The daily star-mirror. (Moscow, Idaho) 1911-1939, 1921-01-15
ORDINANCE DEATH
TO DAIRY INDUSTRY
ATTORNEY POINTS OUT THAT
ENFORCEMENT OF NEW Or
DINANCE SPELLS RUIN.

That the dairy industry in and
around Moscow would be ruined;
trade driven from Moscow to other
towns and Moscow citizens would be
compelled to do without milk, butter
and cream if the ordinance recently
passed by the city council is enforc-
ed, is the statement of A. FL. Over
smith, attorney and president of the
Moscow chamber of commerce, in
communication to The Star-Mirror
which is herewith published.
Much comment and vigorous pro-
test against the ordinance has been
heard and it is safe to say that no
action of the city council in years mas
met with more vigorous opposition
than the passage of this ordinance of
which no one, outside of the council
circle knew anything until it was
passed and published in The Star !
Mirror, the official paper of the city |
That it will wreck the dairy industry,
il enforced, seems to be the general :
opinion of those who have been heard
on he subject Mr.. Oversmith's an
alysis of the ordinance follows:
Dairy Industry Treatened.
Moscow, Ida, Jan. IA, 1921.
Editor of Star-Mirror,
Moscow, Idaho.
Dear Mr.. Editor:
My attention has been called to
Ordinance No. 500 of the City of Mos
COW, which was published in your
paper Wednesday night of this week.
Without desiring to crit1cise the pas
sage of the ordinance, l believe that
the terms of the ordinance ought to
be made plain and the effect OF it
summed up in order that the citizens
of Moscow will understand what this
ordinance provides. IF this ordinance
is enforced, the citizens Of Moscow,
to great extent will be compelled
to get along without milk, butter or
other dairy products.
Section 13 of the ordinance practi-
calIy prohibits any person owning a
COW in the city from selling any. milk.
This same section would prevent any .
milk or cream from being sold in the
city of Moscow by farmers Or other
persons unless they had a separate
milk house which was not used Tor /
my other purpose than taking care
If the milk.
Section III of the ordinance pro-
nibits any individual owning COW
from selling the milk unless the
milk is first cooled or in other words
he milk cannot be put into glass
ars and delivered after milking. In
he summer it would be necessary for !
avery person owning COW to have
refrigerator to cool the milk II such
person desired to sell any to his
1eighbOrs.
Section II of the ordinance also 4
,ompels every person offering for F
;ale any milk, cream, butter or any f
,ther dairy product in the City OF Q
Ioscow, who have COWS from which f
uch dairy products are made to have E
uch COWS tested at least once a year +
" a veterinarian. Under this sec q
ion no farmer can sell any butter in :
doscow unless his cows are first .
ested by a veterinarian. Each farm e
r or person owning a COW would :,
ave to pay the expense Of such ., y,
examination. 3
Reading Section 13 strictly 1T would T,
equire each owner of a COW to take {;
he COW into the front yard or at !. =
east SO feet away from the COW y
table at milking time before he :,
ould sell the milk. The writer is in 81 81
ccord with the object sought to be T.
btained by the ordinance but the |.
rdinance itself is too general and p
DO SCrlCJ III us pIOFlolouo. - II -
ecessary in order to insure the pub
c health of the City of Moscow to az
ave every COW from which dairy
roducts are sold tested for tubercu-
sis, then the public as whole W
ouid be much better off to hire and n
ay a veterinarian for making tests al
I the cows In other words the city M
lould employ a city veterinarian on Id
salary to make the tests provided fr
n in the ordinance. The testing 8
,uld be done much cheaper by Y
Elective effort than by each 1ndi- X.
dual paying for testing his own co
,ws, and the ordinance could bel
uch better enforced if this testing
ere done free of charge to the own nj
s. Every consumer would have to SC
~ the ultimate cost anyway and vi
e city should make arrangements co