Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1885-06-05

offence. to he recovered on Indictment and CO..
yict5on i'm tn, Criminal Court OF Ba}timrr,. pt >
rhn Circuit Court for the county Within whose
Jurisdiction said offence may D" committed. n'1t'-
half thereof to b. PAID - tAe inform r. iIr 'theF
half 10 the state.
S elton 81 .lso provides that tie purch-
aser who Is injured hy the contents OF
sack - labeled not conforming = tie
ANALYST, thereon. may recover back the
price from the &c Ter
These provisions of he Nv impress Us
as thorough and perhaps ample, as far as
the Legislature can intervene, except hat
the fine for fraud should be male greater
The manufacturer is required to place his
nlme and place Of business upon every
package Of his compound and egible
specification Of the percen age by weight
of such compound, of phosphoric ac'd-
soluble in pure cold ,cater, Of phosphoric
acid not thus soluble. and of arniiajle am
monia, ash and soda. These, we be
lieve, are The princip'e ingredients Of ant
food and the chief clemens Of VI. ua usu-
ally found in commercial manures.
We have thug far referred TO the mis-
Chief and the remedy, so far as the Legis-
lature has provided one. Let Us now see
/ if these remedial provisions made by the
Legislature are not practically dead ct
ter, We have seen that the law require.
the manufacturer of commercial mlnures
to specify The quantity of the principal
ingredi of value contained in his com
pound ,legiblyprinted Label on upon every
package he offers for sale, and fixes sma'
penalty for a failure to comply with these
provisions. 1t is known. too, that all o
these manufacturers do comply with thu
requirements of the statu e in on ward APP
pearance. Thegreat AID important ques
ton is, do all the manufacturers of thes'
manures comply honestly with the require
ments of this law enacted Tor the protec
ton of farmers. We fear hat tins is no
the case, otherwise ic could not be saiC
with anv show of truth that any inteli
gent farmer had ever been brought to run
by the purchase of commercial manures
for it is Gear that if these ingredient;
thus specified in the act, were honestly re
' presented on the labels on the packages {
commercial fertilizers then only he ignC
rant or reckless f-rmer could go wron
in the purchase of them.
But the defect of the remedy lies in this
:. The manipulation of commercial manure
knows full we'll when he packs his mi
nures and fixes his label tina, the farmt
to whom he will sell it wi never suhjet
{ it to the test of chemica analysis. /
knows the habi's and facilities Of f4rme
too well to entertain any fear that he sp
cifcarions Of his label will ever be th
cal ed in question. If dishonesty incline
; therefore, he would not hesitate to put
false label on his goods and take the cha
e. ces Of paying fine of $50 in the remote
10 probable event of the farmer putting II
E. commodity to the test Of an analysis. II
a. defect Of The remedy, Therefore, les IN t
al failure to provide any means Of detec il
1t the frauds the act proposes to punish.
a' The auesi ion is, how can this defect
- supplied2 In these days when the exi'
ing public inspections in this State a
- being continually assailed by persons W
i, i, ought to know better we suppose it wou
,r- be supererogatory to suggest that the lie
,r- islature supplement existing legislation
wv providing, at the expense of the State
public Inspector Of fertilizers. The on