Instant Ebook Access, One Click Away – Begin at ebookgate.

com

Poultry Meat Processing Second Edition Owens

https://ebookgate.com/product/poultry-meat-processing-
second-edition-owens/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookgate.com

Click here to visit ebookgate.com and download ebook now
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Poultry Meat Processing and Quality 1st Edition G. C. Mead

https://ebookgate.com/product/poultry-meat-processing-and-quality-1st-
edition-g-c-mead/

ebookgate.com

Poultry Feedstuffs Poultry Science Symposium First Edition

J. M. Mcnab

https://ebookgate.com/product/poultry-feedstuffs-poultry-science-
symposium-first-edition-j-m-mcnab/

ebookgate.com

Meat Refrigeration 1st Edition S.J. James

https://ebookgate.com/product/meat-refrigeration-1st-edition-s-j-
james/

ebookgate.com

Food Processing Handbook Second Edition James G. Brennan

https://ebookgate.com/product/food-processing-handbook-second-edition-
james-g-brennan/

ebookgate.com
Television Sports Production Fourth Edition Jim Owens

https://ebookgate.com/product/television-sports-production-fourth-
edition-jim-owens/

ebookgate.com

Commercial Poultry Nutrition 3rd Edition Leeson

https://ebookgate.com/product/commercial-poultry-nutrition-3rd-
edition-leeson/

ebookgate.com

Information Structure in Spoken Arabic Jonathan Owens

https://ebookgate.com/product/information-structure-in-spoken-arabic-
jonathan-owens/

ebookgate.com

Echoes in the Dark Robin D. Owens

https://ebookgate.com/product/echoes-in-the-dark-robin-d-owens/

ebookgate.com

Emerging Technologies for Food Processing Second Edition

Da-Wen Sun

https://ebookgate.com/product/emerging-technologies-for-food-
processing-second-edition-da-wen-sun/

ebookgate.com
POULTRY MEAT
PROCESSING
Second Edition
POULTRY MEAT
PROCESSING
Second Edition

Edited by
Casey M. Owens
Christine Z. Alvarado
Alan R. Sams

Boca Raton London New York

CRC Press is an imprint of the

Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2010 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Version Date: 20110715

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4398-8216-0 (eBook - PDF)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been
made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the valid-
ity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright
holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this
form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may
rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or uti-
lized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopy-
ing, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the
publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://
www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923,
978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For
organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at
http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
and the CRC Press Web site at
http://www.crcpress.com
 Dedication
This book is dedicated to our mentors and to the memories of Dr. Pam Hargis and
Dr. Doug Janky, two individuals who each had a profound and lasting impact on
the poultry industry and the food and nutritional sciences, as well as the people
involved in them.
Contents
Preface...............................................................................................................................................ix
Contributors.....................................................................................................................................xi

Chapter 1 Introduction to poultry meat processing............................................................. 1

Alan R. Sams and Christine Z. Alvarado

Chapter 2 Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality......................................... 5

Julie K. Northcutt and R. Jeff Buhr

Chapter 3 First processing: Slaughter through chilling....................................................25

Alan R. Sams and Shelly R. McKee

Chapter 4 Second processing: Parts, deboning, and portion control..............................51

Alan R. Sams and Casey M. Owens

Chapter 5 Poultry meat inspection and grading................................................................. 67

Sacit F. Bilgili

Chapter 6 Packaging............................................................................................................... 101

Paul L. Dawson

Chapter 7 Meat quality: Sensory and instrumental evaluations...................................125

Brenda G. Lyon, Clyde E. Lyon, Jean-François Meullenet, and Young S. Lee

Chapter 8 Microbiological pathogens: Live poultry considerations.............................157

Billy M. Hargis, David J. Caldwell, and J. Allen Byrd

Chapter 9 Poultry-borne pathogens: Plant considerations............................................. 175

Michael A. Davis, Manpreet Singh, and Donald E. Conner

Chapter 10 Spoilage bacteria associated with poultry.......................................................205

Scott M. Russell

Chapter 11 Functional properties of muscle proteins in processed poultry

products..................................................................................................................231
Denise M. Smith

vii
viii Contents

Chapter 12 Formed and emulsion products.........................................................................245

Jimmy T. Keeton and Wesley N. Osburn

Chapter 13 Coated poultry products......................................................................................279

Casey M. Owens

Chapter 14 Mechanical separation of poultry meat and its use in products.................295

Glenn W. Froning and Shelly R. McKee

Chapter 15 Marination, cooking, and curing of poultry products.................................. 311

Douglas P. Smith and James C. Acton

Chapter 16 Quality assurance and process control.............................................................337

Douglas P. Smith

Chapter 17 Nutritive value of poultry meat.........................................................................355

Leslie D. Thompson

Chapter 18 Processing water and wastewater......................................................................371

William C. Merka

Chapter 19 Coproducts and by-products from poultry processing.................................381

Rubén O. Morawicki

Chapter 20 Poultry processing under animal welfare and organic standards in

the United States...................................................................................................397
Anne Fanatico

Chapter 21 A brief introduction to some of the practical aspects of the kosher

and halal laws for the poultry industry...........................................................409
Joe M. Regenstein and Muhammad Munir Chaudry

Index..............................................................................................................................................431
Preface
The first edition of this book was the product of some of the best poultry and food scien-
tists in the world. Its concept was born from the need for a good instructional textbook in
the poultry processing and product quality courses taught by many of the contributors.
This second edition has been expanded and updated by the same collection of excellent
scientists with the addition of even more expert contributors. It remains an instructional
and not necessarily exhaustive review of the scientific literature in each of its component
areas. In addition to its teaching use, this book will continue to be a useful reference for
academic researchers, industry personnel, and extension specialists/agents seeking fur-
ther knowledge.
Most of the contributors are active participants in the S-1027 USDA Multi-State Research
Project, and the collaborative relationships fostered by this project have made this second
edition possible. The field of poultry meat processing is grateful for the contributions of
these authors. The editors are also indebted to Elizabeth Hirschler for her excellent tech-
nical and creative assistance, which made the first edition originally possible. As editing
such a book requires much time and attention, the editors appreciate the understanding of
their spouses during the preparation of this book.
Although Alan Sams was the editor of the first edition, Christine Alvarado and Casey
Owens-Hanning have done virtually all of the coordination, facilitation, and editing
involved in the second edition. Without them, this second edition would not exist. It is
evident from their scientific knowledge and editorial skill that they received only the best
education and training and have honed their abilities as they have each established well-
respected and successful careers. Their mentor is very proud of them.

Casey M. Owens, Ph.D.

Christine Z. Alvarado, Ph.D.
Alan R. Sams, Ph.D.
Editors

ix
Contributors
James C. Acton Donald E. Conner
Department of Food Science and Human Department of Poultry Science
Nutrition Auburn University
Clemson University Auburn, Alabama
Clemson, South Carolina
Michael A. Davis
Christine Z. Alvarado Department of Poultry Science
Department of Poultry Science Texas A&M University
Texas A&M University College Station, Texas
College Station, Texas
Paul L. Dawson
Sacit F. Bilgili Department of Food Science and Human
Department of Poultry Science Nutrition
Auburn University Clemson University
Auburn, Alabama
Clemson, South Carolina
R. Jeff Buhr
Anne Fanatico
USDA Agricultural Research Center
National Center for Appropriate
R.B. Russell Research Center
Technology
Athens, Georgia
Fayetteville, Arkansas
J. Allen Byrd
Glenn W. Froning
USDA Agricultural Research Center
Southern Plains Agricultural Research Department of Food Science and
Center Technology
College Station, Texas University of Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska
David J. Caldwell
Departments of Poultry Science and Billy M. Hargis
Veterinary Pathobiology Department of Poultry Science
Texas A&M University University of Arkansas
College Station, Texas Fayetteville, Arkansas

Muhammad Munir Chaudry Jimmy T. Keeton

Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of Department of Nutrition and Food Science
America Texas A&M University
Chicago, Illinois College Station, Texas
xi
xii Contributors

Young S. Lee Casey M. Owens

Nong Shim Co., Ltd. Department of Poultry Science
Seoul, South Korea University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, Arkansas
Brenda G. Lyon
USDA Agricultural Research Service,
Joe M. Regenstein
Retired
Department of Food Science
Athens, Georgia
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York
Clyde E. Lyon
USDA Agricultural Research Service,
Retired Scott M. Russell
Athens, Georgia Department of Poultry Science
University of Georgia
Shelly R. McKee Athens, Georgia
Department of Poultry Science
Auburn University Alan R. Sams
Auburn, Alabama Department of Poultry Science
Texas A&M University
William C. Merka College Station, Texas
Department of Poultry Science
University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia Manpreet Singh
Department of Poultry Science
Jean-François Meullenet Auburn University
Department of Food Science Auburn, Alabama
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, Arkansas Denise M. Smith
Department of Food Science and
Rubén O. Morawicki Technology
Department of Food Science The Ohio State University
University of Arkansas Columbus, Ohio
Fayetteville, Arkansas
Douglas P. Smith
Julie K. Northcutt
Department of Poultry Science
Department of Food Science and Human
North Carolina State University
Nutrition
Raleigh, North Carolina
Clemson University
Clemson, South Carolina
Leslie D. Thompson
Wesley N. Osburn Department of Animal and Food
Department of Animal Science Sciences
Texas A&M University Texas Tech University
College Station, Texas Lubbock, Texas
chapter one

Introduction to poultry meat processing

Alan R. Sams and Christine Z. Alvarado

Poultry processing is a complex combination of biology, chemistry, engineering, market-

ing, and economics. While producing human food is the main goal of poultry processing,
related fields include waste management, nonfood uses of poultry, and pet or livestock
feeds. When considering the global marketplace, poultry refers to any domesticated avian
species, and poultry products can range from a slaughtered carcass to a further-processed
product such as a deli loaf, frankfurter, or nugget. However, because they dominate the
market, chicken and turkeys will be the focus of this book. The reader should remember
that specific numeric processing conditions in this book are for illustrative purposes and
that these conditions may vary between processors. The aims of this book are both to
instruct the user in what steps or conditions are used for processing poultry and explain
why things are done that way. This approach will enable the reader to evaluate problem
situations and develop possible solutions.
Commercial poultry is extremely uniform in appearance and composition. Tightly man-
aged breeding, incubation, rearing, and nutritional regimes have created a bird that is a vir-
tual copy of its siblings. This uniformity has allowed poultry processing plants to develop
into highly automated facilities with an efficiency that is unmatched by other livestock
processors. With line speeds of 70 to 140 chickens/minute, uniformity, automation, and
efficiency are recurring themes and have been key to the success of poultry processing.
Poultry companies in the United States are vertically integrated. This system allows
the same entity (e.g., company, cooperative, etc.) to own several (or all) steps of the produc-
tion process from breeding through processing (Figure 1.1). Vertical integration ensures
maximum efficiency and uniformity. By reducing the number of times a component of
the production system (feed, chick, labor, etc.) changes ownership, the profit charged at
each level of change can be eliminated. Some poultry companies have taken the concept of
vertical integration to a higher level by growing their own grain and purchasing interests
in the breeding companies. Improved uniformity is another benefit that results from all
parts of the production system having a common goal, a common set of specifications, and
a common system of oversight.
The poultry industry is a global market. A growing percentage of the U.S. poultry
industry revenues come from exports of poultry products, particularly the ones such
as dark meat and feet (paws) that do not have strong markets in the United States. As a
result, the industry in the United States has become keenly aware of the politics and eco-
nomics of its major customer countries, Russia, Hong Kong/China, Japan, Canada, and
Mexico. Although the United States is the world leader in poultry production, its industry
is still concerned about conditions and any developments in poultry-producing nations
with which it competes. Examples of important, competitive advantages in other producer
countries include the large grain production and reduced labor costs in Brazil and the
massive potential consumer market developing in China. In an effort to capitalize on some

1
2 Poultry meat processing, second edition

Vertical Integration
Breeder Farm
Breeder Feed Hatching Eggs

Feed Mill Hatchery

Broiler Feed Growout Farms Chicks

Broiler Chickens
Utilities
Labor Processing Plant
Materials Whole Carcasses
Finished Products Parts
Further Processed
Sales
Products
Marketing
Distribution

Figure 1.1 Diagram of the material flow between the components of a vertically integrated poultry
company.

of the production and marketing advantages in various parts of the world, poultry compa-
nies based in the United States are establishing production operations in other regions of
the world. Another factor in the global marketplace is the development of trading blocks
such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the European Union (EU),
and South America’s Mercosul. These alliances reduce or eliminate trade tariffs between
member nations, standardize many requirements, and regulate trade within and outside
the alliances.
Poultry meat consumption in the United States has increased dramatically in
recent decades to the point where it has the largest per capita consumption of any meat
type. Several factors have contributed to this increased appeal of poultry. First, the
fat in poultry is almost exclusively associated with the skin and is easy to remove in
response to dietary guidelines for reducing dietary fat. This is contrasted with mam-
malian meats such as beef and pork, which have more of their fat actually included in
the lean sections of the commonly consumed portions. However, it should be noted
that, depending on the cuts chosen, lean poultry and lean beef have approximately
the same fat content. The distinction is mainly the ease of fat separation. Second, the
industry has been very responsive to developing new pro­ducts to meet the changing
consumer needs, which are versatility, variety, and ease of preparation. Examples of
these include the enormous success of nuggets and similarly formed fried products as
well as prepared ready-to-eat meals. During the 1960s–1980s, the most popular type of
poultry purchased was whole bird. In the following 20 years, the change from whole
bird to parts was consumer driven for reasons of increased versatility and variety. For
example, consumers prefer to purchase specific parts based on their needs, instead of
a whole bird with possible parts and meat type (dark versus light) they would not pre-
fer. In today’s market, further-processed products have become an increasing market
segment, and have recently surpassed parts as percentage of production by poultry
processors. It is estimated that, out of the current domestic market segments, an aver-
age of 40% is made up of foodservice, and, of that percentage, the majority is made up
of fast-food poultry products. Finally, poultry is an extremely versatile meat, a factor
Chapter one: Introduction to poultry meat processing 3

that has possibly contributed to the product development efforts. Poultry meat is more
homogeneous in composition, texture, and color than mammalian meat, making poul-
try easier to consistently formulate into products. When compared to beef, poultry
meat also has a milder flavor, which is more readily complemented with flavorings
and sauces.
Economic production through vertical integration, favorable meat characteristics, and
product innovations to meet consumer needs have all contributed to the poultry industry’s
success. However, the safety of poultry products and the use of water in processing are
two issues with which the industry is concerned. Developments in live bird production,
processing plant operations, product characteristics, and inspection systems are all being
made to reduce bacterial contamination of the product and improve its safety. Likewise,
the expense and environmental impact of using large quantities of water in processing,
and then cleaning that water before discharging it, have all prompted intense study in
these areas. The following chapters will provide the reader with an understanding of these
and the many other areas involved in poultry meat processing.
chapter two

Preslaughter factors affecting

poultry meat quality
Julie K. Northcutt and R. Jeff Buhr

Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 5
Antemortem factors affecting quality........................................................................................... 6
Harvesting.................................................................................................................................... 6
Feed withdrawal.......................................................................................................................... 8
Live production management............................................................................................ 10
Lighting and cooping........................................................................................................... 10
Environmental temperature................................................................................................ 12
Carcass contamination.............................................................................................................. 12
Short feed withdrawal......................................................................................................... 13
Long feed withdrawal......................................................................................................... 13
Feed withdrawal and microbiological implications............................................................ 15
Live shrink and carcass yield.................................................................................................. 16
Feed withdrawal and biological implications....................................................................... 17
Injuries associated with catching and cooping..................................................................... 18
Heat stress during grow-out or preslaughter activities and biological implications...... 20
Summary......................................................................................................................................... 21
References........................................................................................................................................ 21

Introduction
Approximately 9 billion chickens and 280 million turkeys were grown and processed in
the United States in 2008. During the short time between production and processing, there
are a number of factors, and opportunities for events to occur, that could potentially affect
poultry meat quality and yield. Processing is not just a “stand-alone” operation but rather
can be significantly influenced by poultry production factors that have an impact on the
chemical, physical, and structural changes that occur in the muscle as it is converted to
meat. Because large numbers of birds are involved from a commercial aspect, even a minor
live production event can have a significant economic impact by reducing poultry meat
quality and yield. As more poultry are “further processed” (cut up, deboned, marinated,
and/or coated) to meet consumer specifications, quality defects have become more obvi-
ous, and defects that were previously considered to be insignificant for a whole carcass
are now the primary reason for product rejection. During poultry production and man-
agement, antemortem or preslaughter factors not only exert important effects on muscle
growth, composition, and development but also determine the state of the bird on arrival at

5
6 Poultry meat processing, second edition

slaughter. Other production-related defects such as broken or dislocated bones, scratches,

skin lesions, breast blisters, bruises, and other tissue discolorations influence the amount
and quality of poultry meat available for sale. Thus, events that occur both before and after
the birds’ death will affect the quality of the meat it yields.

Antemortem factors affecting quality

According to Fletcher,1 antemortem factors affecting poultry meat quality may be divided
into two categories: (1) those having a long-term effect; and (2) those having a short-term
effect. Long-term factors are inherent, or they occur over the entire length of the birds’ life,
such as genetics (strain), physiology, nutrition, management, and disease.1 These factors
will not be discussed in detail in this chapter; however, additional information may be
obtained from the cited references.2–5 Short-term factors affecting poultry meat quality are
those that occur during the last 24 hours that the bird is alive, such as harvesting (feed and
water withdrawal, catching), transportation, plant holding, unloading, shackling, immo-
bilization, stunning, and killing.1 Commercially, the live production manager will set the
schedule for broiler harvesting and transportation; however, poultry is considered to be
the responsibility of the processing plant management during the last 24 hours that the
birds are alive. The remainder of this chapter will focus on addressing these short-term
antemortem factors, with the exception of immobilization, stunning, and killing, which
are discussed in Chapter 3.

