Note: All items pictured on this website are in the personal collection of Frank W. Reiser. Please contact me if you wish to discuss displaying the collection at your institution or need additional information about the topic.
What Fools These Mortals Be!
Could there be a better catchphrase for a newspaper headline story about its readership being tricked into eating counterfeit staple foods such as milk, sugar, bread, coffee, and tea? Puck was a pioneering American humor magazine published from 1871 to 1918. Founded in St. Louis, Missouri, by Austrian-born cartoonist Joseph Keppler, the magazine significantly shaped the modern political cartoon. In 1877, it moved to New York City and became a leading voice in its cultural and political scene. The magazine’s name was inspired by Shakespeare’s character Puck from “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” and the character became the magazine’s mascot, appearing on the cover of every issue.
During the late 19th century, Puck played a critical role in the evolution of American humor, moving the art from its tall tales and dialect-laden roots toward the more sophisticated and literary humor associated with magazines like the New Yorker. It also led the way for an explosion of color in American printing during the last quarter of the 19th century, inspiring newspapers to follow its style and leading to the advent of the comic strip.
Puck’s political cartoons were particularly influential. The magazine was at the forefront of using humor to critique its time’s political and social landscape. The magazine’s cartoons covered many newsworthy and social issues, including immigration, labor, and women’s rights. Some of the most famous political cartoonists of the time, such as Thomas Nast and Frederick Opper, contributed to Puck.
Introduction
A wave of popular science literature fueled the fascination with microscopy. Magazines and newspapers were replete with articles detailing wonders seen through the lens of a microscope, from the intricate structures of everyday items to the hidden worlds of biological specimens. This era also saw the rise of microscopical societies, where amateurs and professionals gathered to share their explorations. Armed with microscopes, anyone could be a citizen scientist.
Toward the end of the 1800s, investigative reports about coffee and other foods having unsafe additives, a form of cheating to increase profits, were often illustrated with detailed drawings from microscopic observations. A political movement fueled by investigative journalism like Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, an expose of the meatpacking industry’s dark side, set the stage for legislative action.
The culmination of these efforts was the Food and Drug Act of 1906, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt. This act was not just a response to the horrors uncovered by the press and amateur scientists but also a powerful testament to the influence of public engagement in science. It laid the foundation for the modern FDA, emphasizing the need for safety and truth in labeling, though its initial enforcement capabilities were modest. The act, born from a blend of public health crises, journalism, and scientific curiosity, marked a significant step towards consumer protection, driven in part by the middle class’s newfound hobby of microscopy.
A Summation of
The Detection and Adulteration in Food: Part I. Coffee
Charles Marvin Vorce
The American Monthly Microscopical Journal
January 1881, Vol. 2, No. 1, New York
Charles M. Vorce highlights the widespread practice of adulterating food products, focusing mainly on coffee. Despite the availability of pure products, economic incentives drive manufacturers and dealers to adulterate food, making detection crucial for consumer protection. Vorce lists the primary methods for detecting adulteration as microscopical examination, chemical analysis, and physical examination but stresses microscopical examination as the most accessible for general use.
Coffee is often sold in a ground form that is frequently adulterated. The common belief is that chicory is the primary adulterant, but chicory itself is often adulterated with cheaper substances like roasted peas, which are both cheaper and heavier than chicory. Other roots and substances are also used, often dyed to mimic the color of coffee.
Vorce’s Methodology for Microscopical Detection
Pure Coffee: To understand what pure coffee looks like under a microscope, one should examine a roasted coffee berry. The berry’s internal structure, particularly the membrane lining the bean’s cavity, provides distinct features that should be present in ground coffee.
What To Look For
Chicory cells are much larger than coffee cells and have a different cellular structure. Peas or beans can be identified by their starch grains and the texture of their cells, which differ markedly from coffee.
Sifting: Start by sifting the coffee to examine the fine particles for starch, indicating adulteration.
Larger Particles: Inspect larger pieces for root fragments or other adulterants.
Water Test: Microscopically observing how coffee particles react in water can reveal the presence of adulterants like chicory, which swells and colors the water differently.
Vorce ends the article by stating that detecting the presence of adulteration is relatively straightforward with microscopic examination, but identifying the exact nature of the adulterant added is more complex, requiring extensive knowledge of various substances’ microscopic characteristics.
