No. 6. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 1?» 



isbiueut for ibeir violation. The exceptiou to tliis, is on the part of a 

 retailer, who has purchased goods of a manufacturer, supposing them 

 to be made in compliance with the requirements of the laws of the 

 State, but discovers later, that the goods are adulterated, and is 

 arrested and lined for violating the law. 



Where the manufacturer is outside of the State, the law cannot 

 punish him, and if there were no other means of restraint, he would 

 be free to sell any adulterated article he saw fit, without fear of 

 arrest. 



In the absence of a National pure food law, the only way by which 

 he can be reached, is through the man who retails his goods within 

 our borders. If the retailer understands that he will be held liable 

 for the character of the goods he sells, he will protect himself, by re- 

 quiring a sufficient guarantee from the manufacturer, to indemnify 

 him against any loss that he may sustain, through failure of the 

 goods to comply with the laws regulating the sale of food products in 

 this State. This places the responsibility upon the manufacturer, 

 where it properly belongs. 



During the past year, important changes have been made in several 

 of the pure food laws. An entirely new "oleomargarine" law has 

 been enacted, with provisions added which, it is believed, will render 

 its enforcement more effective, than was possible under the law which 

 it repealed. Sufiicient time has not yet elapsed, to fully test the new 

 provisions, so that it is not possible, as yet, to state how the courts 

 will construe them. The injunction clause, and the one which makes 

 it the duty of courts to send the case to the grand jury upon repre- 

 sentation by a constable, are the particular clauses which need to be 

 tested. 



The new "renovated butter" law is also quite different, from the 

 old law, regulating this traffic. It is framed on substantially the 

 same lines as the oleomargarine law, and its enforcement involves 

 the same methods of procedure. Several suits have been tried under 

 it which have terminated favorably. There are the "milk and cream 

 adulteration" law, the amended "vinegar" and "cheese" laws, and 

 the "fruit juice" law, all of which are committed to the Dairy and 

 Food Commissioner for enforcement. 



The work of enforcing these laws has been reasonably successful 

 in all of the districts of the State, except in the County of Allegheny. 

 The Dairy and Food Commissioner has treated, in his report, quite 

 fully upon the condition in that county. The situation there can be 

 summed up in a few words, namel}^ public sentiment in that county 

 is against the enforcement of the pure food laws. 



The situation is very grave, and its serious nature is not due to 

 the mere item of the loss of certain cases bv the State, but to the tem- 



