as to what constitutes adulteration by substitution of an article of the same class.

In referring to coffee and the results of his examinations for the Department, Prof. Cochran writes as follows:

"A ten per cent. decoction of roasted and ground coffee has a specific gravity varying from 1,008 to 1,010. From 25 to 30 per cent. of the weight of coffee has been dissolved by the boiling water used iz making the decoction. Many of the substances used in adulterating coffee yield a decoction of a much lighter specific gravity. This fact frequently furnishes a basis from which the amount of a given adulterant can be approximately calculated.

During the process of roasting, coffee loses from 12 to 20 per cent. of its weight; the toughness of the bean is destroyed, which facilitates grinding; the aroma of the kernel is developed, and its oil rendered more diffusible.

A part of the loss in weight which the coffee sustains in roasting is due to the escape of water. Roasted coffee should contain only one per cent. of water; by glazing, the percentage of water in the beans is sometimes increased to 6 or 7 per cent., or even more. The manufacturers of glazed coffee usually claim that the glazing is done for the purpose of retaining the aroma of the coffee; this claim is in many cases false; the coffees that have been glazed are frequently of very inferior quality, and almost entirely destitute of either aroma or taste; the glazing of these coffees is done for the double purpose of adding weight by the retention of moisture, and concealing inferiority; the claim set forth on the wrappers of many of these package coffees are false and misleading."

SUBSTITUTES FOR COFFEE.

During the past fifteen years the increase in the sales of mixtures designed to take the place of coffee have greatly increased, and numerous materials have been added to the list of their constituents; the minimum of this increase is represented by the sales of 89,000 pounds, valued at $6,000, in 1884, and the maximum, by the sale of 2,807,000 pounds, valued at $107,000, in 1895. Since the latter date, probably owing to the decrease in the market price of genuine coffee, the sales have gradually fallen off, as is shown by the following table, which also shows the increase from 1884 to 1895:

The Department has insisted that these compounds should not only be harmless in their character, but that they should also be labeled or marked in such a manner that their true character might be readily known to the purchaser; their sale is legitimate, and those who want them should be permitted to purchase them without restriction; it is not those who want them that the law is designed to protect, but those who wish to purchase genuine coffee. With this object in view, the Department has required that the word "Substitute," or "Mixture," or in some cases, "Compound," should be used upon the label, and in accordance with the decision, a label reading "Jones' Coffee Substitute," would be permissible, but the word "substitute” must be in as conspicuous type or letters as the other words or printing upon the label, and must occupy as prominent a position.

Under English law this is regulated by the following provision:

"Provided, That each packet containing or purporting to contain coffee, with any other article or substance mixed therewith, shall have affixed thereto a label, in manner hereinafter provided, denoting, in letters of not less size than the largest letters affixed to or imprinted on such label, the proper names of the several articles or substances of which the mixture is composed.

Robinson & Cribb, (Law and Chemistry of Food and Drugs, page 27), give the following abstract of the English law:

"Selling, exposing to sale, offering, keeping ready for sale, or delivering coffee mixed with other substances, unless there be affixed a label denoting the name of such substances in as large letters as any on the label. Imitations or substitutes for coffee, or chicory, must be sold in labeled packets denoting the duty."

Inasmuch as a statement of the various materials used would, to a great extent, expose trade secrets, the Department has not insisted upon the amount and name of the material used being stated upon the label, but, in accordance with our request, many manufacturers and dealers have placed this information upon the package.

Realizing the fact that the general public should be posted as to the actual character of these mixtures, Prof. Cochran was directed to make a careful examination and analyses of the leading articles of substitute coffee found upon the market; in his report of his results, Prof. Cochran has the following:

"No adulterant of or substitute for coffee resembles it in any of its physiological effects upon the human body. The preparations sold as substitutes for coffee are substitutes only in the sense that they furnish a liquid to be imbibed in the place of coffee, and bearing some resemblance to a decoction of the latter in color and taste. This fact is quite generally recognized, and consequently these substances find favor with many people who believe that coffee acts injuriously upon them.

"Some of the substances used either as adulterants or substitutes for coffee are rye, chicory, peas, pea-hulls, wheat, wheat-bran, barley, acorns, husks of cocoa, beans and date stones. Numerous other substances are said to be used in adulterating coffee but have not been detected by me."