Adulterated Coffee by C. Baker, The center group of cells, is very large, typical of chicory, while a bright ring of tracheid cells on the right indicates the source as being from a plant’s root. 100x
A Set of Five Slides for Identifying Types of Starch Grains
by J. T. Ridge
Various types of coffee adulterants can be identified by the shape and size of the starch grains they contain. Starch grains are small and can be isolated from coffee by shaking the grind in a fine sieve. They appear bright when viewed with crossed polarizers, making them easy to spot.
Joseph Moeller and Andrew Winton Build the Backbone For a New Field Of Study – Food Science.
Mikroskopic Der Nahrungs und Genussmittel
The text of Joseph Moeller’s extensive book about Microscopically Examining Vegetables Contains 600 Drawn Botanical Illustrations, half of which show microscopic details. The book became an essential reference for food scientists and researchers. Unfortunately for English-speaking microscopists, all editions were in German, preventing easy access to this important work.
Moeller provides a comprehensive overview of the microscopic analysis of various food products, including grains, fruits, vegetables, meats, dairy products, and beverages. Each of these is investigated from various disciplines, including botanical histology, the detection of contaminants and adulterants, how to analyze food quality and safety, and the identification of food spoilage organisms.
One of the critical strengths of ‘Mikroskopic Der Nahrungs und Genussmittel’ is its focus on practicality. Moeller provides numerous case studies and examples of how microscopic analysis can be used to address real-world issues in the food industry. This includes identifying spoilage organisms, detecting adulteration, and ensuring product quality and safety.
The scope of the revised work by Winton encompasses food items for both human and animal consumption, extending to include flavoring agents like tea, coffee, and cacao. It also addresses substances that appear as impurities or are used for adulteration. Notably, many of the items discussed, such as sandalwood, guarana, and cola, also have pharmaceutical applications, thereby broadening the book’s relevance to pharmacology.
The book is structured around detailed descriptions of each substance, focusing on both macroscopic and microscopic features. Dimensions are often provided to give precise measurements, enhancing the clarity of descriptions.
One of the standout features of this revision is its rich collection of illustrations. Many of these are original, with Winton contributing significantly. A novel approach in the illustrations involves the use of “autophotograms,” where leaves are used directly to create prints on photosensitive surfaces. This technique, while not new, has been effectively utilized to capture detailed images, enhancing the visual understanding of leaf structures.
The English edition, led by Winton with Moeller as a collaborator, is particularly timely given the contemporary focus on food purity and safety in the United States. The book’s accessibility in English ensures a broader audience among food inspectors, chemists, and regulatory officials. The botanical accuracy, especially in anatomical descriptions, makes it a valuable resource for those involved in food analysis. While the botanical and anatomical descriptions are generally accurate, the glossary’s definitions could benefit from more precision without sacrificing practicality. The book retains a strong European influence, which, while enriching, occasionally feels out of place in the American context. Surprisingly, the second edition of Moeller’s work is not referenced in the bibliography, which might be an oversight.
Winton’s work is a cornerstone for English-speaking food scientists, offering both theoretical knowledge and practical applications for identifying and combating food fraud. Kate Benton Winton (1882 -?), under the mentorship of her soon-to-be husband Andrew, earned a PhD at Yale in 1906. She worked for the US. Department of Agriculture as a chemist and microscopist. Twenty-five years later, the husband and wife team Co-authored the four-volume work, The Structure and Composition of Foods, published by John Wiley and Sons.
The field of food science has seen significant advancements since the 19th century. Nevertheless, for microscopists, a high bar had been set by the works of two researchers at the turn of the century, the German Joseph Moeller and his American student Andrew L. Winton.
Originally published in 1881, Moeller’s work has been pivotal in the development of microscopy as a tool for identifying vegetable substances in various states. The need for Winton’s augmented version arose from the rapid evolution of food adulteration techniques and changes in commercial practices in twentieth-century America. While employed at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, Winton significantly contributed to Moeller’s work with his revision in terms of textual content and more than doubled the number of microscopical illustrations. Moeller’s original text contained 308 illustrations, while Winton’s revision has 589.