Harvesting
Birds are typically reared on litter (wood shavings, saw dust, rice hulls, peanut hulls, shred-
ded paper, etc.) in enclosed houses, with approximately 20,000–25,000 broilers per house,
or 6,000–14,000 turkeys per house, depending on house size (Figure 2.1). In the United
States, broilers are typically grown as mixed-sex flocks, while turkeys are sex-separately
reared. This is done primarily because of the size difference between tom (male) and hen
(female) turkeys and the longer grow-out period for males. Grow-out houses are usually

Figure 2.1 Typical commercial broiler house.

Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 7

50′ × 500′ and may cost more than $10/ft2. Most farms have 2 (27%), 4 (43%), or 6 (19%)
houses per farm.6
In the United States, poultry companies are vertically integrated, which means the
company owns the processing plant, hatcheries, and feed mill. Companies contract with
independent farmers (growers) to grow the birds to market age. Grower contracts will
vary from company to company, but usually the grower provides land, labor, housing,
equipment, utilities, and litter. The company provides the birds, feed, veterinarian ser-
vices, medications (no growth hormones), and fuel to heat the house. Growers are paid
according to the number or pounds of live birds delivered to the processing plant and pro-
vided incentives for livability, feed efficiency, and minimal condemnations at the process-
ing plant. This method accounts for disease and environmental growth factors that could
reduce the number of birds brought to market.7,8 Grower contracts are usually on a flock-
to-flock basis (45% of contracts) but, under unusual circumstances, it may be as long as 15
years (8% contracts).6 Bird age at slaughter depends upon the end product (e.g., whole car-
cass, cut-up parts, etc.), but the majority of broilers are processed between the ages of 6 and
8 weeks (4–8 lb live weight), while turkeys are processed between 14 and 22 weeks of age
(14–38 lb live weight). Smaller broilers (<4.25 lb) are used for fast-food and restaurant ser-
vice, while larger broilers (>6.25 lb) provide further-processed products (cut-up, deboned,
marinated, batter or breaded, and tray packed). Turkey hens, which are smaller (12–15 lb),
are typically sold as whole carcasses, and larger tom turkeys (>22 lb) enter the market as
parts (drumsticks, tenders, wings) or further-processed products (luncheon meat, sausage,
ground meat, tray-pack, etc.). In recent years, the industry has been shifting more toward
larger birds because of market demands and because grower compensation per bird is
greater for larger birds that require more time on the farm. Additionally with larger birds,
processing plants can produce the same amount of product in a shorter amount of time
with fewer birds.6
Poultry must be “harvested” before they can be processed, and this involved pre-
paring birds for catching or collection, catching birds, and placing them into containers
(coops, crates, or cages). Figure 2.2 shows a schematic of the preslaughter steps, including
harvesting and up to the point where birds enter the processing plant. Birds are prepared
for catching by raising the feeder and water (feed and water withdrawal, discussed in
next section). In the United States, the majority of broilers are harvested manually using
“catch crews” that consist of 6 to 10 workers per crew. Broilers are usually caught by one
leg, while turkeys may be caught by one or both legs, or by one leg and the opposite
wing. Turkeys may also be loaded into cages using a hydraulic loader or preloader, which
consists of a sloping conveyor belt, with or without aluminum side panels. Turkeys are
herded onto the conveyor belts and transported to the cage opening using the loader or
preloader. Mechanical harvesting equipment is also available for broilers. These systems
vary with manufacturer, but all include an inclined conveyor belt similar to the turkey
loaders and preloaders. While mechanical harvesting seems to reduce the stress on birds
during harvesting, they are not always feasible because of house construction as some
older grow-out houses have center support beams and inadequate space to maneuver
mechanical harvesters.
Some of the major preslaughter problems that occur during harvesting include bird
injuries (bruising, broken or dislocated bones, and skin scratches), bird mortality (suffoca-
tion during improper handling), and bird weight loss due to feed and water deprivation.15
These problems are important because they result in reduced sales from trimming of dam-
aged parts and downgrading of carcasses and parts (not Grade A) products. Bird injuries
and carcass defects will be discussed later in the chapter.
8 Poultry meat processing, second edition

Broiler Feed
and Water
Withdrawal
(8 to 12 hours)

Catching

Transportation
(<2 hours)

Holding at the
Processing Plant

Unloading and
Shackling

Figure 2.2 Short-term preslaughter steps affecting poultry meat quality.

Commercial poultry transportation cages vary in size (number of compartments per

unit, number of units linked together). Loading density also differs during the summer
and winter months. Commercial broiler and turkey cages may be 2, 4, 5, or 6 compart-
ments (levels) high with 2 or 4 units connected. The number of birds per compartment
ranges from approximately 15–25 for broilers and 3–8 for turkeys. Higher loading densi-
ties are for smaller birds during the winter months when heat stress is unlikely. Berrang
et al.9 found that commercial transportation cages could be a significant source of bacte-
rial cross-contamination between flocks. These researchers transported a flock of broil-
ers that had previously tested negative for Campylobacter in the same cages immediately
after transporting a Campylobacter-positive flock. More than 50% of the defeathered
carcasses from the flock that had previously tested negative had detectable levels of
Campylobacter. Berrang and Northcutt also conducted a series of experiments, evalu-
ated poultry cage washing systems, and the impact of these systems on flock-to-flock
and carcass microbiological contamination.10–13 They concluded that cage washing sys-
tems could be beneficial if properly monitored, but inadequate removal of fecal material
during the washing could actually increase the potential for flock cross-contamina-
tion by providing moisture, which benefits bacteria and makes their survival easier.
Transportation cage washing has been recommended by the United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA), but is commercially practiced by more turkey (94%) than broiler
operations (27%).14

Feed withdrawal
Before birds are caught, loaded, and transported to the processing plant, feed and water
are removed to allow time for evacuation of intestinal contents. Removal of feed and
water, or feed withdrawal, reduces incidence of carcass fecal contamination that may
occur during processing.16–22 With the USDA’s requirement of zero tolerance of carcass
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 9

fecal contamination in the Pathogen Reduction (PR)–Hazard Analysis and Critical Control
Point System (HACCP) ruling, length of feed withdrawal has become more important to the
poultry industry. Zero tolerance of feces means that carcasses contaminated with visible
fecal material may not enter the immersion chiller. The HACCP regulation is discussed
in depth in Chapter 5. The USDA is encouraging the use of multiple intervention steps to
reduce the contamination of the final product with pathogenic bacteria (bacteria that cause
foodborne illness in humans). As a result, HACCP is now being applied during live pro-
duction, and this includes monitoring feed withdrawal programs. A 2008 survey reported
that 54% of poultry growers participate in a live production HACCP plan.6 In addition,
63%, 52%, and 49% of growers test their flocks for avian influenza, Salmonella, or other
pathogens, respectively, in the weeks prior to processing.6
Numerous factors influence the effectiveness of a commercial feed withdrawal pro-
gram, making it extremely difficult to optimize such a program. Before discussing these
factors, it is important to have a clear understanding of the definition of feed withdrawal
and the precise goals of a feed withdrawal program. Feed withdrawal refers to the total
length of time the bird is without feed prior to slaughter. It includes the length of time birds
are held in the grow-out house without feed before catching plus the length of time they
are in transit and the length of time they are in the live hold area at the processing plant
(time in house + transportation time + plant holding time = total feed withdrawal time).23
During feed withdrawal, there is an increased likelihood that broilers and turkeys will
consume litter or feces, and these contaminates can later end up on the carcass.
Length of feed withdrawal affects the incidence of carcass contamination, carcass
yield, grower payments, processing plant line efficiency, and product safety and quality.
Ideally, the length of feed withdrawal before processing should be the shortest amount of
time required for the birds’ digestive tracts to become empty.16–21,23 However, this time var-
ies because every bird neither eats at the same time nor consumes the same amount of feed.
Some birds will have just eaten when the feeders are raised, while others may have stopped
consuming feed 1 to 4 hours earlier. Moreover, other factors such as house environmental
conditions and management practices can influence feed passage. Recommended length
of time off feed for broilers before processing is between 8 to 12 hours, while 6 to 12 hours
is recommended for turkeys. During these time periods, most of the birds in the flock
will have had enough time to evacuate their gastrointestinal tracts.16,24 However, this feed
withdrawal time is not so great that there is an excessive loss of carcass yield. Live shrink
refers to the amount of weight lost by meat-producing animals during the feed withdrawal
period. Longer feed withdrawal time translates into fewer “pounds” of chicken or turkey
delivered to the processing plant, and fewer pounds delivered to the plant means reduced
grower payments.
Although 8 to 12 hours (broilers) and 6 to 12 hours (turkeys) of feed withdrawal is
recommended, a variety of feed-withdrawal schedules are used commercially. Most estab-
lishments target a 10-hour feed-withdrawal plan. However, it is not uncommon to have
some plants processing broilers with minimal carcass contamination using a 6- to 8-hour
feed-withdrawal schedule, while other plants prefer a 12- to 14-hour feed-withdrawal
schedule to achieve the same results. It is important to consider live production man-
agement practices (e.g., house temperature, litter moisture, type of feed, house lighting
program, plant holding time) and processing plant history (number of fecal failures and
carcass Escherichia coli counts) in deciding on a manageable feed-withdrawal schedule. The
goal is to minimize the holding time at the processing plant (yard time) as much as pos-
sible, especially during the summer months when high environmental temperatures can
increase live shrink and heat stress.
10 Poultry meat processing, second edition

Table 2.1 Live Production-Related Factors Contributing to

Carcass Contamination
• Lack of uniformity in flocks processed
• Differences in bird sizes over time or between shifts
• Excessively long plant-holding time and conditions
• Communication problems with growers and catch crews
• Frequent feed outages, especially during the week prior to market
• Time of last feed and target amount of feed left in pans at feed withdrawal
• Policy on the fate of leftover feed in pans
• Excessive grower activity in house during feed withdrawal
• Extremes in house temperature during feed withdrawal
Source: Adapted from Bilgili, S. F. 1998. Broiler Ind. 61(11), 30; and Northcutt, J. K. and
Savage, S. I. 1996. Broiler Ind. 59(9), 24.

Live production management

Live production management practices affect the results of feed withdrawal by altering
the birds’ eating patterns or by changing the rate at which feed passes through the birds’
digestive tracts. Table 2.1 gives some examples of live production-related factors that affect
broiler feed withdrawal and, ultimately, carcass contamination. In order for a feed-with-
drawal program to work as designed, birds must have normal feed consumption pattern
and normal feed passage at least 12 hours before feed withdrawal.25 It is not uncommon to
have growers run out of feed before the scheduled feed-withdrawal time because of mis-
calculation of bird placement (not enough feed per bird) or a delay in feed delivery. In this
case, the 12-hour “refeeding” period becomes critical for birds to reestablish performance
gains and normal feed passage.25
Variation in bird size (uniformity) due to feed consumption or other management fac-
tors can affect the efficiency of processing plant equipment, specifically at the vent opener
at the beginning of evisceration. Changes in lighting or temperature regimes (hot or cold),
a disruption immediately after feed is removed, and the stressors of catching and holding
can slow feed passage in birds. When the rate of feed passage is slowed, it may not be pos-
sible to correct this problem simply by holding the birds for a longer period of time before
processing.22,23 However, it is best for plants to process flocks with potential for consider-
able contamination at the end of a shift when more attention can be spent on correcting
any contamination problems.

Lighting and cooping

Lighting (intensity and duration) and cooping have been found to affect bird activity, and
activity of birds affects the rate of feed passage.18 Under continuous light and access to water,
60% to 70% of the intestinal contents will be evacuated during the first 4 to 6 hours of feed
withdrawal (Figure 2.3).24 However, when birds are exposed to darkness, or after birds are
cooped, the evacuation rate may be slower because of stress or reduced activity. Summers and
Leeson26 found that full-fed broilers that were held in cages retained their intestinal contents
longer than those left on litter with access to water. Taylor et al.27 found that caging broilers in
restricted-height containers had no effect on their gastrointestinal tract evacuation. A possible
explanation for this could be related to stress level—broilers used during the study by Taylor
et al.27 had experienced more contact with humans and handling than commercial flocks.
Other research has shown that, after a 2-hour feed-withdrawal period, broilers held
in a dark environment had more feed in their intestinal tracts than those held in the light.
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 11

Broiler Viscera Weight Loss

Same Loss for First 4 hr for Turkeys
120

Grams Viscera Weight

100
80 60–70%

60
40
20
0
0 6 12 18 24
42 Days 44 Days 48 Days
Length of Time off Feed (hours)

Figure 2.3 Effects of length of feed withdrawal on broiler viscera weight. (Adapted from Buhr, R. J.
et al. 1998. Poult. Sci. 77, 758.)

When they had access to feed, birds held in the dark were less likely to get up and go to
the feeders. Lighting had no impact on crop contents, except when it was combined with
cooping. Cooped broilers held in darkness for 2 hours had more than twice as much feed
in their crops than cooped broilers held in the light (Figure 2.4). In addition, after 4 hours
of feed withdrawal, there was twice as much feed within the crops of broilers held in
darkness compared to crops of broilers held in light.18 For this reason, poultry companies
usually want growers to leave birds in the grow-out house on litter with water, but no feed,
for 2 to 5 hours before catching. It has been suggested that 4 hours of water consumption
for broilers, and 2 hours of water consumption for turkeys, is optimal after initiation of
feed withdrawal to allow feed passage from the crop. However, in practice, some grow-
ers will not follow the recommendations and will raise both the feeders and waters at the
same time to prepare the house for catch. Following the recommended 8 to 12 hours of

35.00

30.00
Weight of Crop Contents (g)

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00

5.00

0.00
2 4 6 8
Length of Feed Withdrawal (hours)

Held on litter in light Held on litter in dark

Held in coops in light Held in coops in dark

Figure 2.4 Effects of lighting and cooping on the crop contents (weight in grams) of 45-day-old broil-
ers held without feed for 2, 4, 6, or 8 hours. (Adapted from May, J. D. et al. 1990. Poult. Sci. 69, 1681.)
12 Poultry meat processing, second edition

feed withdrawal results in empty crops at slaughter regardless of the availability of light
or cooping.

Environmental temperature
In addition to lighting, stress, and possibly cooping, environmental temperatures have been
shown to affect digestive-tract clearance of birds during the feed-withdrawal period.18,28
This may be related to the consumption of less feed during hot weather in conjunction with
reduced bird activity. During the fall and spring, when daily temperatures vary widely,
birds may gorge themselves in the evening after the sun goes down and temperatures
begin to decline. If birds have gorged immediately before feed withdrawal, a normal with-
drawal period may not be long enough to empty the digestive tract of its contents.23 Birds
grown during cold weather with house temperatures below 15.5°C also retain feed in their
digestive tracts longer, and the birds may often be too cold to stand and eat.18,28 If the litter
is wet, birds will have difficulty moving back and forth to the feeders. As indicated by May
and Lott,29 “broilers are nibblers and eat regularly when the temperature is constant, and
lighting is continuous.” When birds do not have normal eating patterns, there is greater
variability in the content and condition of their digestive tracts. This can be detrimental to
the processing plant in terms of carcass contamination.

Carcass contamination
Fecal contamination of broiler carcasses occurs when the contents of the birds’ gastrointesti-
nal tract leak onto the carcass, or intestines are cut or torn during evisceration (Figure 2.5).18
Visible contamination on carcasses is typically removed by online reprocessing in cabinet
washers. These washers spray carcasses with a combination of water and an antimicrobial
compound (chlorine, chlorine dioxide, sodium metasilicate, acidified sodium chlorite, mono-
chloramines, peracetic acid, organic acid blends, etc.; see Chapter 9). Online reprocessing
machines frequently employ rotating brushes that scrub the back, wings, and breast area of
each carcass to remove the contamination. Typically, the brushes are sprayed with an anti-
microbial to minimize cross-contamination. Most processing plants will also have an offline
reprocessing station where plant employees remove fecal contamination from carcasses by

Figure 2.5 Fecal contamination of a broiler carcass.

Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 13

Table 2.2 Viscera Contents after Feed Withdrawal

Time off Crop Gizzard Intestinal Sloughing of Gizzard
feed (hours) contents contents shape intestinal mucus bile (%)
0–3 Feed Watery feed Round No sloughing 0
9 Water Litter Flat Mild sloughing 30
12 Empty Litter Flat Sloughing 30
14 Empty Litter Flat and round Sloughing to heavy 35
sloughing
16–19 Empty Litter and feces Flat and round Sloughing to heavy 40–70
sloughing
Source: Adapted from Northcutt, J. K. et al. 1997. Poult. Sci. 76, 410.

washing, vacuuming, or trimming each carcass and then visibly reinspecting them. Manual
carcass reprocessing and reinspection can delay the operation of the processing plant and
increase the cost of producing a quality product, especially when flocks come through with
a high percentage of contamination.17,19,20,23 The frequency of carcass contamination depends
on the amount of material present in the digestive tract, the condition of the digesta (partially
digested food and feces) remaining in the intestines (watery or firm), the integrity of the
intestines, and the efficiency of the eviscerating equipment and plant personnel.22,23
Several studies have been conducted to evaluate the relationship between feed with-
drawal and digestive tract contents. Northcutt et al.21 conducted a field trial in which the
intestinal tracts of 50 to 125 broilers from each of three different commercial plants in
the United States were evaluated. The contents of the crop and gizzard were noted upon
dissection, and gizzard bile was reported on a percentage basis. Intestinal shape was
observed and recorded as (1) round and containing feed, (2) flat and void of feed, or (3)
round and containing gas. Table 2.2 shows the results of this study, and a discussion of the
findings appears in the next two sections.21 Buhr et al.31 conducted another study in which
the influence of broiler feed withdrawal on viscera weight, diameter, and shear strength
(likelihood of intestinal breakage) was studied. Results from this study are also discussed
in the next two sections.

