GOVERNMENTAL INSPECTION 173 



than one gallon in any but transparent receptacles, 

 and the ordinance was sustained.-^ The Chicago 

 ordinance requiring the name of the dealer to be 

 blown or stamped on the bottle was upheld.^ ^ 



While condemnation of milk on account of bac- 

 terial evidence generally depends upon a large 

 content, this is not always so. The presence of 

 the colon bacillus is of itself conclusive evidence 

 of fecal infection, and its presence is therefore 

 sufficient for condemnation.^^ In a like manner, 

 exposure to a liability of infection with the germs 

 of such diseases as typhoid or scarlet fever, or of 

 diphtheria, or the finding of tubercle bacilli in 

 the milk should be held as sufficient warrant for 

 the prohibition of sale from that source until dan- 

 ger had passed. 



124. Confiscation. Milk is not an article which 

 may be impounded and preserved without un- 

 necessary expense. The fact that it has been 

 offered for sale, or that an attempt to ship it con- 

 trary to law has been made, is sufficient justifica- 

 tion for its confiscation and destruction.-^ To 

 simply refuse such milk admission to the city 

 would leave the violator free to attempt another 



22 Covington v. Kollman, 156 24 Dade v. United States, 40 

 Ky. 351, 160 S. W. 1052. App. D. C. 94. 



23 Chicago V. Bowman Dairy 25 Adams v. Milwaukee, 144 

 Co.. 234 III. 294. The Ohio Wis. 371, 129 N. W. 518; sus- 

 statute providing for the sei- tained, 228 U. S. 572 ; Nelson 

 zure and confiscation of bottles v. Minneaj^olis, 112 Minn. 16; 

 bearing a distinctive name, Blazier v. ^liller, 10 Hun, 435; 

 blown or marked in them, when Deems v. Mayor, 80 Md. 164; 

 found in the possession of others Shivers v. Newton. 45 N. J. L. 

 was declared unconstitutional, 469. 



because more extensive than 

 title implied. State v. Schmuck, 

 77 Ohio, 438, 83 N. E. 797. 



