The Fargo forum and daily republican., 1909-08-26
UNIFORM FOOD LAWS.

The efforts or Pure Food Commits
sioner Ladd of this state to secure uni
form food laws-and his preparation of
a model pure food law has attracted
attention all over the country. In
commenting on this phase-The New
York Journal of Commerce says:
The National Convention of State
Food and Dairy departments, which is
to be held at Denver this week, ought
to be made the means OF promoting
uniform legislation on the subject of
pure food In the several states, and
legislation as nearly as possible in har-
mony with the national law. The
working Of these laws cannot be made
wholly effective for their purpose until
they are substantially alike in their
requirements. The federal statute may
not be perfect, and there are still some
unsettled points in It's construction and
application, but in striving for substan-
tial uniformity some model is neces-
sary, and this is the best there is at
hand. States can do no better than
assimilate their legislation to 1T, ex-
cept where 1t may clearly have de-
fects that need to be remedied. Varia-
ton at such points may promote need
ed amendment of the national law, but
there should be no sticking In minor
matters.
Most manufactured or preserved
foods, such as are liable to adultera-
ton or false labelling, are subjects of
both interstate trade and interstate
commerce. No state can legislate
merely for itself and do fits entire duty.
The products the manufacture and la
beling of which 1t can regulate may be
sold in other states, and II can regu-
late the sale. within it's own jurisdic-
ton, of foods prepared in other states.
Where requirements differ materially
they cause a great deal of confusion in
trade and add to It's expense, which
necessarily becomes an added cost to
the consumer. If manufacturer or
wholesale dealer has occasion to send
the same goods into many different
states for sale. where the prohibitions
and requirements In regard to adulter-
alton, preservatives and labelling are
different, II is necessary to divide up
the stock to conform to the provisions
OF law in each state, or run the risk
OF penalties, and these provisions may
all differ in some particular from those
of the state In which the goods are
first put up and shipped.
Difficulties and embarrassment Of
this conflict of state laws are suffi-
ciently manifest. There Is no real oc-
casion for such conflict, for what is
sound and wholesome or honestly made
and branded or labeled In one state Is
/ equally so in another. A genuine
scientific standard or honorable busi-
ness standard Is capable of applica-
| tion everywhere. There have been in
stances of state laws or their adminis-
tration which seemed purposely to dis
criminate against foods manufactured
out of the state and in favor of those
made within its limits. That implies
policy OF narrowness and meanness
unworthy of an American common
wealth, and provokes retaliation be-
tween rival interests and between state
authorities. Everything OF that kind
| ought to be severely discountenanced.
The national pure food law has to be
observed in the sale OF all products
distributed from one state to another
or among several states, as most can
ned, preserved or manufactured foods
are. and In addition the law OF each
state In which they are sold has 70 be
complied with. This is an added rea-
son why the state laws should not only
be uniform. but should conform closely
to the national law. That is result
toward which all legislation should
work. and there Is no greater service
that the food and dairy commissioners
can perform In their national conven-
tions and in their several states than
doing their utmost to bring about thar
result, while also directing their ef-
forts to perfecting all the details OF
pure food legislation.
| ----------------