The evening times., 1902-07-14
Demand Repeal or Re-
vision of the Law.
LETTER TO COMMISSIONERS
Prominent Bakers and Dealers Recite
Grievances Against Recent Prosecu-
ticns-Say Grave Doubt # Inspectors
Legally Hold 0f5oe.


The Times interview with 3Ir. Charles
Schneider. president e. the Charles
Schneider Baking Company in this city
regarding the present mode CT applying
the -four inspection law by Nr- James
II Welch. who. A-- Schneider says. is
acting as -four inspector without au-
Jhority. has created quite a sensation
among the -four - ze-s CT this city. and
the bakers. dealers. 5obbars, and agents
for -four are mere determined than ever
to bring the matter 10 the attention CT
the proper authorities and have The Law
either repealed or revised
The fcur dealers ana bakers claim
that the law IS ineffective and was
framed for The personal benefit Of Q feR
interested parties For the purpose Of
calling the attention Of the District
Commissioners 10 this state CT affairs
the most prominent -four dealers and
b2lzers cf this CITY. nave this morning
sent the following letter TO the Dis
trict Comma issioners.
TO the Honorable Commissioners Of the
District Of Columbia
~SIrs: The undersigned bakers. deal
ers. jobhers. and agents Of flour mills
respectfully desire TO call your atten-
tion to the -four inspection law OF De
cenaer 4, 1898, and its amendment o.
May g. 1850.
fOver - per cent Of the -four shipped
to this city comes IN sacks OF various
weights. The Hour inspectors have
never branded Hour coming IN sacks tor
the reason, as declared by at least one
CT said inspectors. that It would take
too uucn time TO bore into or open
each sack and inspect the same.
The Law Not Observed.
Section 6 of the act provides that all
-four IN barrels, half barrels. or sacks
shah be subjected 10 inspection without
saying who shall have il dene, snG also
that If the flour Is found merchants Die. !
that every barrel or half barrel shall
be branded according 10 the degree OF
dneness Of the -four. but nothing Is pro-
Ylced IS 10 The branding CT -four II
sacks except Is provided II the last
sentence OF said section O. where the
flour Is to he found Unmerchaatable. IL
whl1h case every barrel, half barrel. OF
sack Is % be branded.
Section / OF said act provides that the
Commissioners Of The District shall ap-
pcI1I Tor said District TWO Inspectors OF
flour, who snail be competent judges OF
flour; said inspectors to hold said Of
1ces Two years unless sooner removed
y cle said District Commissioners Ia /
accordance herewith -four inspectors /
were appointed on January Il. 1898. /
whose Germ OF Cfl9e has therefore ex- I
pired and they have never been re-
appointed.
The law does not disclose an inten- /.
ticn that the inspectors should be con 1
tlnued, and, as they have never been /
reappointcd, serious question pre-
senls itself namely, whether there IS
al present such IN official as q -four
inspector under TIE said law.
Who Is to Pay the Penalties.
The penalty cause. as amended. by
the act Of Nay 2s, 1890, provides. And
no barrel, or haIf-barrel, or sack. Of
-Four not examined and branded by the
inspector IS aforesaid. shall be sold
within the District Of Columbia. under
hEe CT enc dollar for each and every
barrel, haIf-barrel. CT sack. 30 be col
Iected as other fines and penalties are
collected The question arises. Who /
shall pay The penaItics-the miller or
his agent OF the owner. or the pur-
chaSer, ce the purchaser q dealer /
baker, or what not9
II seems the flour inspectors are only
now. after the law Is We are advised
has expired, beginning TO prosecute IN
DER II Tor the purpose. as expressed by
one cf the inspectors, OF having the /
court determine whether there are any
Hour inspectors or not. Although we
admit the desiTabiligy Of determining
tbs question, il should not be done BY a
large number Of prosecutions. an. one
or which might determine the question
Nheu -four is shipped IN small sacks.
as ID Is 10 large extent. the inspector
says that he has no time to inspect and
brand as provided by the law. yet prose
cutiCns are begun because -four in sacks
IS not branded, involving to the persons
prosecuted not only q large amount OF
money IL defending themselves. bat
also IN large losses TO their business
which they are compelled 30 neglect
while awaiting the trial Of their cases
IN the Police Court.
ask for q Test Case.
In view Of the defects Of the law. as
herein attempted to be pointed out. and
the other uncertainties appearing on the
face thereof, we respectfully request
that "a test case. or cases. involving
these questions be selected as test
cases, and have them tried in the Po-
lice Court. for the purpose Of having the
Court OF Appeals pass upon the law.
and that, in the meantime. and until
such test case, or cases. are decided by J
the Court Of Appeals the Prosecuting
Attorney for the District be instructed
not TO begin any other prosecutions.
The communication is signed by VIII ,
liam Feldhaus- agent for James Ouirk
killing Company. Minneapolis NInn;
Charles Schneider. president Charles
Schneider Baking Company. James n
kays, manager for Washburu-C-osby
Company. Minneapolis, Minn-; s. A. Gee
agent, Havenner Baking Company. The
Bakers Association; Earnshaw G Lea
~. Browning & Middleton Boston Bak- ,
ing Company, @. T. Schulze. Charles S
Specht, Kari Holman. N HoIzbierIein- ,
Isaac Gutenberg. S Il Rogers e Co. s
r Waters. y. 4 Shea, and others