The Waterbury Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1917-1946, 1934-03-20

1 CAAACAs OAACG NAAG OAA law NAAC &C
cretary made such definitions but
these were really of an advisory
nature and were not legally bind
ing. In the bill 1914 they were to
be completely binding. Packers
would be required to have permits
under the bill and this provision,
had it been in force several years
back. would have prevented many
deaths which resulted from a GER
tain product, DR. Bailey said.
One of the features of the bill
1914 was that more adequate con-
troll over false advertisements of
proprietary medicines would be
provided. In the present law the
government has not only to prove
the product is fraudulent but it
must prove the manufacturers
know it is false.
Hard to Prove
A so-called diabetes remedy
which had no effect on the sick
ness recently caused a long fight
for although the government could
easily prove it was false, it could
rot show the manufacturer had
knowledge of its worthlessness and
thus lost it's case.
More informative labels on food
and drugs by listing of Ingredients
in foods where no standards had
teen formulated were provided for
in bill 1914. These would be stated
in the order of weight. One of the
advantages of this, DR. Bailey
pointed out, is that a physician If
called to q person using such a
proprietary medicine, could tell
from the list Of ingredients what
the patient had been taking.
Inspection Provided
Voluntary inspection was provid-
ed in the bill. Under this the gov
Lernment would send an inspector
to a plant who would give author
itative approval Of the product.
Severe penalties are provided for
in bill 1914. The need for such was
made evident when DR. Bailey said
that in recent series of deaths
following some jamaica ginger
poisonings, the manufacturers
were only given a 5000 fine, this
being the maximum punishment
under this offense. The present bill
would make the fine more COM
mensurate with the offense, DR.
Bailey said.
Some Objections
Objections to the bill were re-
ceived. Some felt that the provi-
sion giving the secretary of agri-
culture power to set tolerances and
promulgate standards gave him
too much power and did not allow
sufficient provision for appeal from
his rulings. Another objection was
raised to general "misbranding"
provision, opponents pointing out
that phrase said that "if by am
biguity or inferecen, the label cre-
ated misleading impression" it
was considered misbranded. A
third objection was on the require
ment for lifting of ingredients, cat
tie food manufacturers for example
claiming that conditions caused
them to change the ingredients in
the food frequently and this chang.
ing of listing would work hard
ships on them.
One of the provisions of the bill
would have barred listing of GER
tain diseases, about 80 in number.
in the label statement which the
statement might claim the product
helped. This provision met with
voluntary inspection idea was
oAoSA SAAoI NV cSAA AA0AuA0SkAkO AS
could afford such inspection and
would suffer a. disadvantage with
those who did have it and received
such approval, DR. Bailey contin-
ued.
The bill 1914 was sent back for
revision and bill 1000 was then is
sued. There were more objections,
DR. Bailey said and the bill $500
was heard on February 81. This
bill was aimed to further remove
objections raised.
Power Curtailed
Under it, and this is the bill now
before the senate, the power of the
secretary of agriculture is curtailed
somewhat. A committee of health,
consisting of five members, none
of whom can be a member Of the
department of agriculture, would
be named to set "tolerances." All
the members would be appointed
by the president and would serve
for five years.
A committee of foods would be
appointed, and would promulgate
standards and decisions. 1t would
consist of seven members, two from
the department of agriculture, two
from the trades, and three from
the public at large. The secretary
of agriculture would name the first
two but all others would be ap-
pointed by the president.
The misbranding clause has been
modified, and the listing Of ingre-
dents in foods has been retained
in the present bill but listing of in
gradients in drugs has been de-
leted. Barring listing of disease
names has been set aside but drugs
not curative, simply palliative, UNI
DER the present bill will be resuired
to be SO listed if applying to any
of those diseases and 1t must be
stated just how the palliative
works.
Open to Amendment
This bill Is now open to amend
ment and it may have an easy time
and may not, DR. Bailey said. :,
However it has the support OF
the administration and the presi-
dent in particular. 1t Is not consid-
cred a bit of major legislation SO
it is possible action on 1t might be
delayed until another session If the
calendar became too heavy.
There is the jerks bill before the
house now which would revise the
present law, DR. Bailey said. This
also will receive a hearing in due
course of time.
Urges Individual Action
Mrs Fenniman introduced the
speaker and after he finished
thanked him, pointing out the
league favored a new food and
drug act feeling that the consumer
needed better protection. She
pointed out how one cosmetic to
make the eyelashes attractive has
caused some to go blind. She
urged all present to write indivi-
Gually to either of the Connecticut
senator's or to the state congress-
men and announce their desire for
a new food and drug act. In the
Howard Whittemore library there
is copy of a congressional digest
containing the provision in the new
bill before the senate and anyone
interested can obtain 1t there. she
added. Several questions were
asked DR. Bailey by his audience.
A discussion of the child labor
amendment will be heard next
Mondav night and Miss Elsie Rob-