Short feed withdrawal

When the length of feed withdrawal is too short (≤6 hours for broilers, ≤4 hours for tur-
keys), there is an increased likelihood that the gastrointestinal tracts of birds will remain
full of partially digested feed at slaughter.21 When this occurs, the intestines may leak
their contents onto the carcass, or the intestines may become ruptured during eviscera-
tion (Table 2.2). During electrical stunning or electrical stimulation, smooth and skeletal
muscles will contract and may expel the contents remaining in the cloacae. For full-fed
birds, the intestines, appearing large and rounded (Figure 2.6), occupy a great deal of space
in the abdominal cavity, such that the duodenal loop is positioned close to where the vent
is opened for evisceration. Therefore, intestines that are full of feed are more easily cut
during vent opening. In addition, processing birds with intestines that are full of feed
increases the likelihood that the force of evisceration will cause intestinal material to leak
out onto the carcass during removal.21,23,29

Long feed withdrawal

When the length of feed withdrawal is too long (greater than 14 hours), a number of prob-
lems may occur that increase the likelihood of carcass contamination. Feed withdrawal
14 Poultry meat processing, second edition

Figure 2.6 Large and rounded intestine from a full-fed bird.

has been reported to have an effect on intestinal villi and intestinal crypt depth. Ileal villi
width, crypt depth, and mucus decrease with longer feed-withdrawal periods. The intes-
tinal mucus (loss of 2% per hour of feed withdrawal) will be passed with feces (intestinal
sloughing), and may affect intestinal integrity. Weaker intestines have a higher incidence
of intestinal tearing during evisceration. Figure 2.7 shows intestinal strength data of broil-
ers after various feed withdrawal periods.31 The intestinal strength of broilers has been
found to be approximately 10% lower when they were without feed for 14 or more hours
before processing as compared to full-fed broilers. The tensile strength of small intestines
was found to be approximately 20% lower as the length of feed withdrawal was increased
from 6 to 18 hours. Moreover, male birds were reported to have stronger intestines by 15%
than female birds.30 The intestinal villi of other areas of the gastrointestinal tract (jejuna
region) have been found to become longer during feed-withdrawal periods, and this is
likely because this region is the primary sites for nutrient absorption, and villi become
longer to increase the likelihood of absorbing nutrients when the intestines are empty.

400

300
Force (grams)

200

100

0
0 6 10 12 14 18 24
Length of Feed Withdrawal (hours)

Figure 2.7 Intestinal strength of broilers held without feed for various times before processing.
(Adapted from Bilgili, S. F. and Hess, J. B. 1997. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 6, 279.)
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 15

In addition to weaker intestines, longer feed-withdrawal times often result in bile con-
tamination of carcasses because bile is continuously produced, and the gall bladder becomes
enlarged. Buhr et al.31 reported that gall bladders recovered from broilers held without feed
for 24 hours were 16% to 21% longer than those recovered from full-fed broilers, but there
was no change in gall bladder width. Enlarged gall bladders may be broken more frequently
during evisceration than smaller gall bladders.21,28,31,32 When the gall bladder reaches maxi-
mum capacity, excess bile backs up into the liver, and is also released into the duodenum and
backflows into the gizzard (Table 2.2). This can alter the appearance of the liver and may alter
liver flavor.21 Liver color has been reported to become darker, less red, and less yellow with
longer feed-withdrawal times.21,31 As a result of the bile, the gizzard lining will have a green
appearance, indicating that feed withdrawal may have been excessive (Table 2.2).21
During feed withdrawal, birds will consume anything that is available, including lit-
ter and fecal material. Thus, there is a mixture of feed, litter, water, and feces in the diges-
tive tract of broilers and turkeys during extended withdrawal periods when the birds are
still on litter. Because of the presence of the other material (residual feed, water, and litter),
feces is not easy to identify in the birds’ digestive tract until they have been without feed for
more than 14 hours (Table 2.2). Consumption of fecal material should be avoided because it
increases the potential for carcass contamination in the plant, and it may affect the plant’s
ability to meet the USDA-established microbiological standards for poultry.21,23,28
Because not every bird eats at the same time, the plant will be processing birds on
feed-withdrawal schedules that vary by approximately 3 hours. For example, if the target
is an 8-hour feed-withdrawal schedule for broilers, some birds have just eaten before feed
is removed, while other birds ate 2 to 3 hours earlier. In a house of 20,000 birds, a catch
crew of 10 will take 2 to 3 hours to empty the house. In a plant running 144 birds per min-
ute, it will take approximately 42 minutes to process the birds on one truck (~6,000 birds).
The three to four trucks needed to catch all the birds in one house will require approxi-
mately 2½ hours to process. A typical schedule would be the following:

4 hours in house on water but not feed

36 minutes per truck catch time (when loaded, trucks leave for plant)
1 hour transportation to processing plant
3 hours yard time
Total time = 8 hours 36 minutes feed withdrawal before processing

Birds on the first truck from this house would have feed-withdrawal times ranging from
8 hours 36 minutes to 9 hours 18 minutes. Birds on the second and third trucks from this
same house would be without feed for approximately 9 hours to 10½ hours.21,23,33 Because
schedules will vary by 2–3 hours of the target, it is possible to be in the feed-withdrawal
range where the intestines begin to weaken.33
According to Hess and Bilgili,32 the effect of feed withdrawal on intestinal strength
varies with season. Experimental trials were conducted using 51- to 52-day-old broilers
grown in open-sided (curtain) houses. The force to tear broiler intestines was 15% higher
in winter than in summer. Moreover, intestinal strength measured during winter did not
decrease with increasing feed withdrawal as was observed during summer.

Feed withdrawal and microbiological implications

Of particular interest to processing plants as well as the USDA is microbiological con-
tamination of products, especially if the bacteria are pathogenic. Recent studies have
16 Poultry meat processing, second edition

demonstrated that the length of feed withdrawal has an effect on pathogenic bacteria
in a bird’s digestive tract. Byrd et al.34 reported that feed withdrawal caused a signifi-
cant increase in Campylobacter-positive crop samples, with 25% positive crops before feed
withdrawal and 62.4% positive crops after. Corrier et al.35 reported similar findings for
Salmonella-contaminated crops, which increased from 1.9% before feed withdrawal to 10%
at the end of feed withdrawal. Stern et al.36 observed an increase in both Campylobacter-
positive feathered carcass rinses and ceca in broilers held without feed in coops for 16
to 18 hours. Humphrey et al.37 found that broilers held for 24 hours without feed had
higher levels of Salmonella in their crops, but the speed with which the remaining sections
of the intestine were colonized with Salmonella was reduced when compared to full-fed
broilers. It was suggested that the normal microflora of the crop, specifically lactobacilli
that produce lactic acid, changed during feed withdrawal, become reduced in number
during feed withdrawal, are no longer available to compete with the pathogens, and the
proliferation of Salmonella is no longer suppressed. Hinton et al.38 reported similar find-
ings when broilers were held without feed for 6, 12, 18, or 24 hours. Broilers held without
feed had higher crop pH than full-fed broilers (full-fed crop pH of 5.5 versus 12 hour
withdrawal crop pH 6.5). This increase in crop pH may create a more favorable environ-
ment for pathogenic bacteria to grow, whereas the lower pH of a full-fed broiler would be
a more undesirable environment for the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria. Northcutt et
al.39 studied the relationship between broiler age at slaughter (6, 7, and 8 weeks old), feed
withdrawal (0 or 12 hours), and carcass microbiological contamination before and after
immersion chilling. Feed withdrawal had no effect on the numbers of bacteria recovered
from carcasses, with the exception of Campylobacter on carcasses from 8-week-old broil-
ers. More Campylobacter was recovered in higher levels from broilers held without feed
for 12 hours as compared to those full fed, even with a cotton plug in the vent to pre-
vent intestinal leakage.39 Previous research has shown that there are high microbiological
loads on the exterior surface of broilers before processing. Cason et al.40 tested 7 different
commercial flocks and found that 6 out of 7 flocks were positive for Campylobacter, and
46 out of 50 of the external carcass samples (feathered carcass, head, feet) that were col-
lected were positive for Salmonella compared to only 26 Salmonella-positive samples col-
lected from the broilers’ gastrointestinal tracts (internal). These data show that live birds
carry high numbers of bacteria on the feathers, skin, and feet, and these numbers must be
reduced during processing.

Live shrink and carcass yield

The weight lost by birds during the time period between feed withdrawal and slaughter
is referred to as live shrink. Live shrink is important because it has a significant economic
impact on carcass yield. The rate of live shrink has been reported to vary between 0.18%
body weight per hour of withdrawal to about 0.5% per hour (Table 2.3). For both broilers
and turkeys, live shrink during the first 5 to 6 hours of feed withdrawal ranges from 0.3%
to 0.6% of the live weight per hour of feed withdrawal. Buhr et al.31 reported that, after the
first 5 to 6 hours of feed withdrawal, live shrink was between 0.25% and 0.35% of the birds’
body weight per hour of feed withdrawal, with the higher loss for male broilers (larger
birds lose more weight) and the lower loss for female broilers. Comparable results have
been found for turkeys (0.2% to 0.4% per hour).41 In addition to gender, Buhr et al.31 indi-
cated that live shrink depends upon bird age, grow-out house temperature, eating patterns
before feed withdrawal, and preslaughter holding conditions (cooping time and holding
temperature). With live shrink, a broiler of market age held off feed for an extra 3 hours
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 17

Table 2.3 Live Shrink Weight Loss for Broilers Held without Feed for
10 to 12 Hours
Live shrink rate
Reference (% live weight per hour feed withdrawal)
Henry and Raunikar (1958)42 0.34
Wabeck (1972)16 0.18–0.24
Fletcher and Rahn (1982)43 0.39–0.42
Chen et al. (1983)44 0.22–0.51
Veerkamp (1986)24 0.2–0.25
Papa and Dickens (1989)19 0.31–0.39
Buhr et al. (1998)31 0.27–0.43
Petracci et al. (2001)45 0.27–0.48
Taylor et al. (2002)25 0.3–0.5

before processing (e.g., 15 instead of 12 hours) will weigh approximately 14 grams less than
the same broiler processed 3 hours earlier. For turkeys, the loss is even greater. A 16-week-
old turkey hen held without feed for 3 extra hours would weigh approximately 55 grams
less than the same hen 3 hours earlier. This is a combination of 3 hours of feed for growth
and live shrink. In an operation that processes 250,000 broilers a day or 85,000 turkeys per
day (average size of a U.S. processing plant), for 5 days a week, an extra 3 hours of feed
withdrawal could equate to reducing the amount of live weight by 16,500 kg for broilers,
or 4,675 kg for turkeys per week. This does not mean that birds given no feed withdrawal
will have the highest carcass yields. In fact, birds full of feed that weigh the same as birds
held off feed have lower carcass yields because their initial weight includes digestive tract
contents. Research has shown that carcass yield is greatest for broilers held off feed for 6
hours prior to processing; however, in reality, a 6-hour feed withdrawal schedule would be
difficult to manage, and carcass contamination levels could be high.28,31

Feed withdrawal and biological implications

Early research on meat-producing animals demonstrated that feed withdrawal resulted in
decreased levels of muscle glycogen. Muscle glycogen is a polysaccharide of glucose mol-
ecules that serves as a short-term energy-storage molecule in animal cells. During muscle
activity and after death, glycogen is broken down by glycolysis to lactic acid to liberate
energy. Antemortem reductions in muscle tissue glycogen means less glycogen is available
for postmortem glycolysis (less lactic acid production), which results in a slightly higher
ultimate meat pH.
In poultry, Murray and Rosenberg46 reported that breast- and thigh-muscle glyco-
gen decreased by 0.27% and 0.22%, respectively, after a 16-hour feed-withdrawal period.
Shrimpton47 reported reduced muscle glycogen levels in broilers following a 24-hour feed-
withdrawal period. Warriss et al.48 found that liver glycogen levels were negligible in broil-
ers after 6 hours of feed withdrawal, and leg-muscle glycogen continued to decrease with
longer feed-withdrawal times. Warriss et al.15 also reported that transportation of broilers
affected liver and leg-muscle glycogen. They suggested that holding broilers at the process-
ing plant for more than 1 hour resulted in higher ultimate breast-muscle pH (5.84 versus
5.78). These results imply that breast muscle glycogen was depleted during holding at the
plant, and glycogen depletion typically occurs when birds are active, fasted, or stressed. In
a similar study, Northcutt49 found that heat and physical stress before slaughter increased
18 Poultry meat processing, second edition

the ultimate pH of turkey breast meat by 0.1 pH units and resulted in greater tissue drip
loss as compared to control turkey breast meat (percentage drip loss 3.90 versus 1.66).
Kotula and Wang50 reported that increasing length of feed withdrawal resulted in
decreased pH and glycogen levels in breast, thigh, and liver at the time of death for male
broilers. For breast muscle, initial pH (<3 minute postmortem) ranged from 6.97 for full-fed
broilers to 6.36 for broilers off feed for 36 hours. Breast-muscle glycogen declined from 7.0
to 3.5 mg/g after 36 hours of feed withdrawal. Thigh-muscle glycogen followed a similar
trend. These same researchers found no difference in final muscle pH (34 hours postmor-
tem) due to feed withdrawal; however, muscle glycogen levels were significantly lower
in both breast and thigh from broilers held off feed for longer periods of time before pro-
cessing. These data demonstrate that prolonged feed withdrawal and other preslaughter
stressors (transportation, physical activity, heat, handling, etc.) may deplete muscle tissue
glycogen reserves in poultry, and this may influence meat functionality (pH, water-hold-
ing, etc.).

Injuries associated with catching and cooping

Catching, loading, and transportation of broilers and turkeys were discussed in a previous
section of this chapter. After catching, birds are loaded into cages, crates, or coops. In the
United States, coops are more common than crates or cages because they are multilayered.
A typical autodump coop (module) is shown in Figure 2.8. The majority of the broilers pro-
duced in the United States are caught manually, while most of the turkeys are harvested
using mechanical loaders. Catching is primarily performed at night when the birds are
more likely to be calm. Manual catching of broilers has been associated with animal wel-
fare problems, poor worker conditions, high labor costs, and carcass damage. Scott51,52 and
Lacy and Czarick53 have published excellent review articles on the handling and mechani-
cal harvesting of broilers.
Irrespective of the method of catching (manual or mechanical), broilers and turkeys
are subjected to handling, which not only can result in fear and stress but may also result
in injuries. These injuries are typically bruising and dislocated or broken bones. A bruise
generally results from a surface injury where the impact force does not pierce the skin but,
instead, ruptures cells and capillaries beneath the skin (Figure 2.9).54,55 The impact force
results in the characteristic tissue discoloration that can appear on poultry within seconds
after the injury. The areas on the bird that are most frequently bruised are the breast,
wings, and legs. It has been estimated that 90% to 95% of the bruises found on birds occur
during the last 12 hours prior to processing.56 Estimates suggest that the grower is respon-
sible for 30% to 35% of the all broiler bruises, while the catch crew is responsible for 30% to
40% of all broiler bruises. The rest of the bruises occur during transport, unloading, and
shackling. Some bruising may even occur during the first few seconds after neck cutting
(within 10 to 20 seconds) before the bird’s blood pressure reaches zero.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, a group of researchers at the University of Georgia
began to investigate the effects of bruising on poultry and livestock. M. Hamdy and
coworkers54–57 suggested that the age of a bruise could be estimated using its color. They
found that, initially after an injury, bruises were red with moderate tissue swelling. Over
time, the color of bruises changed from red to various shades of purple, yellow, green,
and orange before returning to normal. Bruises were reported to heal in broilers within
3 to 5 days, depending upon environmental temperatures, whereas longer time to heal
was required for those birds housed in cooler environments (30°C versus 21.1°C).54–57
Similar studies have been conducted by Northcutt and Buhr,58 and Northcutt et al.,59,60
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 19

Figure 2.8 Typical autodump coops (modules) being unloaded from the truck.

