22 AGRICULTURE OF MAINE. 



who uses the jars. If the jars are short, they are condemned 

 by the sealer of weights antl measures and the loss is sustained 

 by the milk dealer. 1 liope to see the day when Maine will 

 have a law like Massachusetts which will place the loss on the 

 manufacturer, relieving the sealer of weights and measures of 

 the necessity of measuring each individual jar and if it is 

 wrong being compelled to condemn it so that the dealer cannot 

 use it any more. This should be done right at the factory. It 

 is the same way with all otlier bottles in the trade. If you want 

 to buy a quart flask, either for wine, or for any purpose, and 

 you go to the manufacturer he will ask you what kind of a 

 quart, 4, 5, 6. or 7. A 7 is seven to a gallon, and a 4 is four to a 

 gallon. You can get whatever you want and he will put on the 

 outside "full quart," if you want him to. That does not guaran- 

 tee the measure at all. When we get a regulation throughout 

 the United States that the weight or measure, or the numerical 

 count, must be put on the outside of these packages and bottles, 

 or containers of any kind, that will guarantee that the container 

 contains just what is marked on it. As a matter of fact it will 

 take a national regulation to do it and then it will be under 

 United States control. 



There is another big question that I think has held Elaine 

 back as regards the weights and measures laws, and that is the 

 question of fees. Under the laws of the State of Maine each 

 sealer of weights and measures is compelled to go around so 

 often and when he makes an inspection of weighing and other 

 instruments to collect certain fees. That to my mind is very 

 wrong. There are only a few places in the country where a 

 dealer is compelled to pay for an inspection of his weights and 

 measures. It is a protection of the public and the public should 

 pay for that protection in the annual taxes. In the city of Port- 

 land I understand the amount of fees collected is about $450 

 annually. That would not make more than a cent's difference in 

 the tax rate but it throws almost the whole cost of this inspec- 

 tion right on the dealer ; and it seems to me that the dealer 

 should have the same protection and the public should have 

 the same protection, in weights and measures, as thev have 

 against fire and burglars. It should fall under the same head. 

 Of course the dealer is protected against unfair competition, 

 in thi< way: While one dealer i*^ honest, doing a good business 



