From this report, which is the outcome of a thoroughly scientific investigation, it appears that the only thing which could in any manner afford justification for any of the charges before referred to, is the absence of a generally accepted rule as to the length of time beers should remain in cellar before being offered for sale. In reference to this question, Dr. Carroll had the kindness to quote in his report my letter written to him on behalf of the U. S. Brewers' Association, in which it is stated that an attempt would be made at the next Brewers' Convention to establish a standard for normal beer, so far as ingredients and age are concerned. At the risk of becoming tiresome, the writer must reiterate that not one of the 476 samples of malt liquors officially analyzed contained either hop-substitutes or any other deleterious substances, the use of which could, from any rational point of view, be regarded as an adulteration.‡

It has been shown that spices, designed to impart pleasant flavors to beer, have been used by brewers in the earliest ages. Grässe says, that in the thirteenth century the brewers of Flanders used a variety of spices, such as lavender, amber, laurel, sage, &c., and that the spiced beer of Cambray was justly celebrated for its superior aromatic quality. In the first half of the middle ages the Germans drank almost no other but spiced beer; and that it was held in great esteem is evident from the fact that the Ecumenical Councils of Worms and Treves (A. D. 868 and 895 respectively), decreed that persons doing penance should not partake of spiced beer except on Sundays, common beer only being allowed them on workdays. The English used one spiced ale called Bracket, made of ale, pepper and honey; and another called Ale-berry, made of sugar, beer and spices. †

No deleterious substances were ever used, so far as can be judged from reliable information, for the purposes mentioned, and the quantities used never exceeded, of course, that measure which was required to modify the flavor or taste of the beer.

Hence the addition of such spices had no physiological effect whatever. It need scarcely be said that the use of large quantities of these substances defeats its own object, just as the excessive use of spices in cooking instead of improving dishes, spoils them. In fact, the application of flavor-changing substances is to be regarded as analagous in every way to the spicing practiced in cookery. Hager, the eminent authority before quoted, holds that the admixture of flavor-giving substances is perfectly justifiable; all the more so for the reason, that these things are entirely harmless. Anise-seed, fennel, holy thistle, and other similar vegetable matters which are in daily use in every well-appointed kitchen, would scarcely be regarded as injurious by any one. But if any reader, unacquainted with botanical terms, were told of adulterations of beer by the admixture of pimpinella, centaurea benedicta, and fœniculum, he would probably be eager to call the brewers poisoners and load them with maledictions-little dreaming that his cook, in preparing his food, uses the same plants (by other names) in like proportions. This parading of Latin terms is one of the tricks by which Prohibitionists succeed in beclouding the understanding of honest men. Though perfectly justifiable and proper, and sanctioned by timehallowed practice, the use of flavor-giving substances is almost entirely discarded by the brewers of the present time, and in this country it has, in fact, never been much in vogue at any time.

FININGS.

For the purpose of clarifying malt liquors various materials are now in use, the principal ones being chips or shavings of hazel, birch or beech, which fulfil the functions of fining by attracting and holding the muddy particles. Immediately after the completion of the clarifying process they are removed, the taste and general condition of the liquid remaining unchanged, except in point of clearness. In America, as in England and Germany, isinglass and Irish moss sometimes take the place of chips, and it is their application that has given rise to so many astounding stories in reference to dangerous adulterations of malt liquors. Now, isinglass, horrible as the word may sound in the ears of

some persons, is a harmless gelatine "chiefly prepared," according to Webster, "from the sounds or air-bladders of various species of sturgeons found in the rivers of Western Russia." Placed in malt liquor it dissolves, and, spreading into a net-like surface, drags to the bottom the floating particles which are to be removed. In cookery like gelatines are used for similar purposes, and every house-wife knows, that they are tasteless and do not affect food or drink otherwise than in the manner stated. Irish moss, is a sea-weed, used for feeding cattle and for jellies; its clarifying quality is similar to that of the articles already described. This said, it appears superfluous to comment on the motives of the persons who represent this weed as "harmful and destructive" in its effects upon man. * Not one of the articles mentioned imparts any new properties to malt liquors, but merely takes from them that which is in a sense impure.

CLEANSING, PRESERVATIVE AND OTHER MATERIALS.

One of the favorite artifices of the enemies of the brewing industry is to compile a list of the names of articles advertised as "brewers supplies," and to make it appear that the mere fact of being advertised under such head, ought to be sufficient proof that these articles go into beer. The truth is, that many materials so advertised are employed only for cleansing purposes. Hydronapthole is one of them; bi-sulphite of lime is another. Bencoic acid and combinations of sulphurous acids also belong to this category. For cleansing fermenting-vessels, barrels and cellars, for washing yeast and killing bacteria in it, and for like purposes, these substances prove very effective.

