RECENT AMERICAN WORK ON FEEDING STUFFS. 529 



to the Maine law. The Connecticut law includes in its scope brans and 

 middlinos, althouj>-h State inspection laws jronerally exempt these 

 niaterials. Neither the Connecticut nor Rhode Island law imposes 

 an inspection tax. The Connecticut law makes no provision of funds 

 for its execution, but the Rhode Island law carries an appropriation of 

 $1,300 per annum for that purpose. Both laws provide the same 

 penalty as the Maine law, prosecution under the law heinu- in the 

 hands of the State dairy commissioner in the case of the Connecticut law 

 and the board of managers of the Rhode Island C'oUej^e of Aj^riculture 

 and Mechanic Arts in the case of Rhode Island. 



February 13, 189i>. the North Carolina general assembly passed what 

 is known as the "pure food law." which went into etiect on Aujjfust 1 

 of the same year. Under this law feeding stuffs are analyzed as well 

 as foods, since the law declares that the term "• food" shall include all 

 articles used by man or domestic animals for food, condiments, or 

 drink, whether simple, mixed, or compound. 



The State board of agriculture is intrusted with the carrying out of 

 the provisions of the law and is authorized to collect samples, make 

 examinations, and publish the results; to cause all compound, mixed, 

 or blended products to l)e properly branded; todescril)e how this shall 

 be done; to fix standards of strength, (piality, and purity, and to 

 publish lists of articles exempt from the pi-o\ isions of the act. When 

 adulteration, misbranding, or other \iolation is evident, the board of 

 agriculture is directed to certify the fact to tlic proper solicitor, who 

 shall prosecute without dehiy in every case. 



The law provides that any person who shall knowingly manufacture, 

 sell, expose for sale, or have in his possession with intent to sell any 

 article of food which is adulterated oi- mis})randed, or who shall violate 

 any of the provisions of the act, shall l»e guilty of a misdemeanor and 

 be fined not to exceed §i{0() for the tii-st offense and for each subse- 

 quent offense not exceeding ^30o, or l)e imprisoninl not exceeding one 

 year, or both. 



The law also provides for the purchase of samples t'i>i- :iii;ilysi>. and 

 failure to comply with this pro\ ision or hindering the work of the 

 State chemist is declared a misdemeanoi'. punishable h\ tine of not 

 more than $100 oi- by imprisonment foi- not moic than loo days, or 

 both. 



All tines, less It'gal costs and ciuii-gcs. shall be ]>aid inio the Ir»'asury 

 of the Stiite for the ])eni'rit of the department of agriculture, to be 

 used exclusively in executing the provisions of tlu* j)ure-food law. 



The New York law, which werU into elfect December 1, iStM.t. is 

 likewise very similar to the Maine law in its general piovisions, but 

 differs in rt'(|uiiMng a license fee of !^^li.^ amuially by each mamifacturer, 

 importer, or dealer. These license fees are transmitted by the 

 director of the station to the State treasurer, and are used in defrnv- 

 S. Doc. 148, 58-2 M. 