Figure 2.9 Bruising caused by ruptured cells and capillaries beneath the skin.
20 Poultry meat processing, second edition

with emphasis on bruise color development, histological tissue damage, and functional
properties of poultry meat during further-processing.
Bilgili and Horton61 conducted a year-long field study to evaluate the influence of
live production factors on broiler carcass quality and grade. These researchers found that
older, heavier broilers had more bruises, leg problems, breast blisters, and broken or dis-
located bones. In addition, a positive correlation was found between flock age and birds
dead-on-arrival (DOA) at the processing plant. Bird placement density or the amount of
space allowed per bird in the house influence broiler bruising, with a higher incidence
of bruises occurring when space was limited. In 1954, a study conducted on bruising in
turkeys reported that the heavier tom turkeys had 8% fewer bruises than the lighter hen
turkeys.62 These same researchers suggested that bruising accounted for approximately
23% of the turkey carcass defects leading to downgraded carcasses (not grade A).62
Another contributing factor to broiler bruising is the presence of mycotoxins (toxic
metabolite produced by fungi) in grains and feeds. Aflatoxin has been found to increase
the birds’ susceptibility to bruising by increasing capillary fragility and reducing shear
strength of skeletal muscle. As little as 0.625 µg of dietary aflatoxin produced extensive
hemorrhaging in muscles and internal organs.63 Additional information on mycotoxicosis
and bruising may be found in articles published by Tung et al.63 and Hoerr.64
In recent years, both the National Chicken Council (NCC)65 and the National Turkey
Federation (NTF)66 have published animal welfare guidelines and best management prac-
tices for poultry producers. The NCC has also published a welfare audit checklist. NCC
animal welfare guidelines recommend catching procedures (≤5 birds per hand for birds
>4 lb), incentives for catch crews demonstrating proper handling techniques, and no han-
dling of birds by the wing or neck. Guidelines also suggest that, if mechanical harvesters
are used, then the company should have humane protocols. Increased emphasis on animal
welfare concerns has reduced the number of injuries during catching and loading. More
information regarding welfare programs can be found in Chapter 20.

Heat stress during grow-out or preslaughter activities and biological implications

Environmental temperatures can play a major role in antemortem stress and, conse-
quently, postmortem meat quality. Heat stress, chronic or acute, is one of the primary
causes of stress during preslaughter activities. It can also be associated with other physical
stressors to birds, such as crowding during catching, transportation, and holding prior
to slaughter, and result in additive stress effects. At high temperatures, evaporative cool-
ing is the bird’s primary mechanism for heat loss; however, at high relative humidity and
high temperatures, evaporative cooling is impeded, thereby making it harder for birds to
dissipate heat,67 resulting in stress to the bird. McKee and Sams68 evaluated the effects of
chronic heat stress applied during grow-out on rigor mortis development and meat quality
of turkeys. Turkeys subjected to elevated temperatures of 32/38°C (night/day) for 4 weeks
exhibited lower muscle pH, higher L* values indicating paler color, and higher drip loss
and cook loss (i.e., lower water-holding capacity) as compared to turkeys grown at ambient
temperatures of 16/24°C (night/day). These changes in pH, color, and water-holding capac-
ity are characteristics of a condition known as pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) meat, which
results in poor meat quality. The incidence of PSE-like meat also increased in heat-stressed
turkeys.68 McCurdy et al.69 evaluated the effect of season on the incidence of PSE in turkeys
and reported the highest L* values in the summer season and the lowest in the winter sea-
son. Bianchi et al.70 reported that holding broilers at >18°C temperatures prior to slaughter
(i.e., holding shed at plant) resulted in paler meat color compared to holding broilers at
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 21

12°C, suggesting that elevated temperatures in the holding period prior to slaughter can
also increase the incidence of PSE meat.

Summary
Poultry meat quality is affected by numerous antemortem factors, in particular, those
occurring during the last 24 hours that the bird is alive. These short-term factors influence
carcass yield (live shrink), carcass defects (bruising, broken/dislocated bones), carcass
microbiological contamination, and muscle metabolic capabilities. There is even evidence
to suggest that stressful conditions during harvesting, such as catching and cooping, affect
the postmortem muscle functional properties. Current issues associated with foodborne
illnesses have forced poultry companies to pay even more attention to live production
than before to satisfy the “farm-to-table” food safety initiative. These issues will continue
to be priorities for the USDA and poultry companies.

References
1. Fletcher, D. L., Antemortem factors related to meat quality, Proceedings of the 10th European
Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat, Beekbergen, The Netherlands, 1991, 11.
2. Moran, E.T., Jr., Live production factors influencing yield and quality of poultry meat, in Poultry
Science Symposium Series, Volume 25, Richardson, R.I. and Mead, G. C., Eds., CABI Publishing,
Wallingford, Oxon, U.K., 1999.
3. Calnek, B. W., Barnes, H. J., Beard, C. W., Reid, W. M., and Yonder, H. W., Jr., Eds., Diseases in
Poultry, 9th ed., Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, 1991.
4. National Research Council, Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, 9th ed., National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C., 1994.
5. Sturkie, P. D., Ed., Avian Physiology, 4th ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 1986.
6. McDonald, J. M., The economic organization of U.S. broiler production. USDA, Economic
Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin Number 38, 2008. www.ers.usda.gov/publi-
cations/eib38/eib38.pdf. Access date 05/20/2009.
7. Cunningham, D. L., Contract broiler grower returns: A long-term assessment, J. Appl. Poult.
Res., 6, 267, 1997.
8. Cunningham, D. L., Poultry production systems in Georgia: Costs and returns analysis, unpublished
annual reports, Extension Poultry Science, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 1990–1996.
9. Berrang, M. E., Northcutt, J. K., Fletcher, D. L., and Cox, N. A., Role of dump cage fecal contami-
nation in the transfer of Campylobacter to carcasses of previously negative broilers, J. Appl. Poult.
Res., 12, 190, 2003.
10. Berrang, M. E., Northcutt, J. K. and Cason, J. A., Recovery of Campylobacter from broiler feces
during extended storage of transport cages, Poult. Sci., 83, 1213, 2004.
11. Berrang, M. E. and Northcutt, J. K., Water spray and immersion in chemical sanitizer to lower
bacterial numbers on broiler transport coop flooring, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 14, 315, 2005.
12. Berrang, M. E. and Northcutt, J. K., Use of water spray and extended drying times to lower bac-
terial numbers of soiled flooring from broiler transportation coops, Poult. Sci., 84, 1797, 2005.
13. Northcutt, J. K. and Berrang, M. E., Influence of a chicken cage washing system on wastewater
characteristics and bacteria recovery from cage flooring, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 15, 457, 2006.
14. Bennett, P., Compliance guidelines for controlling Salmonella and Campylobacter in poultry, 2nd
ed., 2008. http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Compliance_Guideline_Controlling_Salmonella_
Poultry.pdf. Access date 05/20/2009.
15. Warriss, P. D., Wilkins, L. J., and Knowles, T. G., The influence of antemortem handling on poul-
try meat quality, in Poultry Science Symposium Series, Volume 25, Richardson, R. I. and Mead,
G. S., Eds., CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, U.K., 1999.
16. Wabeck, C. J., Feed and water withdrawal time relationship to processing yield and potential
fecal contamination of broilers, Poult. Sci., 51, 1119, 1972.
22 Poultry meat processing, second edition

17. Bilgili, S. F., Research note: Effect of feed and water withdrawal on shear strength of broiler
gastrointestinal tract, Poult. Sci., 67, 845, 1988.
18. May, J. D., Lott, B. D., and Deaton, J. W., The effect of light and environmental temperature on
broiler digestive tract contents after feed withdrawal, Poult. Sci., 69, 1681, 1990.
19. Papa, C. M., and Dickens, J. A., Lower gut contents and defecatory responses of broiler chickens
as affected by feed withdrawal and electrical treatment at slaughter, Poult. Sci., 68, 1478, 1989.
20. Benoff, F. H., The “live-shrink” trap: Catch weights a must, Broiler Ind., 59 (9), 24, 1996.
21. Northcutt, J. K., Savage, S. I., and Vest, L. R., Relationship between feed withdrawal and viscera
condition of broilers, Poult. Sci., 76, 410, 1997.
22. Bilgili, S. F., “Zero Tolerance” begins at the farm, Broiler Ind., 61(11), 30, 1998.
23. Northcutt, J. K. and Savage, S. I., Preparing to process, Broiler Ind., 59(9), 24, 1996.
24. Veerkamp, C. H., Fasting and yields of broilers, Poult. Sci., 65, 1299, 1986.
25. Taylor, N. L., Northcutt, J. K., and Fletcher, D. L., Effect of short-term feed outage on broiler
performance, live shrink, and processing yields, Poult. Sci., 81, 1236, 2002.
26. Summers, J.D. and Leeson, S., Comparison of feed withdrawal time and passage of gut con-
tents in broiler chickens held in crates or pens, Can. J. Anim. Sci., 59, 63, 1979.
27. Taylor, N. L., Fletcher, D. L., Northcutt, J. K., and Lacy, M. P., Effect of transport cage height on
broiler live shrink and defecation patterns. J. Appl. Poult. Res., 10, 335, 2001.
28. May, J. D., Branton, S. L., Deaton, J. W., and Simmons, J. D., Effect of environment temperature
and feeding regimen on quantity of digestive tract contents of broilers, Poult. Sci., 67, 64, 1988.
29. May, J. D. and Lott, B. D., Effect of periodic feeding and photoperiod on anticipation of feed
withdrawal, Poult. Sci., 71, 951, 1992.
30. Bilgili, S. F. and Hess, J. B., Tensile strength of broiler intestines as influenced by age and feed
withdrawal, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 6, 279, 1997.
31. Buhr, R. J., Northcutt, J. K., Lyon, C. E., and Rowland, G. N., Influence of time off feed on broiler
viscera weight, diameter, and shear, Poult. Sci., 77, 758, 1998.
32. Hess, J. B. and Bilgili, S. F., How summer feed withdrawal impacts processing, Broiler Ind.,
61(8), 24, 1998.
33. Northcutt, J. K. and Buhr, R. J., Maintaining broiler meat yields: Longer feed withdrawal can be
costly, Broiler Ind., 60(12), 28, 1997.
34. Byrd, J. A., Corrier, D. E., Hume, M. E., Bailey, R. H., Stanker, L. H., and Hargis, B. M., Incidence
of Campylobacter in crops of preharvest market-aged broiler chickens, Poult. Sci., 77, 1303,
1998.
35. Corrier, D. E., Byrd, J. A., Hargis, B. M., Hume, M. E., Bailey, R. H., and Stanker, L. H., Presence
of Salmonella in the crop and ceca of broiler chickens before and after preslaughter feed with-
drawal, Poult. Sci., 78, 45, 1999.
36. Stern, N. J., Clavero, M. R. S., Bailey, J. S., Cox, N. A., and Robach, M. C., Campylobacter spp. in
broilers on the farm and after transport, Poult. Sci., 78, 45, 1999.
37. Humphrey, T. J., Baskerville, A., Whitehead, A., Rowe, B., and Henley, A., Influence of feeding
patterns on the artificial infection of laying hens with Salmonella enteritidis phage type 4, Vet.
Rec., 132, 407, 1993.
38. Hinton, A., Jr., Buhr, R. J., and Ingram, K., Feed withdrawal and carcass microbiological counts,
Proc. Georgia Poult. Conf., Athens, GA, September 30, 1998.
39. Northcutt, J. K., Berrang, M. E., Dickens, J. A., Fletcher, D. L., and Cox, N. A., Effect of
broiler age, feed withdrawal, and transportation on levels of coliforms, Campylobacter,
Escherichia coli and Salmonella on carcasses before and after immersion chilling, Poult. Sci.,
82, 169, 2003.
40. Cason, J. A., Hinton, A., Jr., Northcutt, J. K., Buhr, R. J., Ingram, K. D., Smith, D. P., and Cox,
N. A., Partitioning of external and internal bacteria carried by broiler chicken before process-
ing, J. Food Protection 70, 2056, 2007.
41. Duke, G. E., Basha, M., and Noll, S., Optimum duration of feed and water removal prior to
processing in order to reduce the potential for fecal contamination in turkeys, Poult. Sci., 76,
516, 1997.
42. Henry, W. R. and Raunikar, R., Weight loss of broilers during the live haul. North Carolina
Agriculture Economics Information Service Number 69, 1958.
Chapter two: Preslaughter factors affecting poultry meat quality 23

43. Fletcher, D. L. and Rahn, A. P., The effects of environmentally-modified and conventional hous-
ing types on broiler shrinkage, Poult. Sci., 61, 67, 1982.
44. Chen, T. C., Schultz, C. D., Reece, R. N., Lott, B. D., and McNaughton, J. L., The effect of
extended holding time, temperature and dietary energy on yields of broilers, Poult. Sci., 62,
1566, 1983.
45. Petracci, M., Fletcher, D. L., and Northcutt, J. K., The effect of holding temperature on live
shrink, processing yield, and breast meat quality of broiler chickens, Poult. Sci., 80, 670, 2001.
46. Murray, H. C. and Rosenberg, M. M., Studies on blood sugar and glycogen level in chickens,
Poult. Sci., 32, 805, 1953.
47. Shrimpton, D. H., Some causes of toughness in broilers (young roasting chickens). I. Packing
stations procedure, its influence on the chemical changes associated with rigor mortis and on
the tenderness of the flesh, Br. Poult. Sci., 1, 101, 1960.
48. Warriss, P. D., Kestin, S. C., Brown, S. N., and Bevis, E. A., Depletion of glycogen reserves in
fasting broiler chickens, Br. Poult. Sci., 29, 149, 1988.
49. Northcutt, J. K., Influence of antemortem treatments on postmortem muscle properties of poul-
try meat. Dissertation, North Carolina State University, 1994.
50. Kotula, K. L. and Wang, Y., Characterization of broiler meat quality factors as influenced by
feed withdrawal time, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 3, 103, 1994.
51. Scott, G. B., Poultry handling: A review of mechanical devices and their effect on bird welfare,
World’s Poult. Sci. J., 49, 44, 1993.
52. Scott, G. B., Catching and handling of broiler chickens, Proc. 9th Eur. Poult. Conf., Glasgow, U.K.,
II, 1994, 411.
53. Lacy, M. P. and Czarick, M., Mechanical harvesting of broilers, Poult. Sci., 77, 1794, 1998.
54. McCarthy, P. A., Brown, W. E., and Hamdy, M. K., Microbiological studies of bruised tissues, J.
Food Sci., 28, 245, 1963.
55. May, K. N. and Hamdy, M. K., Bruising of poultry: A review, World’s Poult. Sci. J., 22(4), 316,
1966.
56. Hamdy, M. K., Kunkle, L. E., and Deatherage, F. E., Bruised tissue II. Determination of the age
of a bruise, J. Anim. Sci., 16, 490, 1957.
57. Hamdy, M. K., May, K. N., Flanagan, W. P., and Powers, J. J., Determination of the age of bruises
in chicken broilers, Poult. Sci., 40, 787, 1961.
58. Northcutt, J. K. and Buhr, R. J., Management guide to broiler bruising, Broiler Ind., 61(10), 18, 1998.
59. Northcutt, J. K., Buhr, R. J., and Rowland, G. N., Relationship of the age of a broiler bruise, skin
appearance, and tissue histological characteristics, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 9, 13, 2000.
60. Northcutt, J. K., Smith, D. P., and Buhr, R. J., Effects of bruising and marination on broiler breast
fillet surface appearance and cook yield, J. Appl. Poult. Res., 9, 21, 2000.
61. Bilgili, S. F. and Horton, A. B., Influence of production factors on broiler carcass quality and
grade, in Proceedings of the XII European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat, Zaragoza,
Spain, 1995, 13.
62. Mountney, G. J., Parnell, E. D., and Halpin, R. B. Factors influencing the prices received for
Texas turkeys, Texas Agriculture Experiment Station Bulletin 777, 1954.
63. Tung, H.-T, Smith, J. W., and Hamilton, P. B., Aflatoxicosis and bruising in the chicken, Poult.
Sci., 50, 795, 1971.
64. Hoerr, F. J., Mycotoxicoses, in Diseases of Poultry, Calnek, B. W., Barnes, H. J., Beard, C. W., Reid,
W. M., and Yonder, H. W., Jr., Eds., Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, 1991, 884.
65. National Chicken Council. Animal welfare guidelines and audit checklist, 2005. www.national-
chickencouncil.com/aboutIndustry/detail.cfm?id=19. Access date 05/20/2009.
66. National Turkey Federation. Animal care guidelines for the production of turkeys, 2004. www.
eatturkey.com/foodsrv/pdf/NTF_animal_care.pdf. Access date 05/20/2009.
67. Yahav, S., Goldfield, S. Plavnik, I., and Hurwitz, S., Physiological responses of chickens and
turkeys to relative humidity during exposure to high ambient temperature, J. Therm. Biol., 20,
245–253, 1995.
68. McKee, S. R. and Sams, A R., The effect of seasonal heat stress on rigor development and the
incidence of pale, exudative turkey meat, Poult. Sci., 76, 1616–1620, 1997.
24 Poultry meat processing, second edition

69. McCurdy, R. D., Barbut, S., and Quinton, M., Seasonal effect on pale soft exudative (PSE) occur-
rence in young turkey breast meat. Food Res. Intl., 29, 363–366, 1996.
70. Bianchi, M., Petracci, M., and Cavani, C., The influence of genotype, market live weight, trans-
portation, and holding conditions prior to slaughter on broiler breast meat color, Poult. Sci., 85,
123–128, 2006.
chapter three

First processing
Slaughter through chilling
Alan R. Sams and Shelly R. McKee

Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 25
Slaughter......................................................................................................................................... 26
Unloading................................................................................................................................... 26
Stunning...................................................................................................................................... 26
Exsanguination.......................................................................................................................... 29
Feather removal......................................................................................................................... 30
Scalding.................................................................................................................................. 30
Picking.................................................................................................................................... 31
Evisceration................................................................................................................................ 33
Chilling............................................................................................................................................43
Improper chilling and its effects on meat quality................................................................. 47
Summary......................................................................................................................................... 48
References........................................................................................................................................ 49
Selected bibliography.................................................................................................................... 49

Introduction
In commercial poultry-processing plants today, birds are shackled by the legs and pro-
cessed in an automated in-line system that conveys inverted birds through a series of
equipment. The processing steps are a highly coordinated system of mechanized opera-
tions that kill the birds, remove the inedible portions of the carcasses, and package/pre-
serve the edible portions for distribution to the consumer. The efficiency of processing is
largely dependent on the uniformity of the birds, so that each machine can do a repeated
movement with little or no adjustment between birds. Another important factor is the
logistical coordination of carcass flow and production lines, so that adequate birds are
present to make maximum use of the personnel and equipment. These fixed costs are
incurred by the plant regardless of the presence of birds and, therefore, need to be paid by
the production of poultry meat. Because these costs are fixed, it is generally more profitable
to process larger birds. However, the current market segments for poultry require multiple
sizes of birds. The average live weight of broilers is 5.5 lb, but birds can range in size from
3.6 lb up to 8.0+ lb. The smaller birds are generally for fast food, rotisserie, and cut-up
parts, whereas the larger birds tend to be used for further-processing. Since uniformity is
so important to processing efficiency and product yield, poultry processing facilities will
generally process a specific size bird for a targeted market segment. During processing,
the goals are to maximize yield, product quality, and safety. Additionally, to maximize
25
26 Poultry meat processing, second edition

process efficiency and plant yield, it is necessary that every shackle be occupied to produce
the maximum amount of product. This chapter will cover the steps of processing, their
purpose, and how to maintain quality and yield of product throughout processing.

