The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-03-19
FROM THE PEOPLE.
COMMISSIONER M'poSALD REPLIES

Seattle, Wash. March ~. 1900
To the Editor: In your issue Of March
II "a article from David b. Porter,
president OF the Loyhed Tinware Manu-
featuring Company, In which he claims
that the pure food law works an injustice
against the wholesalers and manufac-
turers of this state. I had decided not
TO answer any more articles criticlsing
my administration OF the law. as I was
satisfied that my manner OF enforcing
the law could not be settled through cor
respondence. but as the article Of Mr..
Porter Is from n manufacturer Of our
city who is not financially interested IN
the manufacture Of foods and therefore
Is from an unbiased standpoint. / CON
slider It my duty TO answer Il. I am
satisfied that ~ Mr.. Porter viii come %
my office that can convince him that
the enforcement Of this law does no,
work any greater hardship on the whole
salers and manufacturer % this state
than II does upon the wholesalers and
manufacturers % other states. u Is
true that the manufacturers 81 this state
are within tho Jurisdiction % the commits
sioner, and therefore n ne wishes ~ visit
their manufacturing establishments
might End Irregularities and violations
which might not he discovered by tho
science % chemistry 7 have not taken
that method Of enforcing the law. As
the whole question q pure food rests
upon the science ~ chemistry. have
deemed IL wise 20 secure the samples Of
foods from the shelves ~ the Erocers. -
that tho manufacturers - this state
would stand on the same ground ~ the
manufacturers % other states .m
a strong .ympaihizsr with the infant IN
dustrtes ~ this state and realize the ara
culties % placing their goods upon the
market IN competition with older brands
81 goods Even n their Eoofs are ne
good or even superior 90 an oid estab-
lished brand the consumer prefers %
purchase what he knows rather thar
take some new brand therefore believe
that q "a the duty ~ Tire citizens - this
state 20 encourage the manufacturers
by buying their products believe that
the law will h. benefit % the manu-
facturerp who desire 20 manufacture pure
foods as the manufactured foods ear
be analyred BY ihe state chemist ana
receive certificate SO - their purity
This viii Ala them IN convincing the corr
sumner that The quality - fhe gods "a
eaunI - not better. than the older hrauf
take exception 20 the statement - Mr.
Porter that the who1eHainTs ans ulHrr-
facturera ~ others states are not being
forced 90 live NJ % the law. 7 ~nn rr-.
ducc. II necessary. scores - letters frHn,
wholesalers aad uiAn1farturers . nfhri
states in which thfv have gone 0n rr70rf
that they will guarantees thrir gn Pc 90 tff
grocer and VIII ship their GOODS here
after IN strict conformity With nav rul-
inEs. I challenge any persons 20 secure
frtua any orgr niratfon - retail urnoerF
a statement contradictinE what have
said In almost Al the raFea where fines
have been paid they have heen paid ~
the Wholesalers or mauaf tc-7rrars K 1fh.TT
states a. well rs 81 our own. have
been criticised for not enforcing the Laws
at an earlier date bat know from my
trip throughout the state that 'he man
neT o. enforcing the Law is Just nHi
equitable ans ga not working nv dis-
elimination against any parties who b.
lieve IN the puritv ~ rho food which We
consume have no favorftee and be-
iisve that no foboer or manufacture can
accuse me Of being partial
/ published my revised rulings on July
Is which are clear and no manufacture
can make "a mistake OF be prosecuted n
hA manufactures his goods IN accord