Baking Powder Figures

THAT DON'T LIE. The Royal Baking Powdar Co. try to tve tlie lnference tliat their powder contatos more c reitni Tartar and that lts f.tat cuinï Power is reater than Mv oi lier made, Btated in thelr advertisement on the "Comparativo Worth of Ujfcinu Powders," exhlbited by black Unes. Our name was mentioned in conneciiiin with of our cheaper brand?, made of different materlals as the trade might (Iemand. Our Creitm Tartar brand of Andrew's I'oarl was omltted, evidently for a yery good reasoD, judging from the relalive merlls of Anukew's "Peaisi. '' and the Hoyal. as cleaily (leni'instrated by the Government Ch'emlRt, Dr. PSTBB Coi.LiEi! of the Department of Agrlenlture, at Washington, from samples received by hini from dealers who furaUlted the samples from their stocks on hand in upen market. wffiKSöWsr DR. COLLIERS' ANALYS1S ernment Clicmlst Collier. - ., - U. S. Dept of AGRifUT.TURE. I (2 S Washimqtoh D. C., March 10, 1888. ) C. E. Andrews & Co. - Gentlemen : I received by jr I expref from'Fhoí. Lydon and J. 1'. HarkiBS&Co., "¦ .j Graud Ave., Milwankee. and Harper Bros., Ohlca¦ Em!S ;:o, 11! , ampies of Andrews' Pearl and Roysi] Bak,1 W ¦ B jnr Powders. The cans were in good condition j 9 ö when reeeived and theseals nnbroken. Iflndupon (0 I I analysis that Andrews Pearl Baking Powder conS 36 I B tains about four and a halt (A%) per cent. isiarc M I 5 E ¦ crcam larlar tiian the Hoyal Bakitfg Powder, m and a proportioitiitcly largor percentage m H of earbonic acid gai, und I Hnd it lo tte I l'rec i'roin aluin, aicd any Injnrloui ab" i I tancvs. II Sincerely yours, ¦ ¦ PETER COLLIER, t;4 v'' P P S. Chemist, Dejit. of Agrlcultnre. Uwiimt Cbemist Collier's Analysis as to tlisLeavew Qualitics. andrews' pEARLaflHHHflHHHH9HHBHi99 royal HHHHHMMiS No wonder the Royal Co. omitted Andrews' Pearl from tlieir " Comparativa Lht," a Government Chemist Collier's analysis shows uonclusively two thlngs: í,t That Andrews' Pearl eontains more Cream Tarlar than the Royal, as townby the cute abovej 2d, That the Lcavening Power of Andrews Pearl isgrcatcr than the Royal, as shown by the two black lmes above. CHALLBXTGB. We will gsve the Royal Co. or any one else 51.000 or $5.000 if they can prove by anv fair mutual test that Andrews' Pearl Baking Powder does, or ever dicl, contain alümoranyinjnrious substances, and this challenge is open forever A,u reus Pearl Bakiii" Powder is sustained by a testimonial as to itsptirity añil strengld bythe onlj genuine conmiisioned Government chemist, such as the Royal Co. „ever have published. Thy It. AX„REWS, & CO., 2S7 -289 & 291 E. Water St, Milwankee. 43 Michigan Ave., Chicago.