Slaughter
Unloading
After their arrival at the processing plant, the birds are unloaded for processing. The coops
of birds are removed from the truck and “dumped” onto a conveyor or placed in a position
for them to be manually unloaded. The “dumper” can be a source of carcass damage such as
bruising and broken bones because the birds are allowed to freely fall one or more meters to
the conveyor belt below. Minimizing this distance can reduce the damage. Manual unload-
ing can also cause carcass damage if the birds are handled roughly. Birds should be handled
by their legs to prevent damage to the breast meat. Proper training and supervision are criti-
cal to minimizing damage. When the birds are manually unloaded from the coops, they are
usually directly hung on a shackle and not placed on a separate conveyor belt. Because of
bird size and numbers, dumpers have become the industry norm in the United States, with
manual unloading still occurring in some other parts of the world. Because of their large size
and poor body control, turkeys are usually still unloaded manually worldwide.
The ergonomics and safety of the unloading process has become an issue in recent
years. Coops and/or workers are on platforms of adjustable heights, maintaining the birds
at an optimal position to minimize the bending and lifting required by the worker. The
industry has determined that such ergonomic innovations can yield benefits from reduced
medical claims and better worker performance or retention. Proper ventilation is also
important in the unloading and hanging areas to further improve worker welfare. These
are particularly dusty areas, and the respiratory health of the workers can be a concern.
Wearing masks in the unloading area can help improve the situation. The hanging areas
have traditionally been dark, lit only with “black lights” or dim red lights. This darken-
ing was thought to calm the birds, reducing their struggle against hanging, and thereby
reducing damage to their bodies during handling.

Stunning
The first step in humane slaughter is “stunning” to render the bird unconscious prior to
killing. Stunning is not required by law in the United States for poultry; however, it is
considered humane and provides additional benefits, as mentioned later. Several methods
have been developed to accomplish this goal. The most common and one of the simplest
methods is electrical stunning. While hanging by their feet, the heads of the birds contact
a saline solution (approximately 1% NaCl) that is charged so that an electrical current flows
through the bird to the shackle line that serves as the ground (Figure 3.1). A proper electri-
cal stun will produce about 60 to 90 s of unconsciousness during which the bird is unable
to stand or right itself when removed from the shackle and placed on the floor. This is a
suggested method of evaluating the effectiveness of the stun. Immediately after contact,
the legs are extended, the wings are tight against the body, and the neck is arched. Several
seconds after leaving the stunner contact, the bird’s posture relaxes and the body becomes
almost limp. In addition to humane slaughter, there are other benefits to be gained from
proper stunning, such as immobilization for improved cutting machine efficiency, more
complete blood loss, and better feather removal during picking. Inadequate stunning can
Chapter three: First processing: Slaughter through chilling 27

Figure 3.1 Electrical stunner cabinet containing an electrode covered by a saline solution. Bird
movement is from left to right.

result in carcass defects such as incomplete bleeding, while excessive stunning can cause
quality defects such as broken clavicles (wishbones) and hemorrhages from ruptured
arteries and capillaries. Ruptured capillaries appear as multiple pinpoint blood spots, par-
ticularly near the top of the breast meat, with overstunning. Some commercial poultry is
not stunned because some cultures specifically prohibit preslaughter stunning, requiring
the birds to be conscious when slaughtered (see Chapter 21).
There are different conditions used for electrical stunning, depending on the region
of the world. Although poultry is not required by law to be stunned before slaughter in
the United States, virtually all commercial poultry is stunned for humane, efficiency, and
quality reasons. In the United States, a low-voltage stun (10–25 V) is typically used. The
birds receive 10–20 mA per broiler and 20–40 mA per turkey for 10 to 12 s. The frequency
can range from 50 to 500 Hz (high frequency is common), and the type of current can be
AC or DC. These conditions yield adequate time of unconsciousness for the neck to be
cut, which is within 7 to 10 s, and sufficient blood to be lost so as to kill the bird before it
regains consciousness. In most European countries, laws require poultry to be stunned
with much higher amperages (90 + mA per broiler and 100 + mA per turkeys for 4–6 s).
These laws and high amperages are intended for humane treatment to ensure that the
birds are irreversibly stunned so that there is no chance they will be able to recover and
sense any discomfort. Essentially, these European electrical stunning conditions kill the
bird by electrocution and cardiac arrest, stopping blood flow to the brain. Thus, death is
by loss of blood supply to the brain for both stunning conditions, but one is by removal of
blood, and the other is by stopping blood flow to the brain. The harsher European electri-
cal conditions also result in higher incidences of hemorrhaging and broken bones.1,2
Other methods of stunning have been developed to replace electrical stunning in
areas such as Europe, which require higher electrical conditions. Exposing the birds to
gases to induce either anesthesia or anoxia are methods in commercial use. Carbon diox-
ide is an anesthetic gas used to induce rapid unconsciousness by altering the pH of the
cereb­rospinal fluid.3 It can also induce anoxia at high concentrations. Argon and nitrogen
28 Poultry meat processing, second edition

Figure 3.2 Diagram of controlled atmosphere stunning (CAS) device. (Courtesy of Stork Food
Systems.)

are inert gases that displace the air and cause unconsciousness through lack of oxygen.4,5
There are two main types of gas stunning systems for poultry: reversible and irrevers-
ible. First, systems using mixtures of carbon dioxide (10% to 40%), and air (60% to 90%)
are shorter duration (30 to 45 s) and intended to render the bird unconscious but alive for
the killing machine (reversible). Systems using mixtures of argon (55% to 70%), nitrogen
(0% to 15%), and carbon dioxide (30%), or carbon dioxide (40% to 80%) and oxygen are
longer duration (2 to 3 min) and intended to render the bird dead at the time of neck
cutting (irreversible). These gas-stunning systems have been commonly used in Europe,
and gas stunning of poultry is gaining interest in the United States. However, in the
United States, argon is not used due to the high cost of the gas. Rather, mixtures of carbon
dioxide, oxygen, and nitrogen are used. For example, Stork Food Systems’ “Controlled
Atmosphere Stunning” (CAS) system uses a two-stage irreversible stunning method in
which the birds are placed on a conveyor, travel through the gas tunnel, and are hung on
shackles upon exiting when they are dead (Figure 3.2). In this system, the first stage con-
sists of 40% carbon dioxide and 30% oxygen, which is used for 1 min to anesthetize the
birds. In the second stage, 80% carbon dioxide is used for 2 min to induce anoxia. Other
gas-stunning devices are designed so that birds remain in coops or modules through the
stun tunnel, and there is even a new technology that is designed to stun turkeys while
still on the truck (Praxair, Inc.). The device fits around the module of the coops, and then
the mixture of gases is applied (carbon-dioxide-based). An advantage of these systems
is that the birds are stunned prior to their being hung on shackles. Though reversible
and irreversible gas-stunning methods are possible, the irreversible methods are more
common, generally due to welfare issues. Both gas-stunning procedures, reversible and
irreversible, reduce carcass damage relative to high-amperage but not low-amperage elec-
trical stunning.2 This is because low-amperage electrical stunning has an equally low
incidence of carcass damage. An additional note on gas stunning is that these birds are
flaccid on the shackles when entering the killing machine. This differs from the stiffer,
electrically stunned bird, and must be accommodated with minor machine adjustments
for bird orientation.
Chapter three: First processing: Slaughter through chilling 29

Another stunning system that has received attention for reasons of humane animal treat-
ment is captive bolt stunning.6 In this stunning method, the head is immobilized and a metal
pin or probe is shot into the skull and brain causing immediate and irreversible unconscious-
ness. The humane and carcass quality effects of this method are still under investigation.

Exsanguination
Within seconds after stunning, the shackle conveyor moves the bird to the cutting machine
for exsanguination (Figure 3.3). A series of rotating bars grab the wattles and lower-neck
skin to hold and guide the head into the machine for proper presentation to the cutting
blade. The cutting machine uses a rotating circular blade to cut the jugular veins and
carotid arteries on one or both sides of the neck of the bird. Most cutting machines cut both
sets of blood vessels by rota­ting the head from the bird’s left to right as it passes over the
cutting blade. If the cut is too deep, and the spinal nerve cord is cut, the resulting nervous
stimulation can “set” the feathers and may make picking more difficult. Conversely, if the
cut is too shallow, there will be insufficient bleeding, and the residual blood will cause
engorged vessels and can discolor the skin. Once the neck has been cut (within 7 to 10 s
after stunning), the bird is allowed to bleed for 2–3 min. During this period the bird loses
about 30% to 50% of its blood, which eventually causes brain failure and death. In terms
of overall yield from live weight to processed bird weight (after chilling), blood represents
around 4% of the yield loss during processing. Some processors decapitate (i.e., remove
heads at cutting step) birds to ensure that all birds have been cut for welfare and con-
tainment (i.e., preventing adulteration of products) issues. If decapitation is used, scalding
needs to be adjusted to ensure that the birds are picked effectively, and excess skin around
the neck area needs to be removed to prevent blood from clotting. Insufficient blood loss
can result in minor to major quality problems. The presence of red wing tips after pro-
cessing is a sign of poor bleed out. If this occurs, the cutting machine and bleed out need

Figure 3.3 Picture of a killing machine showing guide bars and bicycle wheel to keep head in
proper alignment for the circular cutting blade below.
30 Poultry meat processing, second edition

to be evaluated for adjustment. Although, red wing tips are a minor problem, the blood
remaining in the wings can significantly reduce the shelf life of this product. Major quality
problems can result if blood loss is insufficient to cause death. If blood loss is insufficient to
cause death, or if the neck cut is missed altogether, the bird may be still alive (heart beating
but not conscious) at the end of the bleeding period when it enters the scalder. In this case,
the blood rushes to the skin surface in response to the scald-water heat, impar­ting a bright
red color to the carcass. These carcasses are referred to as “cadavers,” or “red birds,” and
are condemned so that they do not enter the food chain.

Feather removal
Scalding
Feathers are difficult to remove in their native condition due to their attachment in the
follicles. To loosen them, the carcasses are submersed in a bath of hot water, which serves
to denature the protein structures holding the feathers in place. Two particular combina-
tions of time and temperature have become industry norms and produce quite different
effects on the carcass. Scalding at 53.35°C (128°F) for 120 s is called soft scalding, and loos-
ens the feathers without causing appreciable damage to the outer skin layers, the stratum
corneum, or “cuticle” (Figure 3.4). Because it leaves this waxy, yellow-pigmented layer of
the skin intact, soft scalding is the preferred scalding method for producing fresh poultry
with the yellow skin exposed. Such skin color is highly desired in some parts of the world
as indicating a healthy bird. If the skin’s cuticle will not be exposed or is not pigmented
with carotenoids from the feed, the carcasses are usually scalded at 62°C to 64°C (145°F to
148°F) for 45 s, a process called hard scalding. Because it loosens the cuticle, this is a harsher
procedure than soft scalding. However, it allows easier feather removal than milder scald-
ing conditions. Once loosened, the outer skin layer and its associated pigmentation are
removed by the abrasion of the mechanical pickers. The loss of the waxy cuticle may be
beneficial to the processor whose product is destined to be coated and fried. Because
of their aqueous basis, fried chicken coatings generally adhere to the skin better in the
absence of this waxy, water-repellent layer of the skin.
The scald conditions given earlier are more commonly used in batch-processing-type
systems. In poultry processing facilities today, it is common to have multiple scalders
Skin Surface

A
Epidermis
B

Dermis
(muscle
and fat)

A = Stratum corneum (cuticle)

B = Stratum germinativum

Figure 3.4 Diagram of skin layers. (Adapted from Suderman, D. R. and Cunningham, F. E. 1981.
J. Food Sci., 45(3), 444.)
Chapter three: First processing: Slaughter through chilling 31

(multistage) that can be set at different temperatures. In a continuous processing system,

the scalder water should flow countercurrent from the exit of the scalder to the entrance to
better wash the surface of the bird. To facilitate bird washing and bacterial reduction, scald
water should have a high flow rate and should be agitated. The high flow rate helps to dilute
particulate matter and better reduce bacteria from the bird’s feathers and skin. Often, pres-
cald brushes are used to help remove some of the material attached to feathers of birds prior
to these birds entering the scalder. Using prescald brushes with multistage scalding can
increase the washing efficiency of carcasses. In addition, multistage scalders can help with
maintaining product yield when managed properly. When multistage scalding is used,
there are generally three individual scald tanks in line that have independent temperature
controls. It is important to remember that scalding is a time- and temperature-dependent
process; therefore, different temperature combinations can be used in the multiple scald
tanks. Generally, temperatures will range from 48.9°C to 56.7°C (120°F–134°F) for 2–4 min,
depending on the type of scald (soft or hard) and temperatures needed to maintain picking
efficiency. Scalding temperatures that are too low can promote the growth of bacteria and
lead to poor picking. Scalding with too high temperatures will reduce yield as it liquefies
fat in poultry skin. Another problem with overscalding is the banding appearance that can
occur on the surface of breast meat. The banding appears as whiter bands that are actu-
ally denatured protein caused by heat. Areas of the skin that are not well feathered will be
impacted most because there is less insulation against temperature in these areas.

Picking
The goal of picking is to remove feathers that have been loosened during scalding.
Picking machines consist of rows of rotating clusters of flexible, ribbed, rubber “fingers”
(Figure 3.5). While rotating rapidly, the fingers rub against the carcass, and the abrasion
pulls out loosened feathers. By combining a series of these rotating clusters of fingers, each
directed at a different region of the carcass, the whole carcass is picked. Picking machines
adjusted too close to the bird may cause skin tears in the thigh and breast regions, and
broken wing, leg, and rib bones. It is important to note that picking machines do not cause
bruising. Bruising (hemorrhaging) can no longer occur after loss of blood pressure (i.e.,
once the birds are cut and bled out). Unlike problems when the picking machine is too
close, machines that are too distant may not adequately remove the feathers. Pin feathers
are immature feathers that protrude from the skin, still encased in the feather shaft. These
pin feathers are difficult to remove with machines and therefore require manual attention.
Illustrating the importance of live production issues in processing, a more rapidly feather-
ing bird will have fewer pin feathers when processed. The last step in feather removal is
singeing. Carcasses are briefly passed through a flame to burn off the hairlike filoplume
structures on the skin because they are aesthetically offensive to consumers and consid-
ered a carcass defect. Feather loss represents approximately 6.5% of the yield loss during
processing. Additionally, picking has been shown to be an area of major bacterial cross-
contamination; therefore, a postpicking carcass rinse should follow this step.
Before the carcasses leave the picking area, the heads are pulled off of the necks if
they have not already come off in the picking machines or were removed due to decapita-
tion. The heads, along with the feathers, blood, and inedible viscera, are called offal and
are sent to rendering (either in plant or at a different location), where these materials are
ground and cooked into poultry fat and by-product meal for inclusion in animal feed (see
Chapter 19). Heads represent around 3% of the yield loss associated with processing. The
feet are also cut off at the ankle or “hock” joint and sent to be chilled and sorted for sale
or inclusion in the giblets. There are usually two categories of feet quality: those that are
32 Poultry meat processing, second edition

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.5 Picture of a picker head with the flexible rubber fingers (a). Row of defeathering or “pick-
ing” machines with each one targeting its picker heads at a different part of the carcass (b).
Chapter three: First processing: Slaughter through chilling 33

free of defects and those containing defects such as dark pigmentation or footpad lesions.
The feet equate to about 3.5% yield of the carcass. The last step before evisceration is to
transfer the birds from the kill shackle line (hung by feet) to the evisceration shackle line
(hung by hocks). This is done manually or with a transfer machine. If done manually,
this can be a site of bacterial cross-contamination, as one employee handles many birds.
Separation should be maintained between the live and dead areas of the plant to reduce
contamination of the relatively cleaner evisceration room. Traditionally, one kill line could
feed multiple evisceration lines because the kill line could travel at line speeds greater
than evisceration lines. For example, one kill line running at 140 birds per minute (bpm)
could feed two evisceration lines running at 70 bpm each with two inspectors per line
(speed limited due to inspection purposes; see Chapter 5). However, with newer eviscera-
tion equipment, faster line speeds are allowed (see Chapter 5). Therefore, the same kill line
running at 140 bpm can feed one evisceration line running at 140 bpm with four inspectors
on the line. Typically, shackles are on a 6 in. center (shackles 6 in. apart at center); however,
an 8 in. center is required when processing larger birds (>7.5 lb).

