No. 7. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 71 



REPORT OF THE DAIRY AND FOOD COMMISSIONER 



Harrisbnrg, Pa., December 31, 1910. 



Hon. N. B. Critdifield, 



Secretari/ of Agriculture. 



Dear Sir: I have the honor to submit herewith a preliminary report 

 of the Dairy and Food Division of the Department of Agriculture for 

 the year ending December 31, 1910. It covers the operations for the 

 year and contains some details that may be useful for public informa- 

 tion. 



PRELIMINARY REMARKS 



The work of every governmental department which has been some 

 time established includes, of necessity, a large amount of work c(m- 

 tinuously performed upon the same class of subjects and by methods 

 little changed because of their proven efficiency. 



During the year past, this Bureau has continued the examination 

 of food })roducts for sale in the State, for the purpose of determining 

 their conformity to the requirements of the general and special food 

 laws enacted by the Legislature. While the kinds of material exam- 

 ined and the various kinds of abuse in the trade which we liave 

 sought to discover are the same as those which have occupied the at- 

 tention of the Bureau in the years immediately preceding, so that in 

 many of its as])ects the work exhibits a strong similarity to that 

 covered in the preceding reports of the Bureau, careful consideration 

 of the facts developed during 1910 will discover many articles newly 

 examined and certain important alnises of recent detection. These 

 will be made the si'.bjcct of special comment in later paragrai)hs. 



It is a matter - f gratification that the public interest in and support 

 of the work of i'i:> JUireau have not only been uiaintained, but have 

 steadily increas 1. When first enacted, the food laAvs were received 

 bv manv Intel'. gent citizens with some doubt as to their Avisdom and 

 necessity. Tie <l()ubt I'egarding their wisdom grew largely out of the 

 fact that tlu* i/ime responsibility for sales of adulterated and mis- 

 branded fo( ^s was j»laced ni)on the retailer and it was very generally 

 questioned whetlier it was either wise or fair to fix the responsibility 

 at this point in the chain of transactions extending from the factory 

 to the hands of the jmrchaser. The i)ublic has, however, come gen- 

 erally to understand that the difficulty of securing adequate proof 

 against the jobbers and manufacturers made it necessary to require 



