60 



Food ('oniniissioiiei- of Pennsylvania, the other from the Chief Chemist of 

 the Agricultural Department, which is in answer to an inquiiy made by 

 a chemical house in New York. The following is from the Food Comniis- 

 sioner of Pennsylvania: 



•'A number of manufacturers of 'catsup' have represented that the 

 strict enforcement, at this time, of rule No. 12. of the decisions iiulilishcd 

 in Bulletin No. 30, by this department, so far as it relates to catsup, will 

 seriously injure their busiuess. They state that the catsup for next year's 

 irade was manufactured before the rule referred to was issued and that 

 the goods now contain a preservative. Icnown as benzoate of soda, the use 

 of which is prohibited under the law. Whilst rule No. 12 does not abso- 

 lutely prohibit the use of preseiwatives in food, it does fix the responsibility 

 upon the manufactiu-ers of showing that a preservative is necessary, and in 

 case of doubt as to its effect upon the health of the consumer, of showing 

 that it is not injurions. Before strictly enforcing any new law, or new 

 ruling, the Dairy and Food Commissioner has always given manufacturers 

 and dealers reasonable time in which to lie heard, and. if necessary, to get 

 rid of adulterated goods already on llic market, and tliis is in recognition 

 of the fact that all reputable mannt'.-ictnrers and dealers ch'slre to comply 

 witli every lawful regulation of Irade I'or tln> protection of the pulilic 

 health, and only need to know wh;it the law is. and Vie given reasonable 

 time to adjust their business to its requirements. In order, therefore, to 

 give time for the proper settlement of the points at issue, the enforce- 

 ment of rule No. 12, so far as it relates to the use of a moderate quantity 

 of benzoate of soda in catsup, is suspended until opportunity shall be 

 given manufacturers to make clear tlie fact that its use is necessary and 

 not injurious to health. A meeting will be arranged for in the near 

 future, at which all who are interested can liave opportunity to be heard." 



It seems that the theory of the law has been reversed in this case 

 by holding a thing wrong until it is proven right. This letter is practically 

 a retraction, and it is very evident tlie law was passed without fair 

 investigation. 



The following is from a chemist, which was written in answer to a let- 

 tm' from a chemical house which manufacttu'es carmine: 



•T am in receipt of your letter of the 3d inst. relating to the classifica- 

 tion of carmine. I appreciate the position in which you are placed, but 

 do not consider that it would be permissible to class carmine with vege- 

 table colors. Of course, it is not a coal tar derivative and has never been 