Evisceration
Evisceration is the removal of edible and inedible viscera from the carcass. It is a coor-
dinated series of highly automated operations that vary substantially in sequence and
design from plant to plant and from one equipment manufacturer to another. Although
it is becoming more automated, turkey evisceration is still largely manual worldwide. In
broi­lers, evisceration has three basic objectives: (1) the body cavity is opened by making a
cut from the posterior tip of the breastbone to the cloaca (anus); (2) the viscera (primarily
the gastrointestinal tract and associated organs, reproductive tract, heart, and lungs) is
scooped out; and (3) the edible viscera or “giblets” (heart, liver, and gizzard) are harvested
from the extracted viscera, trimmed of adhering tissues, and washed with water. The edi-
ble viscera or giblets represent approximately 7% of the carcass yield, while the inedible
viscera represents around 3%. The neck is usually part of the giblets but is collected later,
after inspection of the carcass for wholesomeness. Although not technically part of the vis-
cera, the feet (or “paws”) have become a valuable product, primarily for export to cultures
that use them for human food (see Chapter 19, Figure 19.2). In some countries, the paws are
included with the packet of giblets sold with the whole carcass.
There are also some countries where a considerable proportion of the poultry is sold
without evisceration (Figure 3.6). Broilers processed to only remove the blood and feath-
ers are called “New York dressed” and are even sometimes sold without refrigeration.
Cultures preferring this type of product feel that they are fresher because they are whole
and are killed and sold within hours (due to short shelf life). Sometimes these unevisce­
rated carcasses are held for several days because of the desired “gamelike” flavor that
develops. Due to the lack of labeling on these carcasses, processors have used adhesive
labels on the skin to promote customer loyalty through brand identification (Figure 3.7).
The basic design of most evisceration machines is rotating, vertical cylinders that have
ten or more “stations” located around the edge. The shackle line containing the birds wraps
around the cylinder and provides the force for rotation, so the shackle line and machines
move at a coordinated speed. As each shackle and bird contact the cylinder, the bird is
grasped and a series of mechanical procedures are performed. When the cylinder has made
a complete rotation and completed the series of events, the bird is released from the machine
to travel to the next machine in the sequence. After releasing each bird, machines usually
have a washing step for the station before it grasps its next bird. Despite this washing, the
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
2. While we are engaged in holy duties, especially in the public
ordinances of God’s worship, let us endeavour to maintain a
becoming reverence, and filial fear of God, in whose presence we
are, and a love to his holy institutions, which are instamped with his
authority. Let us moreover watch and strive against the first motions
and suggestions of Satan, and our corrupt hearts, endeavouring to
divert us from, or disturb us in holy duties. And let us often lift up
our hearts to God, by spiritual, short ejaculatory prayers, for help
from him, to enable us to improve the word, and, at the same time,
endeavour to our utmost, to affect our hearts with a sense of the
great worth of gospel-opportunities. Let us also cherish, improve,
and bless God for all the influences of his Holy Spirit, which he is
pleased, at any time, to grant to us; or bewail and lament the want
thereof, when they are withheld.
3. In the intervals between our attendance on the ordinances of
God’s public worship, we are to engage in private duties, and
worship God in, and with our families; and in order hereunto, call to
mind what we have heard, impress it on our own souls, recommend
it to those whom we converse with, and are concerned for; and take
heed that we do nothing, between one public ordinance and another,
which may unfit us for the remaining duties of the day; but, on the
other hand, strive against, and give a check to the least motions
thereof in our own souls.
4. The Sabbath is to be sanctified in the evening thereof, when the
public ordinances are over; at which time we are to call to mind
what we have received from God, with thankfulness, and how we
have behaved ourselves in all the parts of divine worship, in which
we have been engaged. Let us enquire, whether the Sabbath was
welcome to us, and we rejoiced in it as a blessing, as well as set
about the observing of it as a duty? as the Psalmist says, ‘I was glad
when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord,’ Psal.
cxxii. 1. Moreover, let us enquire, whether our ends were right in all
the duties we performed? whether the glory of God, and the good of
our own souls, has been our great concern? Or, whether we have
been only influenced by custom, and rested in a form of godliness,
without regarding the power thereof, and loved the opinion and
praise of men more than of God? Let us enquire, whether our minds,
our affections and outward gestures have been grave, sedate, and
composed, and we ready to receive whatever God has been pleased
to impart in his word? and whether we have had a due sense of the
divine perfections impressed on our spirits, and of the infinite
distance there is between the great God and us? whether we have
seen our need of the word, as Job says, that he esteemed the words
of God’s mouth more than his necessary food? Job xxiii. 12. and,
whether we have not only attended to, but applied every truth to
our own souls, as desiring to retain, improve, and make it the rule of
our conversation?
We are also to consider, what we have received from God under his
ordinances; whether we have had any sensible communion with him,
any experiences of his love, or impressions of his power on our
hearts? whether we have had fellowship with the Father, and with
his Son Jesus Christ? whether, as we have gone from one ordinance
to another, we have gone from strength to strength, our faith being
more lively, our love to God increased, and our spiritual joy enlarged
by every duty? Let us enquire, whether, we have learned some
doctrine from the word, which we understood not, or, at least, have
been more confirmed therein, after some degree of wavering, or
have been affected with some truth which we never saw such a
beauty and glory in before? whether we have been melted under the
word; if it has been, as the prophet speaks, like fire; or, as the
hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces, Jer. xxiii. 29. or, as the
disciples say one to another, Did not our heart burn within us while
he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the
scriptures? Luke xxiv. 32.
And we may comfortably conclude, that we have received good
under the ordinances, if we have been brought into an holy and
lively frame of spirit; and the more we attend to them, the more our
hearts are drawn forth to desire and delight in them; and especially
when public duties fit us for private, and from the advantage that we
receive from such opportunities, we are more disposed to walk with
God in all the affairs and businesses of life, so that our whole
conversation in this world, receives a tincture from the benefit which
we gain by that communion which we enjoy with God in his
ordinances on his own day.
Thus we are to take a view of our behaviour when engaged in public
worship; and if we have received any spiritual advantage, the glory
thereof is to be given to God. But if, on the other hand, upon a strict
and impartial enquiry into the frame of our spirits under the
ordinances, we have, as it too often happens, reason to complain of
our deadness and stupidity under them; if we have not experienced
that sensible communion with God, which we have at other times
enjoyed, or have reason to say, that we wax worse, rather than
better, under them; let us dread the consequence hereof, lest this
should issue in a judicial hardness of heart, and habitual
unprofitableness, under the means of grace. We ought, in this case,
to search out, and be humbled before God, for that secret sin, which
is as a root of bitterness which springs up within us, and troubles us;
and be still pressing after that special presence of God in his
ordinances, that will have a tendency to promote the life and power
of religion in our souls.
And to this we may add; that besides our dealing thus with
ourselves in our private retirements, after having attended on public
worship, we are to endeavour to sanctify the Sabbath in our families,
in the evening thereof. Family-worship is to be neglected no day; but
on the Sabbath, it is to be engaged in with a particular relation to
the duties which we have been performing in public; accordingly it is
mentioned in one of the answers we are explaining, that the charge
of keeping the Sabbath is directed to the governors of families, and
other superiors; inasmuch as they are bound, not only to keep it
themselves, but to see that it be observed by all those who are
under their charge, and not to hinder them, as many are prone to
do, by employing them in those works which are foreign to the
duties of the day. Masters of families are not only to restrain
immoralities in those who are under their care, on the Sabbath-day,
but to lay their commands on them, to engage with them in the
worship of God therein, as they expect a blessing from him on their
undertakings. Thus Joshua resolves, that he and his house would
serve the Lord, Josh. xxiv. 15. and God speaks to the honour of
Abraham, when he says, I know him that he will command his
children and his household after him; and they shall keep the way of
the Lord, Gen. xviii. 19. Superiors have no power to dispense with
any of God’s commandments, to disengage those who are under
them, from yielding obedience thereunto. But, on the other hand,
they are obliged to see that all, under their care, perform their duty
to God, as well as to them, and, particularly, that of sanctifying the
Sabbath. Therefore they are to restrain them from taking their own
diversions, or finding their own pleasure in sinful recreations on the
Lord’s day; and impress on them those suitable exhortations, that
may have a tendency to promote religion in their families; by which
means they may hope for a peculiar blessing from God, in every
relation and condition of life.
 Quest. CXIX., CXX., CXXI.

Quest. CXIX. What are the sins forbidden in the fourth

Commandment?
Answ. The sins forbidden in the fourth Commandment, are, all
omissions of the duties required, all careless, negligent, and
unprofitable performing of them, and being weary of them, all
profaning the day by idleness, and doing that which is in itself
sinful, and by all needless works, words, and thoughts about
worldly employments and recreations.
Quest. CXX. What are the reasons annexed to the fourth
Commandment the more to enforce it?
Answ. The reasons annexed to the fourth Commandment, the
more to enforce it, are taken from the equity of it, God allowing
us six days of seven for our own affairs, and reserving but one
for himself, in these words, [Six days shalt thou labour, and do
all thy work,] from God’s challenging a special propriety in that
day, [The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God] from
the example of God, who, in six days made heaven and earth,
the sea, and all that in them is and rested the seventh day; and
from that blessing which God put upon that day, not only in
sanctifying it to be a day for his service, but in ordaining it to be
a means of blessing to us in our sanctifying it; [wherefore the
Lord blessed the Sabbath-day and hallowed it.]
Quest. CXXI. Why is the word Remember set in the beginning of
the fourth Commandment?
 Answ. The word Remember is set in the beginning of the fourth
Commandment, partly because of the great benefit of
remembering it; we being thereby helped, in our preparation, to
keep it; and in keeping it better, to keep all the rest of the
commandments, and to continue a thankful remembrance of the
two great benefits of creation, and redemption, which contain a
short abridgment of religion; and partly because we are very
ready to forget it; for that there is less light of nature for it, and
yet it restraineth our natural liberty in things at other times
lawful; that it cometh but once in seven days, and many worldly
businesses come between, and too often take off our minds from
thinking of it, either to prepare for it, or to sanctify it; and that
Satan, with his instruments much labour to blot out the glory,
and even the memory of it, to bring in all irreligion and impiety.

The method in which we shall proceed, in speaking to these

answers, shall be,
I. To consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment; and these
are,
1. The omission of the duties required. Sins of omission are
exceeding prejudicial; because, though they have a tendency to
harden the heart, and stupify the conscience; yet they are, of all
others, least regarded. As for the omission of holy duties, on the
Sabbath-day; this is a slighting and casting away a great prize, put
into our hands; and therefore, in such a case, it will be said,
Wherefore is there a price put into the hands of a fool to get
wisdom, seeing he hath no heart to it, Prov. xvi. 16. It may be also
observed, that this is generally attended with the neglect of secret
duties, and is an in-let to all manner of sins, and to a total apostasy
from God.
2. The next thing forbidden in this Commandment is, the careless
performance of holy duties; that is, when our hearts are not
engaged in them, or we content ourselves with a form of godliness,
denying the power thereof, have no sense of God’s all-seeing eye, or
dread of spiritual judgments, or being given up to barrenness and
unprofitableness, under the means of grace. Such a frame of spirit
as this, is always attended with a declining state of religion;
especially if we do not lament and strive against it.
And to this we may add, that we greatly sin, when we profane the
day by idleness; and that either by sleeping away a great part of the
morning of the day, as though it were a day of sloth, and not of
spiritual rest, designed for religious exercises; or drowsiness under
the ordinances, as though we had no concern in them; whereby we
give all about us to understand, that we do, as it were, withdraw our
thoughts from the work, which we pretend to be engaged in. In
some, indeed, this proceeds very much from the weakness of their
natural constitution. Such may be heavy and weary in duty, though
they, are not weary of it; and this is what they lament, and are far
from giving way to; though they are, sometimes, unavoidably
overtaken with it. In this case, though it cannot be excused from
being a sin; yet it is such, as, it is to be hoped, our Saviour will
cover, with the mantle of his love, or, at least, not charge upon them
for their condemnation; though he may reprove them for it, to bring
them under conviction. Thus he dealt with his disciples, when he
came to them, and found them asleep, Matt. xxvi. 40, 41. and
though he tacitly reproves them, yet he does not infer from hence,
that they were wholly destitute of faith; but charges their
unbecoming carriage therein, on the weakness of faith, being
impowered by the infirmities of nature, when he says, The spirit
indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.
There are other sins forbidden in the fourth Commandment, that are
particularly mentioned in this answer, which have been occasionally
insisted on, in considering how the Sabbath is to be sanctified; in
which we have shewn, that, as we are not to do that which is in
itself sinful, so we are to abstain from our worldly employments and
recreations, and endeavour to fence against that vanity of thoughts,
which will have a tendency to alienate our affections from God, or
hinder the success of ordinances; and therefore we pass them over
at present, and proceed to consider,
II. The reasons annexed to this Commandment. And,
1. It is highly reasonable that we should sanctify the Lord’s day,
since he is pleased to allow us six days out of seven, for the
attending to our worldly affairs, and reserves but one to himself.
This supposes that we are allowed to engage in our secular callings
on other days: and therefore, though it be brought in occasionally, in
this commandment, it is a duty belonging to the second table rather
than the first; particularly, it seems to be a branch of the eighth
Commandment; however, it is alleged as a reason of our observing
this Commandment. It is a very large allowance that God has made,
of six days in seven, for our own employments. If, on the other
hand, he had allowed us but one day in seven for them, and laid
claim to six days, to be set apart for religious worship, none would
have had reason to complain, since he, being the absolute Lord of
our time, may demand what proportion of it he pleases; and they
who are truly sensible of the real advantage that there is in the
attendance on all God’s holy institutions, and consider the Sabbath
as a privilege and blessing, would not only think it reasonable, but a
great instance of the kindness of God to man, had this earth so
much resembled heaven, that there should be a perpetual Sabbath
celebrated here, as there is there, where the saints count it their
happiness to be engaged without interruption, in the immediate
service of God.
Obj. It is objected, by some, that they cannot spare a seventh part
of time for religious duties, out of their worldly business; and that it
is very hard for them to get bread for their families, by all their
diligence and industry. Others allege, that the Sabbath is their
market-day, wherein, by selling things, they get more than they do
on other days.
Answ. 1. As to the former part of the objection, taken from the
difficulty of persons subsisting their families, it may be replied; that
God is able to made up the loss of the seventh part of time, so that
their not working therein, shall not be a real detriment, to those who
are in the fewest circumstances in the world, God has ordered it so,
that our observing his holy institutions, shall not, in the end, prove
detrimental to us. Thus when Israel was commanded to rest, and
not to cultivate their land for an whole year together, every seventh
year, providence so ordered it, that they were not sufferers thereby,
inasmuch as the year before brought forth enough for three years,
Lev. xxv. 20-22. and when they were not to gather manna on the
seventh day of the week, there was a double quantity rained upon
them, which they gathered the day before, Exod. xvi. 22-24.
Therefore, why may we not conclude, that, by the blessing of God,
what is lost by our not attending to our secular callings on the Lord’s
day, may be abundantly made up, by his blessing succeeding our
endeavours on other days.
As to that part of the objection, in which it is pretended that the
Lord’s day is their market-day, in which they expect more advantage
than on other days; it may be replied, that if this is true, it arises
from the iniquity of the times; and it should be a caution to us, not
to encourage those who expose their wares to sale on the Sabbath-
day; since if there were no buyers, there would be no sellers; and
this public and notorious sin would be hereby prevented. We have a
noble instance of this in Nehemiah, whose wisdom, zeal, and holy
resolution, put an effectual stop to this practice, in his dealing with
those who sold fish on the Sabbath-day, Neh. xiii. 16-21. First, he
shut the gates of the city against them; and when he saw that they
continued without the walls, hoping, by some means or other, to get
into the city, or to entice some to come out to buy their
merchandize; then he testified against them, and commanded them
not to continue without the walls, and by this means, gave a check
to that scandalous practice. Moreover, this gain of iniquity is not to
be pretended as a just excuse for the breach of a positive
commandment; since, what is gotten in a way of presumptuous
rebellion against God, it is not like to prosper, whatever pretence of
poverty may be alleged, to give countenance thereunto.
2. Another reason annexed to enforce our observation of the
Sabbath-day, is taken from God’s challenging a special propriety in it.
Thus it is called the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; a day which he
has consecrated, or separated to himself, and so lays claim to it.
Therefore it is no less than sacrilege, or a robbing of him, to employ
it in any thing but what he requires to be done therein.
3. God sets his own example before us for our imitation therein.
Thus it is said, In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and
rested the seventh day, and hallowed it. It is observed, that God was
six days in making the world; whereas, had he pleased, he could
have created all things with the same beauty and perfection in which
they are at present, in an instant; but he performed this work by
degrees, that he might teach us, that whatever our hand finds to do,
we should do it in the proper season allotted for it; and as he ceased
from his work on the seventh day, he requires that we should rest
from ours, in conformity to his own example.
4. The last reason assigned for our sanctifying the Sabbath, is taking
from God’s blessing and sanctifying it, or setting it apart for an holy
use. To bless a day, is to give it to us as a particular blessing and
privilege. Accordingly we ought to reckon the Sabbath as a great
instance of God’s care and compassion to men, and a very great
privilege, which ought to be highly esteemed by them. Again, for
God to sanctify a day, is to set it apart from a common, to an holy
use; and thus we ought to reckon the Sabbath as a day signalized
above all others, with the character of God’s holy day; and as such,
it is to be employed by us in holy exercises, answerable to the end
for which it was instituted.
III. It is observed in the last answer we are explaining, that the
word Remember is set in the beginning of the fourth
Commandment; from whence we may observe, our great proneness,
through worldly business, and Satan’s temptations, to forget the
Sabbath. We may also learn from hence, the importance of our
observing it; without which, irreligion and profaneness would never
universally abound in the world; and, on the other hand, in our
observing this day as we ought to do, we may hope for grace from
God, whereby we may be enabled to keep his other commandments.
Again, the word Remember, prefixed to this Commandment, not
only imports that we are to call to mind, that this particular day
which God has sanctified, is a Sabbath, or to know what day it is, in
the order of the days of the week; but we ought to endeavour to
have a frame of spirit becoming the holiness of the day, or, to
remember it, so as to keep it holy. It is certain, that it is an hard
matter, through the corruption of nature, to get our hearts
disengaged from the vain amusements and entanglements of this
present world; by which means we lose the advantage that would
redound to us, by our conversing with God in holy duties. Therefore
we are to desire of him, that he would impress on our souls a sense
of our obligation to duty, and of the advantage which we may hope
to gain from it. And to induce us hereunto, let it be considered,
1. That the profanation of the Sabbath is generally the first step to
all manner of wickedness, and a making great advances to a total
apostasy from God.
2. The observing of it is reckoned as a sign between God and his
people. It is, with respect to him, a sign of his favour; and with
respect to man, it is a sign of their subjection to God, as their King
and Lawgiver, in all his holy appointments.
3. We cannot reasonably expect, that God should bless us in what
we undertake, on other days, if we neglect to own him, on his day,
or to devote ourselves to him, and thereby discover our preferring
him, and the affairs of his worship, before all things in the world.
From what has been said in explaining this Commandment, we may
infer,
(1.) That, this may serve to confute those who think that the
observation of days, in general, or, that the keeping the first day of
the week as a Sabbath, is a setting up the ceremonial law, without
distinguishing a right between a ceremonial and a moral precept.
For, how much soever the observation of the seventh day, might
have a ceremonial signification annexed to it, as it was given to
Israel, from mount Sinai, it is possible for the typical reference
thereof, to cease; and yet the moral reason of the Commandment
remain in force to us, as it is a day appointed by God, in which he is
to be worshipped, so that we may have ground to expect his
presence, and blessing, while attending on him in his holy
institutions.
(2.) Others are to blame, who think that every day is to be kept as a
Sabbath, pretending that this is most agreeable to a state of
perfection. But this is contrary to God’s allowing us six days for our
own employment; and, indeed, none, who make use of this
argument, do, in reality, keep any day as a Sabbath, at least, in such
a way as they ought.
(3.) Others are guilty of a great error, who think that the Sabbath is,
indeed, to be observed; but there is no need of that strictness which
has been inculcated; or, that it should be kept holy, from the
beginning to the end thereof. Some suppose, that the only design of
God in instituting it was, that public worship should be maintained in
the world; and therefore, that it is sufficient if they attend on it,
without endeavouring to converse with him in secret.
(4.) What has been said, is directly contrary to their opinion, who
think that the Lord’s day was a mere human institution; without
considering, as has been hinted, that what the apostles prescribed,
relating thereunto, was by divine direction; which opinion, if it
should prevail, would open a door to great carelessness and
formality in holy duties, and would be an inducement to us to
profane the day in various instances.
 Quest. CXXII.

