Q. In case it stood at 95? A. In case it stood at 95 if it were commercial milk I should not consider it necessary.

Cross-examined:

Q. How long have you taught chemistry, Doctor? A. Four or five years.

Q. Did you test the other evening a lactometer handed you by Professor Doremus and myself? A. I did.

Q. Did you find that to substantially agree with the Board of Health lactometer? A. Yes, it agreed essentially with the Board of Health lactometer.

Q. Did you test it at more than one point? A. I tested it at the same points at which I tested the other ones.

Q. Did you test it so that you have no doubt as to its general accuracy? A. Yes, sir; I did.

Q. These samples of milk 86 of which you analyzed, did you know them all to be pure? A. Those that I tested in the country you refer to ?

Q. I think you said you analyzed 86? A. I analyzed 73 samples of milk; I also tested 86 in the country.

Q. The 73 that you analyzed, did you know them to be pure milk? A. I did not; I knew that they were not.

Q. How did you analyze those? A. According to the ordinary method; I will describe the method if you wish; the milk was first dried to a constant weight; then the butter fat was extracted by means of ether, the loss of milk residue determined by the balance, and as a check upon that the amount of butter was placed in a dish and the ether evaporated off and that was also weighed; what remained consisted of caseine, sugar and salts; the sugar was then extracted by means of water and the loss noted and also the weight of the sugar separated was determined; the remainder consisted of caseine together with some salts; the sugar was burned and the salts in the sugar thus determined; the caseine was also burned and the salts with the caseine was determined.

Q. You are familiar with the general method pursued by the Board of Health to detect the adulteration of milk in this city, are you not? A. I am.

Q. Does the Board of Health cause the milk to be tested at the depot?

(Objected to; objection sustained; exception.)

Q. Now, what is the most accurate method of determining the adulteration of milk by water? A. The lactometer.

Q. Then that is more accurate than analysis, is it? A. I think it is.

Q. But you stated just now that by analysis you always found more water in milk than the lactometer indicated, did you not? A. I did.

Q. Then if you consider the lactometrical test the best why was it that you subsequently verified that by analysis? A. Because I desired to find out by two different and independent methods the amount of adulteration.

Q. Then you found the most adulteration by what you deemed the least accurate method of analysis did you not?

(Objected to; objection overruled.)

Q. Will the lactometer show you the percentage of water milk contains to a certainty? A. Do you mean the per cent. of that which it naturally contains?

Q. Naturally and properly together; if you take a sample of milk pure or adulterated does the lactometer show you accurately how much water it contains? A. It will not under those circumstances.

Q. Will it show you accurately how much water is contained in the specimen of pure milk? milk? A. It will not.

Q. Will not analysis? A. Analysis will.

By MR. PRENTICE-Q. Will you read the test of the lactometer handed you by the learned counsel the other evening for a test at the point at which it agreed and disagreed with the other lactometer? A. Where it should have stood at 104 it stood at 105; one degree higher; at 88 it was one degree too low; it was 87; at 78 it was correct; at 68 it was one degree too high; it was 69.

Q. How did you make the determination? A. By taking a salt solution, the gravity of which was determined by means of the specific gravity bottle, and then by calculating from the specific gravity, thus determined, what the degree of the lactometer should have been, and then testing the lactometer in the solution.

HENRY A. MOTT, JR., sworn, and examined by Mr. Prentice.

7. Dr. Mott, will you state your profession? A. I am an analytical chemist.

Q. And what has been your study and experience? A. With respect to the subject of milk, I have devoted what I may say undivided attention to it for the last two years and a half, with a view of publishing a very extensive work on the subject.

am.

Q. Have you already published some papers? A. I have.

Q. You are acquainted with the lactometer, I suppose? A. I

Q. Have you made tests and experiments with it? A. I have. Q. Is it an accurate instrument for determining the specific gravity of milk? A. Yes, sir; when it is properly used.

Q. Other similar instruments are used in the arts for like purposes, are they? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Is there any more accurate method of determining the specific gravity of liquids than by the use of such an instrument? A. I have compared the result I have obtained from the lactometer with the results I have obtained by actual weighing in the scales, and they have agreed in every instance.

