The Washington times., 1911-08-05

created by order Of the Secretary. The
solicitor had previously testified that
the board was named to pass on pro-
posed prosecutions of pure food law
violators, prosecutions beginning on
recommendation OF two members Of the
issued by Secretary Wilson in July,
1910, provided that the solicitor, alone,
may decide on prosecutions, out-voting
If desired. Drs. Wiley and Dunlap.
Does the board make chemical eX-
animation Of foods and drugs?" At
torney Davis asked
No, the examinations are made by
the Bureau of Chemistry, and the find
ings are reported TO the inspection
board" McCabe answered.
In the McCabe letter concerning the
cure-al remedies on sale, the solici-
tor asked every few lines such ques-
tlons or DR.. Wilev as ARE you 50 credu-
lous as to believe this?" and "can you
believe that this nostrum will do what
is claimed on the label?'
In his reply DR.. Wiley informed Mr..
McCabe that some of the medicines
named We're under investigation by the
Rureau of Chemistry. Whereupon Mr.
McCahe indicted another caustic letter
10 the chief chemist enumerating again
the list of patent medicines and sug-
gesting that the chemist go after the
balance.
In this connection 1t probably will be
shown that the Supreme Court has held
that the Bureau of Chemistry has not
the right, as the law Is now framed, to
inquire intothe therapeutic claims and
properties of medicines. Following the
decision of the court in the Johnson
case. the President has transmitted a
message TO Congress asking that the
law shall be amended so as to reach
the misbranding as to curative proper
ties of patent medicines,
Six months after Solicitor McCabe
became involved in a controversy by
correspondence with DR.. Wiley, the Sec
Order No: 14O,' which specifies that
Solicitor McCabe and not the majority
of the Pure Food Inspection Board
may recommend prosecutions of the
act.
Hepburn In Conflict.
Former Representative William p,
Hepburn, who was chairman of the
House Interstate and Foreign Commerce
Committee when the law was enacted,
was also present today as counsel for
DR.. Wiley, and he disagreed in several
instances with McCabe's Interpretation
Of the act. For instance, Mr.. Hepburn
disagrees with the idea that the solicitor
should assume entire control of prosecu-
tions. The entry of former Representa-
tive Hepburn in the case insures a con-
fiict over the Interpretation the depart
ment has placed on the pure food law.
''Mr. McCabe," asked Attorney Davis,
lis 1t not true that under general or:
der No. 140, you have superseded DR.
Wiley and the board of food and drug
inspection in everything except cases
affecting seizure and import caseS?"
81 have not" answered McCabe.
Very well, we will let 1t stand at
that for the present." answered At
torney Davis.
At the beginning of the hearing today
a letter was read from Secretary Will
son In response to the request Of the
committee that the department shall
furnish its permanent. abeyance regis
ter" This register Is supposed to con-
tain a record Of pure food prosecutions
held in abeyance. Secretary Wilson as
sured the committee that he wanted to
aid II in every way possible, but re-
piled that the register was not complete
at this time The Secretary promised to
have the register fully posted and to
supply the committee with copy.