Quest. CXXII. What is the sum of the six Commandments, which

contain our duty to man?
Answ. The sum of the six Commandments, which contain our
duty to man, is to love our neighbour as ourselves, and to do to
others what we would have them do to us.

As the first table of the ten Commandments respects our duty to

God, the other contains our duty to our neighbor; which is
comprized in the general idea of love. This is therefore styled the
sum of the following six Commandments; and it is included in our
Saviour’s words; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, Matt. xxii.
39. and elsewhere, Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you,
do ye even so to them, chap. vii. 12. Here it may be observed,
I. That we are commanded to love our neighbour as ourselves. This
implies in it,
1. A caution against a selfish temper; as though we were born only
for, or were obliged to do good to none but ourselves. This is what
the apostle reproves, when he says, Men shall be lovers of their
ownselves, 2 Tim. iii. 2. that is, they shall study and consult the
happiness, ease, and comfort of none but themselves.
2. It farther implies in it, our using endeavours to promote the good
of all, whom we converse with; and thereby rendering ourselves a
blessing to mankind. It does not, indeed, exclude self-love, which it
supposes to be a duty; but obliges us to love others as well as
ourselves, in things that relate to their spiritual and temporal good.
This leads us to enquire,
(1.) Whether we ought to love others better than ourselves; or what
the apostle intends, when he says, Let each esteem other better
than themselves? Phil. ii. 3.
Answ. [1.] It cannot be hereby intended, that they, who have
attained a great measure of the knowledge of the truths of God,
should reckon themselves as ignorant of, or unstable in, the
doctrines of the gospel, as those who never made them the subject
of their study and enquiry; nor, that they, who have had large
experience of the grace of God, should conclude that they have no
more experience thereof than those who are unregenerate, and
have not taken one step heavenward. But,
[2.] The meaning is, that the greatest saint should not think himself
better than the least, any otherwise than as he has received more
from the discriminating grace of God; as the apostle says, Who
maketh thee to differ from another; and what hast thou, that thou
didst not receive? 1 Cor. iv. 7. And, indeed, such an one may see
more sin in himself than he can see in any other; and therefore, may
have reason to reckon himself, as the apostle speaks, the chief of
sinners, 1 Tim. i. 15.
[3.] The best saints would have been as bad as the vilest of men,
had they been left to themselves; and it may be, some of them who
have had less grace, have had fewer talents, and opportunities of
grace, than they have had; which they have improved better, in
proportion to what they have received, than they have, the many
advantages which God has been pleased to bestow on them.
(1.) Our next enquiry may be, whether our love to our neighbour
should extend so far, as that we should be willing, were it needful, to
lay down our lives for them; as it is said, in 1 John iii. 16. We ought
to lay down our lives for the brethren; and in Rom. v. 7.
Peradventure, for a good man some would even dare to die.
Answ. [1.] By laying down our lives in these scriptures, is principally
intended hazarding our lives, or exposing ourselves to the utmost
danger, even of death itself, for others. But,
[2.] We are not to do this rashly, and at all times; but when God,
who is the sovereign Lord of our lives, calls us to it. And,
[3.] This ought not to be for every one, but for the brethren,
especially for those who are more eminently useful in the church of
God than ourselves or others. Accordingly the apostle says, for a
good man; that is, one who is a common good, or a blessing to
many others, one would even dare to die.
[4.] This must be, at such times, when in exposing ourselves for the
sake of others, we give our testimony to the gospel; and, in
defending them, plead the injured cause of Christ and religion.
II. This loving our neighbour as ourselves is farther illustrated in this
answer, by doing to others what we would have them to do us. This
is one of the most undeniable, and self-evident truths contained in
the law of nature. So that whatever disputable matters there may
be, as to what respects other duties, this is allowed of by all
mankind. Many, indeed, do not conform their practice to this rule;
which gives occasion to the injuries done between man and man.
However the vilest of men, when they deliberate on their own
actions, cannot but blame themselves for acting contrary thereunto.
Thus Saul did, when he said unto David, Thou art more righteous
than I; for thou hast rewarded me good; whereas I have rewarded
thee evil, 1 Sam. xxiv. 17. Therefore we conclude, that it is one of
the first principles of the law of nature; and may well be called, as it
is in this answer, the sum of the Commandments of the second
table, or that, to which they are all reduced. There are two things,
which we shall lay down, relating to this golden rule, of doing to
others as we would that they should do to us.
1. It is miserably neglected by a great part of the world; as,
(1.) By them who turn away their hearts from the afflicted; so as not
to pity, help, or endeavour to comfort them in their distress. The
Psalmist was of another mind, when he says, As for me, when they
were sick, my clothing was sackcloth. I humbled my soul with
fasting, and my prayer returned into mine own bosom. I behaved
myself as though he had been my friend or brother. I bowed down
heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother, Psal. xxxv. 13,-15.
(2.) They who deny to others those natural, civil, or religious
liberties, which, by God’s appointment, they have a right to, or envy
them the possession thereof, may be said to neglect this golden rule.
2. We are farther to enquire, how this rule, of doing to others what
we would have them do to us, may be of use, in order to our right
observing the Commandments of the second table?
Answ. The fifth Commandment, which requires the performance of
all relative duties, would be better observed, did superiors put
themselves in the place of inferiors, and consider what they would
then expect from them; and the same they ought to do to them.
Again, the sixth, seventh, and eight Commandments, that respect
the life, honour, or wealth of others; if these are dear to us, ought
we not to consider, that they are so to others; and if we would not
be deprived of them ourselves, how unreasonable is it for us to do
any thing that may tend to deprive others of them? Again, if,
according to the ninth Commandment, our good name be so
valuable, that we ought to maintain it, should not this rule be
observed by defamers, slanderers, and backbiters, who do that to
others which they would not have done to themselves? And the
tenth Commandment, which forbids our uneasiness at, or being
discontented with, the good of others, or endeavouring to supplant,
or divest them of the possession of what God has given them in this
world. This cannot be done by any one who duly considers, how
unwilling they would be to have what they possess taken away, to
satisfy the covetousness, or lust, of others.
Quest. CXXIII., CXXIV., CXXV., CXXVI., CXXVII.,
CXXVIII.

Quest. CXXIII. Which is the fifth Commandment?

Answ. The fifth Commandment is, Honour thy father and thy
mother, that thy days may be long upon the land, which the Lord
thy God giveth thee.
Quest. CXXIV. Who are meant by father, and mother, in the fifth
Commandment?
Answ. By father and mother, in the fifth Commandment, are
meant not only natural parents; but all the superiors in age, and
gifts, and especially such as by GOD’s ordinance, are over us in
place of authority, whether in family, church, or common-wealth.
Quest. CXXV. Why are superiors styled, father and mother?
Answ. Superiors are styled father and mother, both to teach them
in all duties towards their inferiors, like natural parents, to
express love and tenderness to them, according to their several
relations, and to work inferiors to a greater willingness and
cheerfulness in performing their duties to their superiors, as to
their parents.
Quest. CXXVI. What is the general scope of the fifth
Commandment?
Answ. The general scope of the fifth Commandment, is, the
performance of those duties which we mutually owe in our
several relations, as inferiors, superiors, or equals.
 Quest. CXXVII. What is the honour that inferiors owe to their
superiors?
Answ. The honour which inferiors owe to their superiors, is, all
due reverence, in heart, word, and behaviour; prayer, and
thanksgiving for them, imitation of their virtues and graces;
willing obedience to their lawful commands, and counsels, due
submission to their corrections, fidelity to, defence, and
maintenance of their persons and authority, according to their
several ranks, and the nature of their places; bearing with their
infirmities, and covering them in love, that so they may be an
honour to them and their government.
Quest. CXXVIII. What are the sins of inferiors against their
superiors?
Answ. The sins of inferiors against their superiors, are, all neglect
of the duties required towards them, envying at, contempt of,
and rebellion against their persons, and places, in their lawful
counsels, commands, and corrections, cursing, mocking, and all
such refractory and scandalous carriage, as proves a shame and
dishonour to them and their government.

