DR. HERTER'S TESTIMONY

Q. As a matter of fact, you know, don't you, Doctor, that the very opposite effect to which you testified has been found by other eminent scientists with reference to some of these subjects that you have testified about even in the administration of small doses of benzoate?

A. Well, I don't believe that I can agree to that.

Q. Have you not examined Dr. Wiley's report of his investigation?

A. I have.

Q. Well, do you not know that he so found?

A. I do.

Q. And what position does he hold, Doctor?

A. He holds that sodium benzoate--

Q. Well, I know--what official position does he hold?

A. He is chief of the bureau of chemistry of the Department of Agriculture.

Q. What Government?

A. The United States Government.

Q. That is rather a responsible position?

A. Very.

Q. And Doctor Wiley has occupied that position for many years, has he not?

A. I believe he has.

Q. And he conducted quite an extensive investigation on this subject, did he not?

A. I believe that he did.

Q. You know, too, don't you, Doctor, that a number of eminent scientists who have read and studied the report that was published of the work of the so-called Referee Board have reached different conclusions from the board as to the effect of benzoateof soda in foods, even based on the facts included in those published reports, don't you?

A. I have been told that there has been criticism of the report of the Referee Board, but I have felt that the criticism that has come to my notice has been for the most part, or wholly, from such sources as lead me not to give great confidence, to place great confidence in those results or in those opinions I should say--they are not results--opinions. In general I would say that that is my attitude.

Q. Well, you know that Dr. Wiley has criticized this report and draws a different conclusion from what the Board did from the facts that are published in the report, do you not?

A. I think so. Dr. Wiley told me so himself the other day when he talked with me.

Q. Now, you know Dr. Reed of Cincinnati, do you?

A. I had that pleasure at Denver.

Q. He is an ex-president of the American Medical Association, is he not?

A. I don't know that of my own knowledge. I will have to answer that on sQme kind of hearsay.

Q. Well, he is an eminent physician, is he not, and a scientist?

A. I don't think there is any reason to regard him as a scientist. I have been told that he was a good gynecologist.

Q. Well, do you know what his training is, Doctor?

A. No, I can't say that I do. That is a matter of hearsay.

Q. You know that he reaches a different conclusion from what the board did?

A. I do.

Q. I didn't get my question in--you know he reaches a different conclusion from what the board did as to the effect of administering benzoate of soda in the foods, based on the facts published in the report of the board, do you not?

A. I had a different idea of what he bases his views on.

Q. You know that he does not agree with the conclusions of the board, do you not?

A. I infer that.

Q. Now there was some sort of an association of chemists held at Denver recently, wasn't there, Doctor?

A. I think that the association contained some chemists. Whether they are all chemists or.not, I don't know.

Q. What is the name of that association?

A. That is the--I ought to remember on account of the squabble over the Mississippi, but I have forgotten--that is the National Pure Food and Dairy Association--no, that isn't right--The Association of State and National Food and Dairy Departments--I think that is what it is.

Q. Now that is made up of people who are connected with the study of foods, is it not?

A. Certain aspects.

Q. Study and manufacture of foods?

A. Certain aspects of the study of foods.

Q. You were present at that association?

A. I was present.

Q. Did you address the association?

A. Well, I spoke to the association.

Q. What was the subject of your address?

A. It had to do with the action of sodium benzoate on the human organism.

Q. Did you discuss the work of the Referee Board in that connection any?

A. I referred to it, but I particularly referred to the work done in my laboratory.

Q. Was there any of the other members of the Referee Board there?

A. They were all there.

Q. Did any of the other members address that meeting?

A. They all spoke except Dr. Taylor.

Q. What were the subjects of their addresses?

A. The same general topic, I should say.

Q. That you discussed?

A. Well, for their own reports--they did for their reports what I did for mine.

Q. And were there any other addresses delivered there on this subject of the use of benzoate of soda in foods?

A. Well, I suppose that the chairman's address might be so regarded and Dr. Reed's address; they contained reference to it.

Q. Who was the chairman?

A. Mr. or Dr. Emery--Mr. Emery.

Q. Now there was some sort of a report passed upon there by that association with reference to this effect of benzoate of soda upon the human system as administered in the food, and also as to the result of all investigations made on that subject up to the date of that association, was there not?

A. I think there was. I think that I have in mind probably the same report that you have in mind, but I am not sure.

Q. And that report that was made to the association was a report made by a committee of eleven men, was it not?

A. I believe that there was a committee which reported.

Q. I will ask you now if that committee was not composed of chemists entirely?

A. I don't know, sir; I don't think that I had heard the name of any one of the number.

Q. And you know that it was reported there by that committee that the investigation of that subject had not been carried to an extent sufficient to determine the question as to whether the use of benzoate of soda in food was or was not injurious to the human system--do you not?

