Minneapolis Star editors used a funny-looking spelling (ludefisk) for Scandinavia’s funny-smelling food (lutefisk) in this page one story from January 1951.
 
SCIENCE TO DECIDE
 

Smell Ruled Out as Test of Good or Bad Ludefisk

 
There was little to smile about in a 1950s lutefisk factory. Arthur Boscher, left, and David Arneson of Lyon Food Products hoisted some slimy goodness. (Minneapolis Star photo by Jack Gillis)

There was little to smile about in a 1950s lutefisk factory. Arthur Boscher, left, and David Arneson of Lyon Food Products hoisted some slimy goodness. (Minneapolis Star photo by Jack Gillis)

District Judge William C. Larson admitted today there is no way to tell good ludefisk from bad by smell alone — and he put the problem squarely up to the bacteriologists at University of Minnesota.
 
The question came before the judge when two ludefisk — one, unquestionably good, the other, allegedly bad — were brought into his courtroom within sniffing distance.
 
They were designated as Exhibit 2 in the case of Ivan Bogen, representing the InterState Brokerage Co., versus Olsen Fish Co., 815 5th street N.
 
Bogen was demanding payment of $1,396.18 as balance of his bill for delivering 47 bales of “dry stock fish” to the Olsen firm in November, 1948.
 
The fish company rejected the shipment on the ground the fish were spoiled and declined to pay.

Older Post

March 16, 1882: Oscar Wilde, 'ass-thete'

Newer Post

June 1, 1916: 'Shackelton' and Endurance crew are safe after harrowing journey