64 ' ANNUAL. REPORT OF THE OfC. Doc. 



rated. Many of the more sensible and conservative manufacturers have already 

 recognized the importance of changing their labels so as to meet the require- 

 ments of the Pennsylvania law, and they will thereby spare themselves the 

 public odium, expense, mental anguish and annoyance that would follow 

 prosecutions. Others will comply philosophically rather than willingly and 

 cheerfully, after the annoyance of being prosecuted and compelled to pay fines 

 and endure newspaper publicity and possibly criticism. 



The National Food and Drugs Act, while requiring certain information from 

 manufacturers, does not have any direct application to the Pennsylvania law, 

 and in consequence a compliance with that law does not relieve any one from 

 the requirements and responsibilities imposed by the State law. This matter 

 has been explained at more or less frequent intervals, and the average manu- 

 facturer is therefore fully informed. 



The people of the State are heartily approving this work, as it deals most 

 effectively with an evil that should have been remedied many years ago. 

 Counterfeit productions, if at all permissible, should not sail under false colors, 

 and the old system of exaggerated and misleading labeling must be discon- 

 tmued. One of the worst evils known to the trade has been the tendency to 

 mlsbrand food products. 



FOOD COMMISSIONEiR CANNOT APPROVE OR JUDGE LABELS. 



Since the enactment of the pure food law, approved June 1st, 1907, the 

 Dairy and Food Bureau has received hundreds of requests demanding that the 

 officials should examine and pass judgment upon the legality of labels found 

 on food products, etc. In the absence of any analytical knowledge of the 

 contents of packages, and knowing that such an "opinion" would in most 

 Instances be used very freely for advertising or other improper purposes, it 

 was found impossible to comply with such requests. In consequence of the 

 frequency and persistency of these requests, the Commissioner recently prom- 

 ulgated the following circular letter of information: 



"Rule 12— Numerous requests are referred to this Division for the approval of 

 labels to be used in connection with food products under the Pennsylvania 

 Pure Food Act of June 1st, 1907. This Act does not authorize the Dairy and 

 Food Commissioner nor any Agent of the Division to approve labels. The 

 Division, therefore, will not give its approval to any label. Any printed mat- 

 ter upon the label implying that this Division has approved it will be without 

 warrant. It is believed that with the law and regulations before the manu- 

 facturers they will have no difficulty in arranging labels in conformity with the 

 requirements set forth." 



It is obvious that this is the only rule that can be safely followed by pure 

 food authorities at this time. 



STATUS OF IMPORTED FOOD PRODUCTS. 



Inquiries have been made as to the status of imported food products that 

 might be offered for sale in Pennsylvania. The Dairy and Food Commissioner 

 has in all such cases held that although such articles of food may have passed 

 government inspection, they are still subject to the approval of State authori- 

 ties. 



In case samples are bought from merchants whose business places are located 

 within Pennsylvania, and upon analytical examination, such samples are found 

 to be adulterated or deleterious to health, there is no hesitancy about insti- 

 tuting legal proceedings against the parties offering for sale or selling such 

 unlawful products. If a package of such imported goods is found to bear a 

 label that is misleading or illegal, it also comes within the scope of the authori- 

 ties to institute prosecution. 



The idea that imported goods are absolutely safe to handle because of their 

 acceptance in a port of entry is erroneous and it therefore behooves the jobber 

 and retailer to use proper care and vigilance. This regulation is the only one 

 that can be safely pursued by food officials, since without watchfulness and 

 care it would be a matter of but a comparatively short time until the Penn- 

 sylvania stores would be flooded with imported goods of at least questionable 

 purity and quality. There is no discrimination against goods of a foreign 

 make, but it must be understood that they shall be found to be on an equality 

 with home products, and subject to a careful surveillance like our home 

 products. 



NO JURISDICTION OVER ADULTERATED LIQUOR. 



Many correspondents of the Dairy and Food Bureau, presumably under the 

 impression that this Bureau still had undisputed jurisdiction over the sale of 

 adulterated liquor, as in the past, entered complaint and protests against the 

 sale of such liquids by alleged unprincipled dealers in their respective localities. 

 Under the adverse opinion of the Supreme Court in the oft-quoted case of Com- 

 monwealth versus Kebort, (adulterated liquor case), this office has no such 

 power to interfere, no matter how gross or serious the harm or injustice per- 

 petrated. 