In the fifth Commandment, no other relations are mentioned, but

father and mother; yet it may be observed,
I. That, hereby, all superiors in general are intended; as many others
are called fathers in scripture, besides our natural parents, viz.
1. Superiors in age. Thus it is said, Rebuke not an elder, but intreat
him as a father, and the younger men as brethren; the elder women
as mothers, the younger as sisters, with all purity, 1 Tim. v. 1, 2.
2. They, are also called fathers, who are superior in gifts; and
accordingly have been the first inventors of arts, which have been
useful to the world. Thus Jabal is said to be the father of such as
dwell in tents, and have cattle, Gen. iv. 20. that is, the first that
made considerable improvements in the art of husbandry; and Jubal
is said to be the father, that is, the instructor of all such as handle
the harp and organ, ver. 21. or the first that made improvements in
the art of music.
3. Persons to whom we owe, under God, our outward prosperity and
happiness. In this sense Joseph, though a subject, a young man,
and a little before, a prisoner, is called a father to Pharaoh, chap. xlv.
8. as he was an instrument to support his greatness, and preserve
him from the inconveniences of a seven years famine.
4. Princes, great men, and heads of families, are called fathers. Thus
Naaman was by his servants, 2 Kings v. 13.
5. Men of honour and usefulness in the church are so called. Thus
when Elisha saw Elijah ascend into heaven, he cries out, My father,
my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof, chap. ii.
12. And Joash, the king of Israel, used the same expression to
Elisha, when fallen sick, chap. xiii. 14. And this is implied in the
apostle’s styling those whom he had been of use to, for their
conviction, and enlightening in the doctrines of the gospel, My little
children, Gal. iv. 19.
6. Good kings and governors are called fathers. Thus it is said, Kings
shall be thy nursing fathers, and queens thy nursing mothers, Isa.
xlix. 23.
II. We have an account, in one of the answers we are explaining, of
the reason why superiors are styled father and mother; namely, to
denote, that they should behave towards their inferiors, with that
love and tenderness, as though they were natural parents. Authority
is not only consistent herewith, but it ought to be exercised, by
superiors towards inferiors, in such a way. Thus Job, when in his
prosperity, was, as it were, a common father to all that were under
him; accordingly he says, I delivered the poor that cried, and the
fatherless, and him that had none to help him, Job xxix. 12. upon
which occasion he says, I was a father to the poor, ver. 16. And
ministers, who, in some respects, are superior in office to others;
when their reproofs are mixed with tenderness and compassion
towards the souls of men under their care, are compared to the
nurse that cherished her children; as being affectionately desirous,
and willing to impart to them, not the gospel of God only, but also
their own souls, as being dear to them, 1 Thess. ii. 7, 8.
III. We have, in another of the answers under our consideration, an
account of the general scope of the fifth Commandment; and, as it
requires the duties to be performed by every one in their several
relations; these are considered either as superiors, inferiors, or
equals. There are several sorts of relations wherein persons are
styled superior or inferior to one another.
1. Such as are founded in nature; as that of parents and children.
2. There are such relations as are political, designed for the good of
mankind, living together as members of the same common-wealth,
in which every one has a right to his civil liberties, which are to be
enjoyed by one, and defended by the other; of this sort is the
relation of magistrates and subjects.
3. There is a relation founded in mutual compact and agreement,
respecting things to be done, on the one side, and gratifications to
be allowed, on the other; of this kind is the relation between master
and servant. The only difficulty that arises from the account we have
of the obligation of persons to give honour to others, respects
superiors honouring inferiors. For the understanding of which, let it
be considered,
(1.) That superiors are not obliged to shew the same marks of
honour to their inferiors, as inferiors are bound, by the laws of God
and nature, to express to them. Nevertheless,
(2.) There is a duty which the greatest owe to the least; and there is
also a degree of honour, which the lowest of men, as reasonable
creatures, or Christians, have put upon them by God; and this is to
be regarded by those who are, as to their condition in the world,
superior to them.
(3.) The meanest and lowest part of mankind, are, in many respects,
necessary and useful to those who are much their superiors; and are
to be regarded by them in proportion thereto. And the performing
the duties which such owe to them, is called an honouring them.
IV. We have, in another of the answers we are explaining, an
account of the honour which inferiors owe to their superiors. Here it
will be necessary for us to premise some things concerning the
measure of submission and obedience which inferiors owe to
superiors, of what kind soever the relation be. As,
1. When the authority God has invested superiors with, is abused,
and the highest end of all sort of government, to wit, the glory of
God, and the good of mankind, can never be attained, nor is,
indeed, designed; or when the commands of superiors contradict the
commands of God, we are to obey him rather than men, Acts iv. 19.
2. If we cannot obey the commands of superiors, as being unjust,
we must pray that God would interpose, direct, and over-rule their
authority, that it may not be abused by them; or become a snare, or
an occasion of sin, to us.
3. Though we cannot yield obedience to them, in those things that
are contrary to the laws of God, this does not discharge us from our
obligation to obey their commands, in other things, agreeable
thereunto; since we are not to suppose that the abuse of their
authority in some instances, divests them of it in all respects.
V. We shall now proceed to consider the duties which inferiors owe
to their superiors. And,
1. That of children to parents. This is founded on the law of nature,
as under God, they derive their being from them; and they are
obliged thereunto, from a sense of gratitude for that love,
tenderness, and compassion which they have shewn to them.
Therefore the apostle says, that this is right, Eph. vi. 1. that is,
equitable, and highly reasonable; and elsewhere, that it is well-
pleasing unto the Lord, Col. iii. 20. This duty includes in it several
things.
(1.) They are sometimes to shew the regard they have to them by
outward tokens of respect. Thus Solomon, though his character, as a
king, rendered him superior to all his subjects; yet he expressed a
great deal of honour by outward gestures to his mother; when she
went to him to speak in the behalf of Adonijah: it is said, that ‘the
king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down
on his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king’s mother; and
she sat on his right hand,’ 1 Kings ii. 19.
(2.) They ought to be ready to do them any acts of service, which
are not unlawful or impossible, when commanded by them. Thus
Joseph obeyed Jacob, when he sent him to see where his brethren
were, and what they were engaged in, Gen. xxxvii. 13. and David
obeyed Jesse, when he sent him to his brethren to the camp of
Israel, 1 Sam. xvii. 17, 20. This service is required more especially of
them, while they live with their parents, are maintained by them,
and not, by mutual compact, become servants to others.
(3.) Another duty which they owe, is, patient submission to their just
reproofs, design for their good. Thus the apostle says, ‘We have had
fathers of our flesh, which corrected us; and we gave them
reverence,’ Heb. xii. 9.
(4.) They are to attend to, and comply with, their wholesome advice
and instruction. Thus it is said, A wise son heareth his father’s
instruction, Prov. xiii. 1. and, on the other hand, he is branded with
the character of a fool who despiseth it, chap. xv. 5. and it is farther
added, He that regardeth reproof is prudent.
(5.) Children are to express their duty to their parents, by a thankful
acknowledgment of past favours; and accordingly ought to relieve
them, if they are able, when their indigent circumstances call for it;
and endeavour to be a staff, comfort, and support to them, in their
old age. This is contained in the message which Joseph sent to
Jacob, when he invited him to come down to him into Egypt, Gen.
xlv. 9,-11. So when Ruth bare a son to Boaz, her mother Naomi’s
companions blessed her, and said, He shall be unto thee a restorer
of thy life, and a nourisher of thine old age, Ruth iv. 15.
(6.) Children are to pay deference to, and, so far as it concerns the
glory of God, and their own future good, be advised, by their
parents, in disposing of themselves in marriage, or any other
important change of their condition and circumstances in the world.
Herein they acknowledge their authority as superiors, and the care
and concern which it is supposed they naturally have for their
welfare, as a part of themselves. Moreover, by this they pay a
deference to their wisdom and judgment, as being superior in age,
and probably, in wisdom, as well as relation. And this ought to be
done out of a sense of gratitude for past favours received; and
prudence will, for the most part, dictate as much, especially when
they depend on them for present, or expect future advantages from
them. This is also an expedient to maintain love and peace in
families, which is oftentimes broken by the contrary practice. And it
may be farther recommended, from the laudable examples hereof in
good men; as Isaac, who submitted to the direction of his father
Abraham herein; and Jacob, Gen. xxiv. who was determined by the
consent of Laban, chap. xxix. Many more instances might be given
to the same purpose. And, on the other hand, Esau’s contrary
practice hereunto is recorded in scripture, as a vile instance of
disobedience; which was a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah,
chap. xxvi. 35. And it was, doubtless, an argument that he had no
regard to God or religion.
Nevertheless, this obligation is not without some exceptions; for,
[1.] We do not speak of parents that are so far deprived of
judgment, that they are not fit to determine this matter; nor,
[2.] Such as have divested themselves of the natural affection of
parents, and entertaining an ungrounded prejudice against some of
their children, are endeavouring to expose them to ruin, that they
may shew more kindness to others. These forfeit that right, which is
otherwise founded in nature.
[3.] If parents, by refusing to comply with the desire of their
children, plainly, in the judgment of the wisest of men, obstruct their
happiness, and the glory of God herein. Or, if they have no reason
for their not complying, or the reason given is contrary to the laws of
God, or the common sense of all impartial judges; especially if the
affair took its first rise from them, and afterwards they changed their
mind, without sufficient ground. This, without doubt, lessens, or it
may be so circumstanced, that it wholly takes away the charge of sin
in the child, in acting contrary to the will of his parents, and fastens
the guilt on them.
[4.] The case is vastly different, when applied to children who are so
far from being dependent on their parents, that they depend on
them. Nevertheless, in this case, some deference and respect ought
to be paid to them; and as it is the children’s duty, it may be their
interest so to do; since we can hardly suppose, that parents, who
depend on their children, would oppose their happiness, in an affair
that is apparently contrary to their own interest, if they did not think
that they had sufficient reason for it; which ought to be duly
weighed, that it may be known, whether their advice is expedient to
be complied with, or no. And if in this, or any other instance,
children are obliged to act contrary to the will of their parents; they
ought to satisfy them, that it is not out of contempt to their
authority, but a conscientious regard to the glory of God; and that it
is conducive to their happiness, in the opinion of the wisest and best
of men.
2. We shall now consider the duty of servants to their masters. This
depends upon, and is limited by the contract, which first brought
them into that relation, the not fulfilling whereof, renders them guilty
of unfaithfulness. And it is no less an instance of immorality, for
them to rob them of that time, which they have engaged to serve,
than it is to take away any part of their estate. But more particularly,
(1.) Servants ought to behave themselves, in their calling, with
industry, being as much concerned for their masters interest as their
own. Thus Joseph, though a foreigner, and one who does not appear
to have expected any reward for his service, but a maintenance,
served Potiphar. In the like manner Jacob served Laban, though an
unjust, severe and unrighteous master. This may lead us to enquire
concerning the duty of servants, when their masters are froward,
passionate, and unreasonable in their demands, which renders their
service very irksome and unpleasant; but let it be considered in this
case,
[1.] That, the master’s passion, which is his sin, ought not to draw
forth the corruption of his servant; for, sin indulged by one, is no
excuse for its being committed by another. The apostle Peter
supposes the case under our present consideration, and gives this
advice; Servants be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to
the good and gentle, but also to the froward, 1 Pet. ii. 18.
[2.] If the master’s demands are unreasonable, the servant must
know the extent of his contract and obligation, which he must, in
justice, fulfil as unto Christ, Eph. vi. 5,-8. And, as for those services
that are reckoned unreasonable, and not agreeable to the contract.
These, if demanded, are rather to be referred to the determination
of others, since persons are apt to be partial in judging in their own
cause.
There seems, indeed, to be an exception to this, in some instances,
which we find in scripture, of the unlimited obedience of servants
under the ceremonial law, which was not founded in, nor the result
of any contract between their masters and them; accordingly we
read, that persons became servants,
1st, Through poverty; by reason of which, they sold themselves for
the payment of debts. In this case there was a kind of contract,
indeed; and the service to be performed ought, (pursuant to the law
of God and nature,) to have been agreeable to, and adjusted by the
value of the debt contracted.
2d, Prisoners taken in war, were treated as servants, and, as such,
sold to others. In this case, all the children that were born to them,
during their servitude, were the property of the master; and these
are called home-born servants, who had not so much liberty allowed
them as when they were servants by mutual compact, as is most
common among us; in which case both parties are bound by this
agreement.
3. We proceed to consider the duty of the members of a common-
wealth, or body-politic, to their lawful magistrates, as the apostle
says, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, Rom. xiii. 1.
Here we may observe,
(1.) The necessity and the end of civil government. This will appear,
if we consider mankind in general, as prone to be influenced by
those passions, which are not entirely under the conduct of reason,
and, if no check were given to them, would prove injurious to
societies. We may also observe, that God has, in his law, ordained
certain punishments to be inflicted, with a design to restrain those
corruptions, and to keep the world in order. And that this end may
more effectually be answered, it is necessary, that some should be
set over others, to administer justice, in chastising the guilty, and
defending the innocent; otherwise the world would be filled with
confusion, and men would commit sin with impunity; and more
resemble brute creatures than those that are endowed with reason,
and as such, capable of moral government; as it is said when there
was no king in Israel, every man did that which was right in his own
eyes, Judges xxi. 25.
We proceed now to consider the advantage of civil government. It is
in itself a blessing to mankind, when it does not degenerate into
tyranny. So that good magistrates are a great instance of divine
favour to a nation; as the queen of Sheba said to Solomon, Happy
are thy men, and happy are these thy servants which stand
continually before thee, and hear thy wisdom. Blessed be the Lord
thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be
king for the Lord thy God. Because thy God loved Israel, to establish
them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do
judgment and justice, 2 Chron. ix. 7, 8. And it is included among the
blessings of the gospel-state, that kings should be their nursing
fathers, and their queens their nursing mothers, Isa. xlix. 23. Such
are said, as David was, to be raised up, to fulfil the will of God, Acts
xiii. 22.
Nevertheless, civil government may be so administered, that it may
cease to be a blessing to the subjects. Thus Samuel describes the
miserable estate of a people, whose kings endeavour to establish
their own greatness by enslaving and plundering their subjects
taking their sons and daughters by force, to be their servants;
seizing their fields, their vineyards and olive-yards, and the tenth of
their increase; which would oblige them to cry unto the Lord,
because of their oppression, 1 Sam. viii. 11,-18. And we have an
instance of this in Rehoboam, who was herein as remarkable for his
want of conduct, as his father was for his excelling wisdom. His
rough and ill-timed answer to his subjects, in which gave them to
expect nothing else but oppression and slavery, issued in the revolt
of the ten tribes from his government, 1 Kings xii. 13, 14.
From this different method of the administration of civil government,
whereby it rendered either a blessing or an affliction to the subjects;
we may infer,
[1.] That when that which is in itself a blessing, is turned into a
curse, this may be looked upon as a punishment inflicted by God, for
the iniquity of a people. Thus he says, I gave thee a king in mine
anger, and took him away in wrath, Hosea xiii. 11.
[2.] We have great reason to be well-pleased with, and to bless God
for the government we are under, as not being exposed to the
slavery that some other nations are; who have no laws, but what
result from the arbitrary will of their prince; and who can call
nothing they have their own. This should make us prize the liberties
we enjoy; and be a strong motive to us to give due and cheerful
obedience to our rightful and lawful sovereign, and all magistrates
under him, who rule in righteousness, and are a terror to evil doers,
but a praise to them that do well.
[3.] This affords matter of reproof to the restless tempers of those,
who are under the mildest government; which is administered
beyond all reasonable exception, our enemies themselves being
judges, who would confess the same, were they not blinded with
prejudice; which puts them upon betaking themselves to railery,
instead of better arguments. These are reproved by the apostle, who
speaks of some that walk after the flesh, in the lust of uncleanness,
and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they
are not afraid to speak evil, even of dignities, 2 Pet. ii. 10. This leads
us
To consider the honour that subjects owe to their lawful magistrates.
Accordingly,
1st, They are highly to resent, and endeavour, in their several
stations and capacities, to check the insolence of those who make
bold with the character, and take the liberty to reproach their
magistrates in common conversation; which is directly contrary to
the law of God; that says, Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought,
and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber. For a bird of the air shall
carry the voice; and that which hath wings shall tell the matter,
Eccles. x. 20.
2dly, We are to support the honour of government, by paying those
tributes which are lawfully exacted. Thus the apostle says, Render to
all their due; tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom
custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour, Rom. xiii. 7.
3dly, We are to pray for a blessing from God, on the administration
of our civil governors, that it may be under the divine direction, and
tend to answer the great ends of government, viz. the glory of God,
and the welfare of the subject. And here I cannot but observe, that
no one on earth has a power of discharging subjects from their
obedience to their lawful governors, who endeavour to rule them
according to the laws of God and nature, and those fundamental
constitutions that are agreeable thereto. Therefore it is a most
detestable position advanced by the Papists, that the pope has a
power to excommunicate and depose sovereign princes; though it
does not appear that he has received any such authority from Christ,
but herein intermeddles with a province that does not belong to him.
For princes do not receive their crowns from him; and therefore are
not to be deposed by him. In opposition hereunto, it may be alleged,
1st, That this is directly contrary to the temper of the blessed Jesus,
and of the apostles, and primitive Christians; who did not encourage
their followers to depose Heathen kings and emperors; but on the
other hand, exhorted them to submit to them in all things,
consistent with the glory of God, and the good of mankind; not only
for wrath, but for conscience sake, ver. 5.
2dly, The church has no temporal sword committed to her, all its
censures being spiritual. Temporal punishments are left in the hands
of the civil magistrate; concerning whom, the apostle says, that he is
the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is
evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the
minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth
evil, ver. 4. On the other hand, when speaking concerning those,
who have the government of ecclesiastical matters committed to
them, he says, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but
mighty through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, 2 Cor. x.
24.
The arguments generally used by the Papists, to support the cause
of rebellion, and their usurped power to depose magistrates, who
are not of their communion, are very weak, and most of them, such
as may easily be answered; as,
1. When they allege the commission given by Christ, to Peter, Feed
my sheep, John xxi. 17. They pretend, that to feed, is the same as to
govern; and that this implies a power of punishing; which they
suppose to be so far extended, as that the bishop of Rome may
depose sovereign princes, as occasion offers; and that this power
was given to Peter and his successors, which the popes of Rome
pretend to be.
But to this it may be replied; that this commission given by Christ to
Peter, to feed his sheep, imports his feeding them with knowledge
and understanding, and not lording it over God’s heritage. Thus our
Saviour says, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them;
and they that exercise authority over them, are called benefactors.
But ye shall not be so; but he that is greatest among you, let him be
as the younger; and he that is chief as he that doth serve, Luke xxii.
25, 26. Moreover, their pretence that the bishops of Rome are
Peter’s successors, contains a claim of what they have not the least
shadow of right to; and is, indeed, to place them in Peter’s chair,
who are the greatest opposers of his doctrine.
2. Another argument they bring, tending to overthrow the power of
the civil magistrate, is, that, as the soul is more excellent than the
body, and its welfare to be preferred in proportion thereunto; so the
church is to take care of the spiritual concerns of mankind, to which
all temporal concerns are to give place; therefore its power is
greater than that of the civil magistrate.
Answ. To this it may be replied; that this similitude does not prove
the thing for which it is brought; and though it be allowed, that the
soul is more excellent than the body; yet its welfare is not to be
secured by inflicting corporal punishments, such as persecutions and
massacres; which, to abate and encourage, is to cast a reproach on
religion; and it will tend very much to weaken the interest of Christ
in the world.
Moreover, the magistrate is ordained by God, to defend the religious
as well as civil liberties of his subjects; which is included in the
apostle’s exhortation; let prayers be made for kings and for all in
authority; that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all
godliness and honesty, 1 Tim. ii. 2. and elsewhere we are exhorted,
to submit to governors, as unto them who are sent by the Lord, for
the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do
well, 1 Pet. ii. 14.
3. There is another argument which they make use of, taken from
Azariah the priest’s opposing king Uzziah, for intruding himself into
the priest’s office, in burning incense in the temple. Thus it is said, in
1 Chron. xxvi. 16-18. that ‘when he was strong, his heart was lifted
up to his destruction. For he transgressed against the Lord his God,
and went into the temple of the Lord, to burn incense upon the altar
of incense. And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him
four-score priests of the Lord, that were valiant men. And they
withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not
unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests
the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense. Go out of
the sanctuary, for thou hast trespassed, neither shall it be for thine
honour from the Lord God.’ To support their argument, taken from
this scripture, they observe, that the priests, who went in with
Azariah, are said to be valiant men, and so ready to commit any
hostilities against the king. Azariah also threatens him, when he tells
him, It should not be for his honour; and peremptorily commands
him, to be gone out of the temple. This they suppose, is a flagrant
instance of the power of the church over the civil magistrate, in all
those things that interfere with what is sacred.
But to this it may be replied;
(1st,) That Uzziah’s sin, according to the law of that dispensation,
was very great, and against an express command of God, who had
ordered, that none should officiate in the priest’s office, but those
who were of the family of Aaron.
(2dly,) Azariah, and the rest of the priests, did not attempt to
depose him, but to prevent his going on in his sin; which would not
be for his honour, as the high-priest tells him. And this he says, not
in a menacing way, as signifying that he would inflict some
punishment on him; but as declaring what God would do against
him, that would tend to his dishonour for this sin.
(3dly,) Though the high-priest, in God’s name, commanded him to
go out of the sanctuary; yet he did not lay violent hands on him, at
least, till the leprosy was seen upon him. Ver. 27. ‘And Azariah the
chief priest, and all the priests looked upon him, and behold, he was
leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea,
himself hasted also to go out, because the Lord had smitten him.’
This they did, because a leper was not, according to the law of God,
to enter into the congregation, inasmuch as he would defile it.
(4thly,) He was not properly deposed; but, by this plague of leprosy,
rendered incapable of reigning; and therefore ‘he lived alone,’ ver.
21. ‘in a several house, being a leper; for he was cut off from the
house of the Lord: and Jotham his son was over the king’s house,
judging the people of the land.’ This was agreeable to the law of
God, touching the leper, in which it is said, that ‘all the days wherein
the plague shall be in him, he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he
shall dwell alone, without the camp shall his habitation be,’ Lev. xiii.
46. It may farther be observed, that his son managed the affairs of
the kingdom for him; so that the use which is made by the Papists of
this scripture, to give countenance to their doctrine of deposing
princes, is foreign to the true sense thereof.
4. There is one more scripture-example which the Papists bring,
whereby they defend their practice, not only of deposing, but
murdering princes; and that is in 2 Kings xi. 15. But Jehoiada the
priest commanded the captains of the hundreds, the officers of the
host, and said unto them, have her forth without the ranges; and
him that followeth her, kill with the sword. For the priest had said, let
her not be slain in the house of the Lord. But to this it may be
replied,
[1st,] That Athaliah was plainly an usurper, not only by reason of her
sex, since a woman was not to reign over Israel, or Judah: But she
killed all the seed royal, to establish herself in the throne, except
Joash, who escaped, being hid from her fury, in an apartment
belonging to the temple, 2 Chron. xxii. 11.
[2dly,] What Jehoiada did in deposing her, was not only with a good
design to set up the lawful heir; but it was done by an express
command of the Lord, chap. xxiii. 3.
[3dly,] Joash was proclaimed, and anointed, and universally owned
as king by the people, before Athaliah was slain, 2 Kings xi. 12,-14.
VI. We are now to consider the sins of inferiors against their
superiors. These are expressed in general terms, in one of the
answers we are explaining; namely, neglecting the duties we owe to
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about books and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!

ebookgate.com