Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1907-07-24
Pure Food Laws.
Continued from page /.


either external or internal use or for
cosmetic purposes or for inhalation
or perfumes.
[p] In the state law, cocaine and
alpha and beta eucaine are not in
cluded in the list of habit forming
drugs where the name and quantity
or proportion of such drugs must be
placed on the label. But cocaine
and alpha and beta eucaine are in
cluded in a general state law that
limits their dispensing and sale to
PHYSICIANS prescription, hich
makes the law as to cocaine and Gu
caine more restrictive than the nat
ional law. Too much care cannot
be taken in the use and sale of habit
forming drugs and certainly the
purchaser has the right to know,
outside of phycician's prescription
that he is purchasing such narcotic
drugs.
Ia There are some slight differ
ences as to labels, otherwise, the
state drug law is substantially the
same as the provisions of the nat
ional law.
POLICE POWER.
The enactment and enforcement
of pure food laws by state come
under what are known as the gen.
eral police power of state. This
power is broad and general in its
scope.
Blackstone defines police power
and economy to be:-"The due regu-
lation and domestic order of the
kingdom whereby theindividuals of
the state, like members of we'll
governed family, are bound to con-
form their general behavior to the
rules Of propriety, good neighbor-
hood and good manners, and to be
decent, industrious and inoffensive
in their respective stations"
No full and complete definition OF
police power has been given. The
courts have preferlel TO determine
whether particular case comes
within the general scope of the pow
er than to undertake to give an alb
stract definition of the power itself
that would be applicable to every
case that might arise.
The police power means the gen.
eral power of the state to promote
and preserve the public welfare and
is power that belongs to and is
welded almost exclusively by the
state.
"The police power of state ex.
tends to the protection of the lives
limbs, health, comfort and quiet of
all persons, and to the protection of
all property within the state, and
hence to making of all regulations
promotive of domestic order. morals,
health and safety"
RAILROAD co. VS.. HusEN, 95 U. S. 465.
The legislature may pass any
measure that appears to be necessary
for the preservation of the public
health or the promotion of the pub
lie welfare, subject to the provisions
Of the federal or state constitutions,
and the further limitation established
by the courts that the exercise of
the police power by the legislature
must be reasonable.
The question of reasonableness
usually resolves itself in this: Is the
regulation carried to the point where
it becomes prohibitive, destructive
or confiscatory."
FREUND ON POLICE POWER.
almost every police regulation
effects to greater or less extent
some property right, but these rights
are subject to such reasonable limi-
tatioEs as the legislature may deem
necessary or expedient. State VS.
Schlenker, liz Ia, 642.
CoMMRCE CLAUSE.
The principal check on the police
powers Of state is the provision in
the federal constitution giving con-
gress power ito regulate commerce
with foreign nations and among the
several states" known as the com
merce clause.
The difficulty is in drawing the
line where the commercial power of
congress ends and the power of the
state begins.
Commerce is the interchange or
mutual change of goods or pro-
visions or property of any kind be-
tween nations or individuals. Com
merce is more than traffic, it Is in
tercourse. The power of congress
to regulate is exclusive whenever the
subjects of it are national in char
acter or admit of only one uniform
system or plan of regulation. The
power to regulate includes ali the
forms and instruments by which
commerce may be conducted. Inter
state commerce applies only to the
subjects which are property and
lawful articles Of commerce. If an
article is recognized by the com.
mercial world, by the laws of con-
gress and by the decisions of the
courts as commodity, it cannot be
excluded by state as not lawful
subject of commerce; to this extent
the state cannot fix its own stand
ards against the general opinion Of
the commercial world that will gov.
ern interstate commerce.
In Leisy VS. Hardin, l35 U. S
100, the supreme court held thai
the citizens of one state had the
right to import beer into another
state contrary to its statutes, anc
the right to sell it there in the orig.
inal packages, and that commerce.
between states has been conGdee
exclusively to congress by the con
stitution and is not within the iuris
| j a. Al