The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-06-15
STATE POWER AFFIRMED.

Those who have been arguing tina
the National Pure Food law is suff
cient without the states cnacting lee
islation on like lines. are confufed o
two main propositions. First the Dc
partment of Agriculture through IN
prme Initiative OF President Roose
feli in his corn sugar rulipp an,
ms appointment OF the Rcmsen board
aud thc supineness OF Secretary Wijso,
has gone far toward nullifying the pur
poses aud even the positive rcouire
mentS of the pure food act. makint
! supplemental State action desirable
and second, the States can get closer
To the people IN the cuactmrt of pure
food laws especially appropriate tt
their localities than can the Nation
through Congressional action Con
gress can logislatc generally. TO he
sure. on articles OF nationwide demand i;
but cN"ry state should logisIa,c direct
| ly and specifically so As to meet the
requirement sof it's particular locality,
and to enforce healthful conditions at
home.
lt has been supposed bv MANY that
the legislation OF States upon this sub
Icct might be overthrow BY the Su-
preme Court. as infringing upon the
legislative authority Of Congress. The
Supreme Court Of the United States,
however has lust affirmed the In.
diana pure food law as constitutional,
and not in any way infringing upon
the powers of Congress. The court az.
firmcd in this decision the general
principle that n Federal regulation docs
not suspend the police power of
state. The right of a State to fix
standards as to tho quality and fitness
OF food offered for sale within its iur.
iSdiction and 10 protect its inhabitants
from adulterations or impurities. is in.
herent IN state as a necessary portion
of it's sovereignty. The power Of the
states 10 enforce their inspection laws
aud to charge the cost Of inspection on
commodities brought into them from
other States or from foreign countries
is expressly affirmed as q principle
recognized in the constitution. The
'ourt holds that tho pure food laws of
! state may impose any requirements
lccmcd necessary for the public health
and the welfare of the citi |
ems, aud foods produced in other
states as well as within the State itself |
must como mp 10 these requirements |
wen though they he different from and |
more strict than those imposed by the
'cderal law. The court holds that The |
'ederal law may supplement but can
rot supersedc the state law, which may
citing than the law of Congress.
All this is encouraging TO the States
q proceed on protective lines for their
inhabitants. 1t may DO added as We
ave urged heretofore, that such lcgis-
alton, wherever it trsvcrscs the same
round as the Congressional statute,
hould conform 10 that statute, so as
o avoid conflicts and differing stand
rds. Such conformity Is also reason
bic on the broad lines Of manufacture,
acking. and transportation; for it
'ould evidently be unreasonable TO ex-
ect that manufacturers Of a given ar
Icle Of consumption should make up
heir packages and make their ship
lents on different bases for every diff
erent State In the Union. Standard
ling is the tendency of the times. and
his standardizing should be recognized
. all State legislation, Congressional
'gislation being necessarily directly in
he line Of helping towards standard /,
ling in ali products or articles Of use.
Tho States, then, should lcgisIato for
but on lines following J
hose laid down in the National enact.
tents. making the inspection and the
'quircments as much more strict As they :
Ike. and as much more searching as
he state requirements would suggest.
'c have a wide variety of climate and i
temperature. 1t is true that most Of
he standard articles of manufacture ,
re made so as TO be Of equal useful
css and saleIbility in any part of the J
ouutry; but il is the province of every
tatc. while keeping in mind the gen j
raj iiea OF standardization, To enact ;
bcrcycr IT is necessary additional re. /
nircmcnts. and 10 deal especially with
rticles produced within the State. The ,
uprome Court decision in the Indiana I,
ure food case is distinct encourage. 2
lent TO the States 10 proceed with
.rctness in legislation for the protcc. ]
ION Of their people in the matter of .
uvc foods. drugs, and all prepared ar ,
cics OF commerce and consumptiou [,
,
A QUESTION OF SINCERITY