The scope of the revised work encompasses food items for both human and animal consumption, extending to include flavoring agents like tea, coffee, and cacao. It also addresses substances that appear as impurities or used for adulteration. Notably, many of the items discussed, such as sandalwood, guarana, and cola, also have pharmaceutical applications, thereby broadening the book’s relevance to pharmacology.
Both books are similarly structured around detailed descriptions of each substance, focusing on macroscopic and microscopic features. Dimensions are often provided to give precise measurements, enhancing the clarity of descriptions.
The reason for including the two works is the standout feature of their rich collections of illustrations depicting microscopic examination of botanical fine structures by the authors. A 1916 revision of Winton’s work adds illustrations by Winton’s wife, Kate Barber Winton (b.1883), and credits her as a co-author. Moeller’s name is no longer listed as an author, but his illustrations continue to be used and are properly attributed. A novel approach in the illustrations for the 1916 revision involves the use of “auto-photograms,” where leaves are used directly to create prints on photosensitive surfaces. While not a new printing technique, their inclusion effectively modernizes the book’s appearance.
Winton’s co-authorship and updating of Moeller’s book was particularly timely given the contemporary focus on food purity and safety in the United States. The book’s accessibility in English ensured a broader audience among food inspectors, chemists, and regulatory officials. Its botanical accuracy, especially in anatomical descriptions, makes it a valuable resource for those involved in food analysis.
Although the botanical and anatomical descriptions in the tomes are remarkably accurate, the glossary’s definitions in Winton’s English revision could benefit from more precision, improving practicality. Winton’s Microcopy of Vegetable Foods retains Moeller’s influence as its enriching backbone, which works well in the American context. Surprisingly, the 1916 edition of Winton’s work does not reference Moeller in the bibliography, which hardly could be seen as an oversight.
The Collection Holds Winton and Moeller’s Original Submission Filed With The Library of Congress For U. S. Copyright Protection In 1903.
The Library of Congress became officially involved in the U.S. copyright protection process following the passage of the Copyright Act of 1870. This act centralized the administration of copyright law in the Library of Congress by requiring two copies of every copyrighted work for deposit in the Library. Thorvald Solberg, the first Register of Copyrights at the institution, was appointed by Congress in 1897, solidifying the Library’s official role in the administration of copyright protection.
Ainsworth Rand Spofford, the Librarian of Congress from 1865 to 1897, was the first to recognize the value of requiring copyright deposits at the institution for building up vast holdings of the nation’s Library.
The requirement of copyright deposits was instrumental in the growth of the national collection to its present size. Authors and publishers seeking copyright protection for their works bore the expense of shipping two copies to the nation’s Washington D.C. library. Under Spofford’s direction at the close of the Civil War, the Library of Congress assumed a national role. By the turn of the century, the Library of Congress was recognized as America’s national Library. Its new building in 1897 was distinguished by the unsurpassed size and scope of its collections, covering all forms of media regarding American life, mainly fed by the new copyright law.
Those who advocated for a national library, including New England scholars, intellectuals, and members of Congress, initially sought immediate appropriations. However, Jewett and Spofford, while acknowledging the importance of large appropriations, saw copyright deposit as a more immediate and practical method of achieving a national library. In 1895, Spofford foresaw that the new Library building, completed in 1897, would need to diversify its methods of collection expansion beyond copyright deposits.
A bookplate affixed to the front pastedown of the book indicates that it is a Copyright Deposit to the Library of Congress. The title page bears the perforation mark ‘LC,’ with its reverse side bearing the copyright information. The copyright is attributed to Andrew L. Winton, proving this to be the volume submitted to the Library of Congress copyright collection. The book bears no stamps, sleeves, or cover numbers to indicate that the Library ever placed the book in the circulation collection.
An ink stamp on the copyright page indicates that the Library of Congress received two copies in the physical collection on Feb 14, 1906. Below that, handwritten in ink, is the following: “Copyright entry Jan 29, 1906, Class A, Xxc No. 137183, Copy B. Library of Congress TX543. W79”, the official copyright date.
How to cite this page.
Reiser, F. (2024) Microscope Sluthes Catch Coffee Bandits. Available at: https://antiqueslides.net/coffee-bean-microscopists/