The Washington times., 1911-08-16

4
and If the decision be sustained tn'
. case is certified 10 the proper distric
attorney for prosecution.
This was the original ractiCe. Their
came the board Of food and drug in
spection, of Wiley, Dunlap, and Nc
Cabe. 1t hears appeals as a whole oil
through some member of the bureau"
rs Mr.. McCabe chemist"
Not to my knowledge. On hearings
the majority of this board decided
If Dunlap and l disagreed, Mr. McCabe
decided
And he's not chemist?''
Not to my knowledge. The views OF
the Bureau of Chemistry We're sustained
in about third of the cases by the
board of food and drug inspection;
When Dunlap and l disagreed, ! recall
no case in which / was finally sus-
tained by the vote of McCabe. In the
| answer to a certain letter about What
was rye whisky McCabe held with
me and against Dunlap. 1t was, think.
the only such case"
How many such cases have there
| been?'
From 1.5OO to 1000, I-should say"
| "All chemistry or composition cases?'
| Nearly ala few were cases OF
false weighing"
Rye Whisky.
| Explaining the rye whisky case, DR..
| Wiley said he had held that rye whisky
must be made entirely of rye. DR..
Dunlap held that It could contain other
| things, and Mr.. McCabe held with
Wiley
In about 100 cases where on the first
vote Dunlap voted with me, and Nc
Cabe opposed us both, Dunlap at once
changed and supported McCabe"
The committees eyes opened wide at
this statement, from which McCabe was
made TO appear for the first time as the
real chemical authority, though not 4
chemist. DIR. Wiley added that in all
cases the board has been sustained by
Secretary Wilson.
Asked about the cost of preparing
such cases. DR.. Wiley said:
There have been about 1900 cases of
alleged adulteration and misbranding
total amount of cash used by 1900
makes an apparent cost of about $500
III preparing each case. This includes
cost Of samples. all services Of the
found not to justify prosecution are
properly dropped.
Mr.. MCCabe rarely attends a meet
ing or hearing, before the. food and
drug board. All that work is attended
to by Mr.. Dunlap and myself. II held
al a distance from Washington an Of
hclal of the bureau is detailed, and
stenoGraphic report is taken and for
wardcd to us"
Representative Sloan asked IL Wiley
ever appealed to Secretary Wilson in
case of being ovcrruled by the major
tty OF the board.
In two cases l did so appeal" he
said, ''on the ground that the public
health was threatened. But in both
cases the Secretary decided against
me; in fact, ] found soon that appeals
against the majority was hopeless.
One of these cases was that of glu-
ten -four, made for diabetic patients. I
insisted that half the usual amount OF
starch must be removed, but, in fact,
none had been. To feed a flour of
that sort to a diabetic patient, under
the impression that half the starch
was out, was direct menace to the
patient
The other case involved the use OF
sulphur dioxide. The board recon-
mended that We discontinue the rule
requiring that the presence of sulphur
dioNide be shown on the label That
rule had been adOpetd by the three
Secretaries, of Agriculture, the Treas
ury, and Commerce and Labor I
knew that sulphur dioxide thus used
was a menace TO public health. Yet
the board recommended, in my ab-
sence, that the rule be abrogated.
He Protests.
"On returning and learning what had
been done l protested in writing that
the food and drug board had no power
to abrogate an order of the three Sec
retaries. 1 wrote Secretary Wilson
that this was done in my absence, late
in the day, one day when l was about
leaving the city. l was with the
board till p. m, then left for Boston.
After ! left, this action was taken. |
was not notified that it was contem-
plated. |
Il asked the Secretary to hear me
on the matter"
"Have you his reply7"
Il never got one"
Ever talk to him about it?"
Il did nOt-the incident was closed |
when the Secretary failed to answer my |
letter" |
Have your colleagues on this board |
commonly been antagonistic to your
Generally. yes; in about a third Of |
the cases we have acted together. |
When l am present I have charge of all |
though they all go to |
DR.. Dunlop to be Overlooked"
Are you over or under DR.. Dunlap |
in authority"
Il regard him as my superior. be-
cause in notifying me of mis- appoint
ment the Secretary directed me to af-
ford him all facilities, quarters, etc,
that he might need. Also, I have a
letter from the Secretary, not in the
record, but which / will produce, which
to me appears to give the superior place
Dr. Dunlap"
The committee, a good deal startled, 1
demanded that this letter be produced.
1t will be.
Taking UP the famous alum case, Dr.
Wiley said the evidence taken, as to
use of alum, was very closely divided. |
He CWiIey) wanted to exclude 1t from
foods on the ground that in such a
doubt, safety lay in shutting it out.
The board of food and drug inspection,
however wanted to send the matter to
the Remsen referee board for investi-
cation.
ct told them 7 would agree IN that II |
they would vote with me to forbid the
use of alum pending the decision by the
referee board.
"I wrote a letter suggesting this
course, and urging action. The other
ood and drug board members were
slow about taking any action, and I
could not force it. You see, I don't
get a vote often. I only vote when
here is a tie in the food and drug
BOARD and that doesn't often happen"
10000000O0 S0co0o000Oe0o0o