THE ETHICS OF FOOD 531 



6. It was a common custom to make false and misleading 

 statements concerning the character and origin of articles and 

 to attach to them false and misleading designs or devices. 



The general purpose of all such practices was gain. There 

 were few forms of adulteration or misbranding, perhaps none, 

 which were of any benefit whatever to anybody except the 

 manufacturer and dealer. I cannot recall a single case of 

 sophistication of the nature mentioned which was of any 

 advantage to the consumer. 



The magnitude of these malpractices, discovered by scientific 

 examination of food materials, was so great that public dis- 

 cussion was excited and public attention so drawn to them 

 that ultimately a sentiment was aroused which made remedial 

 legislation possible. 



The attitude of the legislator towards questions of this kind 

 has often been severely criticised. The criticisms may some- 

 times have been just ; on the other hand, it is manifestly 

 improper to impugn the motives of legislators who, year after 

 year, pass by evils so glaring without voting in favour of their 

 removal. This fault is not inherent in the legislator alone. It 

 is the common condition of the people and perhaps a desirable 

 condition. It is not well that people should be unduly excited 

 at all times about matters which relate to their welfare. There 

 is a sentiment of peace, of quietude and patience, which is 

 becoming to a nation and is an element of strength. This 

 condition of insensibility, as it may be called, permits a nation 

 to pursue its ordinary course without undue divagation. It is 

 only when great principles are at stake or intolerable evils are 

 to be removed, that the people rise in their strength and indulge 

 in a general house-cleaning. So it was that a quarter of a 

 century of investigation and discussion of the evils arising from 

 the adulteration of food went on in the country before the final 

 effort was made to correct them by national legislation. 



It is true that many of our States were led years ago to 

 pass laws regulating sales of food and drugs. There were also 

 national laws of a partial character but no general Act had been 

 placed upon the statute-books by Congress. All the laws 

 relating to the sale of food and drugs were special and referred 

 to named articles, while in the Act of June 30, 1906, a radical 

 departure was made in passing a law which did not specialise 

 but applied equally to all articles used as foods and drugs. 