A. I have only a very vague recollection of what was said in the report.

Q. You heard the report discussed, did you?

A. I think that I did. My impression is that a recommendation was made by that committee asking for further investigations. That is my recollection of it.

Q. You do know, don't you, Doctor, that there is now, and has been, a diversity of opinion among scientists upon this very question?

A. Which question, may I ask?

Q. The question as to whether or not the administration of benzoate of soda in foods to the human being is injurious to the human system.

A. I know that there has been a diversity of opinion about that.

Q. And you know, too, that this diversity of opinion has existed since the Referee Board report was published, do you not?

A. Well, you mean it has existed in spite of the publication, or do you mean that it was initiated then?

MR BINGHAM: Listen to the question, Doctor; I think it will explain itself.

A. Well, I wouldn't say since; it existed before.

Q. Well, you know that scientists have criticised it since it was published, do you not, and that they have even told you that they did not agree with you on the question?

A. I have never heard any adverse opinion of the report of the Referee Board from any person that I would class as a scientist.

Q. How do you class Dr. Wiley?

A. Well, I don't know Dr. Wiley very well, and I find it is a rather difficult task to class him. I don't know what you expect of me.

Pages 160-161.

Q. One more question as to Dr. Lucas. (Dr. Lucas was one of Herter's squad.) It is a fact, is it not, Doctor, that Dr. Lucas disagreed with you as to the result of the injurious effect of the use of benzoate of soda in food in small quantities?

A. I do not know very accurately what Dr. Lucas' views are, but I know he has done some work particularly on the action of benzoic acid and I judge from the paper that I heard read at Denver that his views are in some respects at least different from mine. I do, not know to what extent.

Page 165.

Q. Did you know that the Department of Agriculture of the United States Government stood ready to furnish this Referee Board with everything at its command that was necessary for making this experiment that is under consideration?

A. I heard that stated by the President of the United States and by the Secretary of Agriculture more than once.

Q. Did you know that the United States Government had a chemical laboratory in the City of New York?

A. I did not.

Q. Did you not learn from the Department that it had numerous analytical chemists in its employ at the time and before this experiment was begun, in the City of New York?

A. I was not aware of that fact.

Q. Well, you did know that it had a Department of Chemistry?

A. I did.

Q. And-you knew, too, that that department was engaged in the administration of pure food laws of the United States, didn't you?

A. So I had heard.

Q. And you knew that it had a corps of workers, of chemists, analytical and otherwise, constantly engaged in the work of analyzing foods and their analytical testing, did you not?

A. I assumed that to be the case.

Q. How did it come that you did not secure your analytical chemists and men for doing the routine work from the force of the Department of Agriculture?

A. Because it was intimated to me that it was the desire of the Department of Agriculture and by the President of the United States that in the investigation carried on by me I should be free to use my judgment as to all points connected with the matter of personnel in my laboratory.

Q. Why was it that you preferred to select such men as Dr. Lucas and Dr. Ringer and Mr. O'Brien and Dr. Harvey, some of whom at least are neither graduates or chemists and who, according to your own statement, would need instruction, rather than those experienced men in the Department of Agriculture who are regularly engaged in that class of work?

A. It never occurred to me that they would be available, partly because they had their own occupations for the entire year and partly for the reason that it nevef occurred to me that men such as I wanted would be willing to come from the Department of Agriculture. We canvassed the situation with regard to the universities particularly and if I had known there was a branch department of the Department of Agriculture in New York I certainly should have applied to them.

Pages 176-177.

Q. Well, you were impressed at that time, were you not, with the fact that this expenditure of time and money was not being made as a matter of idle curiosity, but for the purpose of opening the door, if possible, to the use of benzoate of soda for such purpose?

A. I did not hear the case stated so fully nor so eloquently as that, but I got the impression that the manufacturers felt that if they had to give up benzoate of soda--or at least that some of them felt that if they had to give up benzoate of soda--they would either have to be shown some other way of carrying on their preservation of food or they would be put to financial loss.

Page 178.

Q. Who was it that said that this benzoate of soda question was a pressing question?

A. I do not know that anybody said that it was a pressing question; I may have said it myself.

Q. How did you get the impression that that was a pressing question?

A. Well, I said that there were two or three questions, the sulphite question, the benzoate question, the saccharine question, that it was important to act on. The President wanted the saccharine question investigated.

Q. Who was it that gave you to understand that these two subjects were the most important?

A. I am unable to answer that question.

Q. Did you not get the idea that these questions were pressing because they involved large interests?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Yes, I know; but getting this settled was desired owing to the fact that large interests were involved?

A. That was the general impression of the board.

Q. You knew that the interests involved were the ones that were clamoring for some sort of a chemical preservative, did you not?

A. I knew from the meeting of the manufacturers to which I have referred that many of them desired either to be permitted to continue to use benzoate of soda or requested a substitute for it, and I understood, principally from Dr. Taylor, that the question was a very live one in the west.