The Washington times., 1911-08-22
THE REAL THING IN THE
WILEY AFFAIR.

clear, i'll his testimony, that DIR. Wiley
has been a troublesome, unmanageable
person.
The doctors superiors, and his am
bilious interiors as well, are not alone
in this view. The food manufacturers
and the medicine mixers have for a
long time felt the same way about him.
For years they wanted Wiley fired
for pernicious activity in his efforts to
get the pure food law passed. But he
beat them.
Now they want him fired for per-
nicious activity in trying to get that
law enforced.
Before setting DR.. Wiley down as
mere breeder of troubles, it is well to
compare his attitude toward this law
with the attitude of his enemies.
The law says-and DR.. Wiley is an
old d-fashioned person with the idea that
when the law says it, it means it-that
the Bureau of Chemistry shall examine
articles, determine whether they COM
ply with the law, and report to the
Secretary for action to enforce the
spirit of the measure.
DIR. Wiley took that provision Sc
riously.
When he found a food and drug
board interposed-not by law, but by
executive order-between his bureau
and the enforcement of the law IN
accordance with the laws terms, the
doctor was peeved.
He saw an instrumentality which
the law DID NOT provide put over
the machinery which the law DID
provide.
He saw this extra legal mechanism
operating to neutralize his efforts to
enforce the law which Congress had
made.
Being old-fashioned, the doctor had
prejudice in favor of the law as
made by the lawmakers.
Next the doctor found the Remsen
board established by executive order
WITH THE PLAIN INTENT OF
MODIFYING THE LAW, AND THE
ULTIMATE EFFECT OF LARGELY
REPEATING 1T.
1t was, not unlikely, embarrassing
to his superiors that the doctor should
still adhere to his archaic notions of
the sufficiency of the law as made by
Congress. But there are yet simple
minded folk in this country who hold
such views about law enforcement.
Still later, the doctor saw the au-
thority which the law had reposed in
his bureau with regard to prosecutions,
taken away by executive order and
reposed in McCabe.
Now, McCabe might be the most de-
sirable individual in the world to per-
form these duties; but DR.. Wiley
thought the thing ought to be done j,
the way the law intended.
Once more, in the corn syrup case
the doctor saw the three Secretaries
calmly reverse the finding of the au
thorities designated by the law, and
prevent the enforcement of the statute
in the way Congress had intended.
Is it any wonder that Wiley got the
notion that the law was being whitfield
down to vanishing point?
For the sake of argument, let it bt
assumed that every move toward modi
flying the law has resulted in good tc
the public interest The fact will still
remain that it is not the right way tc
revise a law.
. If DR.. Wiley was bad chief of the
, Bureau of Chemistry, the Administra
ton should have dismissed him anC
told the public he was no good.
BUT 1T DIDN'T DARE DO THAT
{ If the law was bad, if it needed {
, food and drug board, Remsen board
an appeal to the three Secretaries, 81;
.. LAWYER to wise and revise the decisions
of the chemists, why, all these thing
should have been recommended to Con
gress, and it should have been induces
n to write them, as amendments, into tn
y act.
g BUT THE ENEMIES OF THE Law
u DIDN'T DARE APPEAR IN TIL
OPEN WITH ANY SUCH PROGRAM
AS THAT.
. DR.. Wiley has frankly told the com
v mittee that it has been his policy. i
: case of uncertainty about the injuriou
II effects of certain foods, to GIVE TIL
PUBLIC THE BENEFIT OF TIL
e DOUBT. Was he rightf How doe
> the public feel about that?
The reader can judge for himsel
h by imagining two bottles in the famil
- medicine chest. The labels have bee
i lost. He knows one contains a deadl
# poison, the other is harmless.
,r If he goes ahead and tries one {
0. them it may not hurt. If he gets tn
y right bottle no damage will ensue.
It's the same way with Wiley.
a there are even chances that a give
2 o4;,,o 80 food ;S bo rr,losS Wila