As a preservative salicylic acid, which is at present used more frequently than anything else in preserving certain kinds of food, deserves preference. Applied in the ratio of 1 to 10,000 it fully answers the object indicated, and is physiologically free from any injurious effects. When salicylic acid was first introduced as a preserver of food, the usual prejudices against everything bearing a chemical appellation, lead to acrimonious controversies be

* In the N. Y. Mail and Express of February 17, 1886, isinglass, liquid finings, Irish moss, &c., are described as "harmful and destructive," and are classed with substances that never enter into the composition of beer.

tween flatulent would-be saviors of mankind on the one hand, and progressive scientists on the other. But since Professor Kolbe has demonstrated the harmlessness of the acid, by swallowing sixteen grains of it every day during an entire year, one hears rarely of objections to the use of the article. Glycerine may be, but very rarely is, applied in the ratio of 1 to 10,000, when in consequence of being stored for too long a time, malt liquors, originally good and perfect, have acquired a hard taste.

BI-CARBONATE OF SODA.

Dr. Alfred Ludlow Carroll, until recently the able Secretary of the N. Y. State Board of Health, under whose direction the law prescribing the analysis of malt liquors has been carried out, was asked by the writer whether, judging from legal and medical standpoints, the use of bi-carbonate of soda could be held to be an adulteration. To this question Dr. Carroll replied, that such use is entirely proper within certain reasonable bounds. It is understood that the action of bi-carbonate of soda upon beer is to neutralize the acid taste peculiar to malt liquors. Brewers would certainly prefer not to add this material to their finished product, since it entails upon them additional cost and labor; but they are compelled to do so, on account of what might be styled a vitiation of the taste of modern beer-drinkers. Brewers have ascertained, to their cost, that lager beer having the acid taste, which bi-carbonate of soda neutralizes, is at once pronounced defective by the consumers, and hence discarded. It is for this reason that brewers use bi-carbonate of soda, but never in larger proportion than one ounce to a keg at the utmost, the usual quantity being a half ounce to a keg.* The best proof of the correctness of the latter assertion lies in the fact, that the cartridges of bi-carbonate prepared for brewers' use never contain more than one ounce, and usually only a half ounce. Every physician knows that Dr. Carroll's hygienic view of the use of bi-carbonate of soda, in the proportion stated, is entirely correct.

* Drs. Schwarz & Weingärtner of the N. Y. Scientific Station for the Art of Brewing, to whom I am indebted for valuable information, have thoroughly probed this subject and reached the conclusion, that 99 per cent. of the brewers would abandon this harmless practice, if popular demand did not prevent them from doing so.

This is in every way a complete statement of the practices of modern brewers. Not one of the substances used by them is injurious to health, and as a matter of fact there are but two materials enumerated herein, to the use of which objections were ever raised, at one time or another, by the public. These are glucose and bi-carbonate of soda. Both are harmless, and declared to be so by the best authorities. If their use should be discontinued for any rational reasons, concerted action ought to be taken by all States. It will not do, however, to forbid such use in one or two States only. And in this connection it may be appropriate to invite attention to a bill now pending before the Legislature at Albany, and another recently introduced in the Congress of the United States. The former provides † that "all ale and beer manufactured in this State shall be brewed and made from hops and malt and pure water, and nothing else." The enforcement of such a law, prohibiting the use of finings, &c., would amount to a destruction of the brewing industry of the State of New York, for the simple reason that beer-drinkers of the present time cannot be induced to drink beer lacking the qualities produced by some of the harmless substances herein described, and the result would be, that the beers manufactured in adjoining States, where no such laws are in force, would flood the New York markets. The legislators of New York would in that case have legislated to death one of the largest industries of their own State for the benefit of the same branch of industry in other States. And, what is more still, the law would be a failure so far as the pretence of protecting public health is concerned, since the public would obtain from elsewhere precisely the kind of beer, the mauufacture of which would be prohibited in New York. A noble task, indeed, for the law-makers of a great State! Unless all the States of the Union agree upon concerted action in the matter, the passage of such a law in any State would be equivalent to the crippling of an industry in that State, to the end that the prosperity of other States may be enhanced. The only

+ An Act to prevent the manufacture and sale of adulterated ale and beer, and to preserve public health. A similar bill was recently introduced, but defeated, in the German Reichstag.