Q. How many times have you done that, do you remember? A. I did that at least six times last winter.

Q. This was in a case of milk? A. Yes, sir; in the case of cows' milk.

Q. You have examined the question of milk, generally? A. I have examined milk, generally.

Q. And you have made comparative tests to determine the accuracy of the lactometer you have already stated? A. Yes, sir.

Q. What do you understand by the specific gravity of milk ? A. I understand by the specific gravity of milk, first, the result obtained by comparing the volume with the known quantity of milk, the weight of a known volume of milk with the weight of a known volume of water, at the conventional temperature of 60 Fahr.; and secondly, I should have said when I speak of the specific gravity of milk, I mean the specific gravity of all the milk that can be obtained from a cow, in perfect health, thoroughly mixed together

at the temperature of 60 degrees, and not the specific gravity of the first, second, or third portion of milk.

Q. What would you say of the standard of 1.029 as a standard of milk from a sound healthy cow? A. I say, that the standard 1.029 is the lowest that pure normal milk can ever reach: it never falls below that standard. In cases where it falls below the milk is not normal but is abnormal.

Q. Are you familiar with the literature of milk and its examination? A. I am, sir.

Q. What is the best opinion according to the best authorities, with regard to the use of the lactometer, for detecting the watering of milk?

(Objected to; objection overruled; exception.)

A. According to my opinion and the researches that I have made from the best authorities, the lactometer is recommended as a test; not of the purity of milk but of the excessive adulteration of milk.

COUNSEL I move to strike that out as not responsive.

The COURT-I think it is responsive; leave it in.

By Mr. PRENTICE-Q. You understand it approves the use of the lactometer? A. Yes, sir, I understand it.

Q. Do you consider that the thermometer is absolutely necessary to discover the fact, whether milk has been adulterated with water or not? A. "The fact," I should like in italics-to discover the fact. No sir, for this reason, that combined with the lactometer we use the senses. If there is any doubt as to the temperature of milk, it can be easily cooled, so that the senses will detect that its temperature is below 60, and when it is below 60, it is in favor of the milkmen.

Cross-examined:

Q. How do you determine the temperature without the thermometer? A. I can easily determine by my senses that the temperature of milk is or is not below 60.

Q. Can you tell it with water? A. Through the glass, no.

Q. Well, if you taste it or touch it-apply your senses to it? A. Do you say that is water?

Q. I say it came from this decanter? A. I should cool the milk a

little further down before I made the experiment. I should imagine the temperature of that was below 60.

Q. Then to determine the temperature of milk you would use your imagination, would you—would you determine the temperature of milk by your suppositions—what do you think the temperature there is? A. I said that I would cool the milk lower than that. I should judge that that was below 60; it was 48 and a half.

Q. In order to get it to a temperature which would favor milkmen you would cool that first still further, would you, if it was milk? A. Not a great deal.

Q. If you would put it at 16 degrees from the 48 you would have it at the freezing point? A. Yes, sir; when you have reached a certain standard one or two degrees makes considerable difference.

Q. At what standard does one or two degrees of temperature make considerable difference; why does it make a considerable difference there? A. Because my senses are acute enough to tell the distinction.

Q. Now why would you cool this article at 48 further in order to test it properly? A. I would like to explain.

Q. We have seen that you cannot tell the temperature of a fluid by guessing at it; are your other senses, referring only to those you would use in testing milk, more accurate than the sense which enables you to tell the temperature? A. I have never found any defect in my senses.

Q. Won't you apply another of your senses, that of sight, to the contents of this bottle?

(Showing bottle.)

A. To a chemist's preparation? no, sir.

Q. Have you any ground for assuming this to be a chemical preparation? A. The ground that you will not positively swear that it is milk.

Q. Have I been a witness in this case-this is a fresh bottle? A. What is the question?

Q. Won't you apply another of your senses, that of sight, to the contents of this bottle?

(Objected to; objection sustained; exception.)

Q. Is the sense of smell of use to you in determining whether a fluid is milk or not? A. Yes, sir, when I heat the milk.