ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

DR. G. A. TOLLMAN, DOVER.

The hour is late, and I will speak but a moment, and will pick out but one point of the many excellent ones we have listened to in Dr. Greeley's paper.

At the rate the children are being instructed to-day and the number of duties they are called upon to perform, it would seem to me at first glance that we had better instruct them less and look after the schoolhouses more closely in which they are instructed. If there was any beginning to be made in prophylactics, it would seem to me it should be in the schoolhouse. It is that time that the child is in the formative period; it is that time when you get your crooked spines from your illy constructed desks, not adjusted at all to the requirement of the child; it is that time when mucous membranes get into that inflamed condition which breeds further trouble. Of course, in our large cities all this matter is nearly perfected. But if we were to begin with the country school and go through the smaller towns and small cities, and even to the larger cities of our state, I will guarantee that there can not be found one half dozen schoolhouses that are constructed in any way as they should be. The hygiene is poor, the desks are poor, the lights are poor, the lights are crossed against the children's eyes, their blackboards are in improper places for them, and these things are going to bring forth fruit in the future. You can trace in your country schools, as I have recently, your typhoid, and here is a point I would like to make, that the physician should in some way interest himself in the school board, and have some bearing and force upon these matters. Get on your school boards, or get on some friend who can control them. They won't put you on if they have an inkling of what you are up to, for they will say, up go our taxes. I traced one case of typhoid to water that was dipped out of the river, allowed to stand all day in a pail, and each time a drink was taken,

if there was any left in the cup it was turned back into the pail. That was continued until the pail of water was used up the next day. I have traced my diphtheria to a closed water-closet, and found, on examination, it was one of the old-fashioned, boxed-in closets. After breaking down the door, which had marked on it "Closed," and breaking out the box and getting in there, I found there a lot of fecal matter-lying there, the janitor said, he did n't know how long. The urinals were in much the same condition, and I had to stand at that door almost with an armed guard, with the health officer, and in fact I had to send for the mayor, before I could prevent the school being attended that day.

Now, as I have said, it is up to us, if we want to practice prophylactics, or instruction of prophylactics, to get down to the root of the matter and look after the school itself and have the places in which all our troubles, or most of them, are bred, remedied; if they are remedied, then we will have fewer curvatures of the spine, fewer troubles with the eyes, and fewer cases of tuberculosis.

TWO YEARS OF PROGRESS UNDER THE

FOOD AND DRUGS ACT.

C. D. HOWARD, CONCORD.

The passage of the National Food and Drugs Act, June 30, 1906, marked the culmination, of one stage at least, of a twenty years' struggle in Congress. On the one hand were the people; on the other, certain aggregations of capital organized for the purpose of exploiting the consumer. I say "exploiting" because possibly nine-tenths of this opposition was inspired by concerns or organizations which, like the National Patent Medicine Manufacturers' Association and the National Wholesale Liquor Dealers' Association, objected to having taken from them the privilege of deluding or swindling the public.

It is true there was also some honest opposition to the various measures as submitted year after year, not only on the part of reputable manufacturers who feared the imposition of hardships, but again on the part of those who contended that such a measure would interfere with the police powers vested in the states. The story is told of one of the Southern senators who, in spite of the popular clamor for the measure, had consistently and persistently opposed it on the alleged ground that it attacked a vital principle of the Democratic party. Dejectedly informing his wife that only three senators finally stood with him against the iniquitous measure, the latter extended her commiseration, at the same time inquiring to what particular bill he referred.

"They call it the Pure Food Bill," replied the senator. "What, is it possible you are against that bill? Why, I'm in favor of it."

Such was the popular demand, a demand, by the way, that was compelled to thrive and spread by mere force of its virtuous character. It was a case where the usual moulding of public sentiment by the press was for the most part conspicuously absent. The newspapers as a class failed to develop any appreciable amount of enthusiasm over the proposed law, and aside from occasionally poking at it in a humorous sort of way, gave their columns up to the report and discussion of other matters.

While a certain few states have been enjoying the benefits of food inspection for more than a decade, the first operations of this kind under the federal government had their inception in a clause of the Agricultural Appropriation Act of 1903. This clause, authorizing the secretary of agriculture to inspect before entry into this country all foods, drugs and beverages of foreign production or manufacture, was responsible for the establishment of government laboratories, first at New York and subsequently at all the larger ports of entry. It is true that previous to this there was, and still is, an official known as the port examiner, who is attached to the treasury department and whose function is to make examinations of such articles as crude drugs, sugars, dye-stuffs and the like, more particularly with the view of determining their proper classification for the levy of duties. For this purpose one package in ten of every shipment, transported from the wharf to the appraisers' stores, is broken open and inspected by the treasury officials. By the terms of the act of 1903, the same package is also inspected by the agricultural department, for the purpose of excluding from entry into the United States any adulterated or otherwise objectionable article of food.

The act of 1906 not only affords a more permanent and definite basis for the exclusion of adulterated foreign products, but it provides the various state departments with something long needed, that is, a means of reaching the culprit outside their borders. Hitherto there has been

nothing to prevent the Massachusetts food manufacturer from shipping into New Hampshire products that he would not dare attempt to sell in his own state. Now, however, by a proper co-operation with the federal officials we are in a much better position to put a check on this condition of affairs.

Except as applied to the District of Columbia and the territorial possessions, the operation of the federal act is limited simply to the inspection or seizure of original packages entering the country, or in actual transit from one state to another. As the present interpretation of the term "original package" is held as referring to the box, barrel, bale, or other container in which the goods are actually shipped, it will be seen that instead of indiscriminately visiting the retail stores, the field of action of a federal inspector is comparatively limited. The sample must be taken from the unbroken shipping case. As it must also be paid for, and as the freight-handlers and truckmen have no license to sell what is not theirs, the only opportunity that the inspector has is in following up the dray to the back door of the retailer.

Seizures of adulterated or misbranded foods or drugs are also provided for by section 10 of the act.

In fact, this method of enforcement seems to be a favorite one with the government, and it certainly is proving an effective one. One of the earliest seizures was that of one hundred and thirty-five barrels of adulterated cider. As there was a default on the part of the owners in answering the libel, these goods have now become permanently confiscated and "Notice of Judgment No. 1" has recently been published and distributed by the secretary of agriculture.

Another notable instance of this kind is in the seizure at Boston recently of nearly three thousand packages of "Digesto Coffee," just arrived from New York. The analyses in this case showed that the claims of the coffee company

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »