The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-07-02
MOORE REPLIES ID
 CRITICISM OF THE
 HEALTH OFFICIAL
Says Dr. Bowling Wants Ar bitrary Power In Condemn inf Foods-Courts Won't
 Approve Ordinance

In regard to the criticism of the municipal legal department, re- garding the ordinance for handling foods, Fred c. Moore, city attor- ney, yesterday said:
 The conservation of the public health is. of course, of paramount importance, and realizing this it has always been the policy and practice of the law department of the city to cheerfully and vigorously cooperate in every way possible in the enforce ment of all valid laws and ordinances relating thereto.
 We have successfully defended against numerous attacks made from every angle, both the state law and city ordinances relating to social dis cases. and have prepared many ordi- nances looking to the general end of public health conservation. This, of course, is all in the days work.
 Milk Controversy
 "Incidentally, 1t may be said that "a much better settlement of the milk controversy could have been made
  chancellor had decided every point of importance (except as to the bac- tcrial count, which was left open for taking eyidence) in the city's favor. than was made recently. But sug- gestion of compromise would not be entertained by the health officer at that time.
 His statement in the morning paper that there arc no regulations safeguarding the city's food supply Is pure nonsense. Only one oral nance has been enjoined, and others which have been in force for years arc still in force. Besides, the state sanitary law. which the health officer claims is practically identical With the city ordinances. has been in force before and since the injunction was granted, and the health officer, had he so desired, could have ignored the ir function which was directed only gatnst the one ordinance and en- forced by tho state law, and this through the medium of the recorder court which has original Jurisdlction of state misdemeanors, and also py virtue of the city's so-called blanket ordinance. which makes violations of state misdemeanors offenses against
 the city.
 Arbitrary Power
 ..The health officer, however, has always complained about the SLOW | processes of the courts and the low fines and appeals from the recorder courts his general attitude peins one of ,ntempt. He desires arbitrary 1 and unrestrained power to enforce ] fanciful whims and that IS the l trouble with the ordinance enjoined. l @f
 upon the health officer the power
 to seize and destroy food, fruits, etc., without 8 hearing when not pro- ! tected in a manner approved by him. | I advised the health officer when this ordinance was presented that In my judgment. that section was void, but l stated that since the courts were Liberal in their interpretation Of
 health laws anu ordinance, 1 would
 try 1t out at least in the circuit court. | The ordinance was promptly declared | invalid by the circuit court.
 "Since then I have had several con ferences with attorneys for the com plaining parties, seeking satisfac- l tory settlement on the basis of elimi- ! hating the arbitrary power section 1T l their clients would agree to comply with the remainder of the ordinance.
 This they have finally refused to do. 1 contending that other portions of the
 ordinance are also unreasonable and void To this I cannot agree, and | therefore there Is nothing to do but | continue the litigation.
 l "This office has always done, is now doing, and will continue to do everything in it's power, in a consti-
 tutional and orderly way. to conserve | the public health and enforce all laws and ordinance relating thereto; but
 I have some respect for the law and | the rights of the citizen, the health 1 officer seems to have neither"