Box-End Sticker, 1833
Another roaster said, "if coffee works havoc with your nerves and digestion, it is because you are not using a fresh roasted, thoroughly cleaned, correctly cured coffee. Our method of preparing gives you the strength and aroma without its nerve-destroying qualities." A well known coffee packer advertised, "Our coffee is free from the dust and bitter tannin—the only injurious property in coffee." Still another packer informed the consumer that "by a very special steel cutting process" he sliced the coffee beans "so that the little cells containing the volatile oil (the food product) are not broken."
A prominent Chicago packer put out a new brand of coffee which he claimed was "non-intoxicating," "poisonless," and the "only pure coffee." A New Yorker, not to be out-done, brought out a coffee that he said contained all the stimulative properties of the original coffee berries, but with every trace of acid removed, every undesirable element eliminated. "Also," he added for good measure, "this coffee may be used freely without harming the digestive organs or impairing the nervous system."
And one package-coffee man became so exercised over cereal competition that he brought out a grain "coffee" of his own, which he actually advertised as "the nearest approach to coffee ever put on the market, having all the merits without any objectionable features, strengthening without stimulating, satisfying without shattering the nerves."
And so history again repeated itself in America. Five hundred years after the first religious persecution of the drink in Arabia, we find it being persecuted by commercial zealots in the United States. And even in the house of its friends, coffee was being stabbed in the back. The coffee merchants themselves presented the spectacle of "knocking" it by inference and innuendo.
Something had to be done. As cereal drinks, standing on their own feet, the coffee "substitutes" would have attracted little notice. It was only by trading on the allegation that they were substitutes for coffee that they made any headway. The original offender sold his product as "coffee," which was an untruth, as he later admitted there was not a bean of coffee in it. He boldly advertised: "Blank coffee for persons who can't digest ordinary coffee."
When it became no longer possible to perpetrate an untruth on the package label, there still remained the newspapers and billboards. For years before fake-advertising laws and an outraged public opinion made recourse to these no longer possible, it was a common practise to use the newspapers and billboards to promote the idea that here was a different coffee; and in this way to create a demand for a package, which, when purchased, was found to tell a different story.
