756 
the force or equipment of this division, in connection with the execution of 
the law and heretofore no such increase has been necessary as no effort has 
been made to enforce it, consequently few samples have been presented. In 
consequence of a more active supervision of the milk supply in Washington 
by the local health authorities, however, a number of samples of milk were 
presented to this office during August and September, 1S93, for decisions as 
to their adulteration under the provisions of this law. As the time required 
for the analysis of these samples and for the rendering of expert testimony 
thereon in court threatened to interfere seriously with the regular work of 
the division, revised regulations were issued (Series 7, No. 15 revised) pro- 
viding for the analysis of all such samples by the chemist of the health office 
of the District of Columbia, under the control and supervision of this office. 
Reports were accordingly received from this officer from September, 1893, 
up to the close of the fiscal year, of the analysis of 17 samples — 15 of milk, 1 of 
butter, and 1 of granulated sugar — all of which were decided to be adulterated 
and so certified to the district attorney for the District of Columbia. I would 
suggest in this connection that Congress be asked to either provide the facili- 
ties necessary for the analysis of all samples in the laboratory of this office, or 
to so amend the law as to relieve me entirely from any connection with its 
execution.® 
After the amendment of the regulations, samples of milk and of 
other articles of food were collected by agents of the health depart- 
ment and duly analyzed by the chemist. If the result warranted a 
prosecution, the usual form of application for analysis and certifica- 
tion, provided by the Commissioner of Internal Eevenue, was made 
out in triplicate, the report of the analyst being filled in by the chem- 
ist of the health department. After such application had been duly 
certified, one copy was filed with the district attorney and the prose- 
cution was duly proceeded with. The method was cumbersome and 
lacked the directness essential to the efficient enforcement of a statute 
by criminal procedure. Keference of the case to the Commissioner of 
Internal Eevenue was a mere form, since the findings of the chemist 
of the health department were not verified in the office of the Commis- 
sioner by independent analysis, nor was the vendor given an opportu- 
nity to be heard. The enactment of this law was, however, of impor- 
tance as marking a definite effort toward the proper control of the 
food supply of the District of Columbia and marking also the estab- 
lishment by regulation of a standard for “whole (pure) milk.” The 
chemist of the board of health had recommended the establishment of 
such a standard on November 10, 1874;^ its establishment became an 
accomplished fact on November 20, ISSS."" It can hardly be said 
that any undue haste was displayed with respect to the matter. 
The possible relation between the milk supply and the prevalence 
of typhoid ferer in the District of Columbia appears to have been 
called directly to public attention for the first time, by Prof. J. D. 
“Report of Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1894, page 197. 
® Report of Board of Health, 1874, p. 207. 
^ Instructions to Internal Revenue Officers, Series 7, No. 15, p. 13. 
