202 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 
to use this method for misleading the public. 
Though the national government thus tries to pro- 
tect the citizens in their lives and property, it does 
not in the least relieve the manufacturers and 
dealers from their responsibility and liability. It 
is the part of the government supervisors to check 
any suspicious tendencies, but the real liability 
rests with the manufacturing company. Some 
companies have learned this lesson, but some 
others still seem at times willing to take risks 
which should not be run. There should be no 
diphtheria antitoxin sent out where there is a 
possibility of there being tetanus infection in the 
serum; nor hog cholera serum until tests have 
shown the absence of the foot and mouth disease 
virus. One serious outbreak of tetanus occurred 
through virus manufactured under a municipal 
health department, ‘‘to save money,’’ and not 
under federal supervision. This is not a business 
for non-experts to engage in. So long as the high- 
est degree of care and diligence is used the manu- 
facturer will be protected by the courts; but if, 
to reduce expense, or because of commercial pres- 
sure, it be shown that he ‘‘runs the risk’’ and harm 
results, he should be prosecuted criminally, and 
he should also be forced to pay full damages for 
the harm done. A firm manufacturing vaccine 
virus rented calves for that purpose. After col- 
lecting the vaccine serum the calves were returned 
to the renters, sold and shipped to distant parts, 
infected with the foot and mouth disease virus 
through vaccination. Under the present orders 
of the Public Health Service such an accident is 
less likely to recur, because in addition to testing 