By direction of the Department, Prof. Cochran made a full report upon these substitutes as found by him in the open markets of the State, but our space will only permit of the use of the following extracts from his report:

1. Roasted, sweetened wheat, 75 per cent.; coffee, 25 per cent. Top of package marked: "This package contains 35 per cent. of pure coffee, 15 per cent. of sugar and 50 per cent. of wheat."

2. Sample is exclusively "roasted rye."

3. Sample is composed of bran, cracked wheat, chaff, and caramel. 4. Sample is roasted barley.

5. Sample is composed of the roasted and rather finely broken grains of wheat and barley.

6. Sample is composed of roasted peas, about 69 per cent; roasted grains, about 29 per cent., and chicory, about 2 per cent.

7. Sample is apparently composed of coffee screenings.

8. Contains about 64 per cent. of pea-hulls, 13 per cent. of chicory, and 23 per cent. of coffee.

9. Sample is composed of roasted cereals and husks of cocoa beans. 10. Sample is composed of bran, cracked wheat and a little caramel; it is chiefly wheat bran, sweetened and roasted.

11. Sample is composed of ground chicory, peas, coffee and coffee hulls; the proportions are about as follows: coffee and coffee hulls, 75 per cent.; chicory and peas, 25 per cent.

It is unnecessary to multiply quotations from Prof. Cochran's report, and it is sufficient to state that one or more of the above will probably cover nine-tenths of the "coffee substitutes" now upon the market. Their sale is not objectionable except from the fact that the purchaser is paying many times the actual cost and value of the materials; their sale is not objected to by the Department, and it is only anxious that the purchaser should know their true character, and be in a position to judge justly as to the comparison of prices paid and value received.

In this connection it is a satisfaction to be able to report that in no case, in the large number of coffee substitute samples examined by the chemists of the Department, has anything of a positively injurious nature been discovered; probably the worst than can be reported is that some of the materials used are of doubtful effect and utility in the case of invalids suffering from certain classes of disease. The materials have, in all cases, been such as, while they contain none of the special constituents of coffee, and only furnish a beverage resembling coffee in color, and of a character that only injures the public by the high prices paid, of which a portion is chargeable to the packages which contain the mixture, and which, in some cases at least, are of an elaborate and expensive character, all of which the purchaser pays for without obtaining any direct benefit.

BEER, WINE AND MALT EXTRACTS.

During the past two years the attention of the Department has been repeatedly called to the statement that injurious materials were being used in beer, wine and malt extracts. The attention of F. N. Moore, one of the special agents of the Department, was called to the matter, and Dr. F. T. Aschman, of Pittsburgh, was directed to test samples sent him by Mr. Moore. Twenty-seven samples of beer, thirteen of wines and thirteen of malt extract were selected and sent to Dr. Aschman. A full and complete report on the subject was also. prepared, and it is to be regretted that the space at our disposal will not permit us to use anything but leading extracts from the results as given by Mr. Moore and Dr. Aschman.

In referring to the analyses of the samples of beer, Dr. Aschman writes as follows:

"Looking over these results we find two facts especially noticeable; that the old definition of a true beer will no longer hold good, for the majority of the beers sold within our State; and that in many instances preservatives and carbonating and "improvers" are used to prevent the spoiling of the beer or to aerate or improve it. According to all authorities, beer should be a beverage obtained by fermentation, partial or complete, without distillation, from barley, malt, hops, yeast and water. The results obtained, especially the percentages of extract, albuminoids, ash and phosphoric acid, indicate that in a large proportion of our beers, rice, corn and grape sugar are substituted to a great extent for malt made from barley. This practice has grown to an enormous extent in our country, and is partially due to the demand on the part of the American public for a light colored, sparkling beer. The use of grape sugar and other saccharine substances is the most objectionable of the substances specified as they are entirely lacking in the important mineral and nitrogenous principles of the malt and other grains.

The use of preservatives and "improvers" is also unfortunately practiced to a considerable extent and is undoubtedly the most important adulteration of beer, and one which should be prohibited, ferreted out and punished wherever found. These materials are objectionable for many reasons: They introduce foreign and often deleterious substances into the beer; permit the marketing of badly brewed or spoiled articles, and they prevent the public from judging of the true character of such spoiled beers when they are really unfit for consumption.

I have not been able to detect in the samples of beer examined any 6--7--98