SECOND DAY. The Congress met at 2 o'clock. The President: I am very happy to announce that we have present this afternoon to address this body, as per invitation extended this morning, the distinguished Secretary of Agriculture, Hon. James Wilson, of Iowa. Secretary Wilson then addressed the Congress as follows: SECRETARY WILSON'S ADDRESS. "This country of ours, through the ingenuity of its people, the goodness of its lands, the growth of its manufactories, and the perfection of its commerce, is ready now to furnish cheap food to the whole world. We can produce meats, dairy products, poultry and all the things man requires throughout the world cheaper than they can be produced anywhere else. We are ready to overflow the markets of the whole world; the great manufactories, the commercial countries of the earth cannot live without us. They require our food. All they ask is 'Give us honest, pure food. If we do this our markets are unlimited across the Atlantic. There may be a few nations that are not quite fair in their dealings with us, but, on the whole, the European countries treat us comfortably well. Now we can only secure a permanent footing in those markets by sending what is honest, and what is just as we represent it to be. "The Department of Agriculture has been making efforts during the past year and will continue to make those efforts to find new markets for our products abroad. It is very difficult to establish markets in foreign countries if our goods are not what they are represented to be. If some of us send honest creamery butter abroad and others send oleomargarine, the American good name is injured and it is only a question of time when our consumers abroad will learn to distrust us and look to other countries for pure food. So it is with many other things. The drugs of the United States which our physicians prescribe for us when sick should be what they are represented to be, but it is a well-known fact that they are not. "We have evidence, however, that many of the imports from foreign countries are not what they are represented. There are plenty of rascals in other countries, and if the time ever comes when we must reason with another nation, we will have quite as much to say on that subject as anybody else. We are pretty well prepared along those lines. But that is no excuse for us. Because other people send us doctored goods is no reason why we should do the same thing. The people of the United States should rise to higher levels. "The name 'American' should be synonymous with fair dealing through out the world. Just as soon as interest money becomes as cheap in the United States as it is in foreign countries we will build American ships that will take our goods to all parts of the known world, but before we send the American flag to every corner of the earth, we must send our reputation ahead of us, so that when an American ship goes into any port the people of that port will say, 'Here comes an honest trader among you" "I will not presume to advise you, gentlemen. I see here many men of experience, men known in their own States and throughout the United States. Whatever the people determine they want Congress will seek to give them. Agree on some fair general proposition and we shall have a magnificent beginning. I will say for myself and the gentlemen with whom I am associated in the Department of Agriculture, that we will do everything in our power to help along the work you begin here to-day. Let us know what your will is and it will be our greatest pleasure to serve you. I thank you, gentlemen." At the conclusion of Mr. Wilson's address, a vote of thanks was tendered him for his able and interesting address. The chair announced the following Committee on Resolutions : The motion was made to resume the regular order of business, but waş suspended, after the reading of the resolutions by -Messrs. Hamilton and Jordan, to allow the regular order of business, the consideration of the Brosius Bill, to be resumed. An amendment was offered by the National Confectioners' Association which was properly referred. The Chair then announced the following Committee on Legislation: COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION. Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chemist, Department of Agriculture, Aaron Jones, Indiana, Master National Grange, C. C. Bell, Missouri, F. N. Barrett, New York, Mr. Eaton, Connecticut. Mr. Kaiser, President Retail Grocers' Association of Philadelphia, Prof. Gill, Ohio, Prof. Kline, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Mr. Holladay, Raleigh, North Carolina, Mr. Allen, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station, Prof. Miller, Secretary Brewers' Association, Ohio, N. J. Batchelder, Secretary of Board of Agriculture, New Hampshire, Mr. Martindale, Philadelphia, Mr. Abbott, Missouri, Dr. King, State Chemist, Tennessee, Dr. Wingate, representing Board of Health, Wisconsin, Miss Emma C. Sickels, Chicago, Ill, Mr. Wardell, Farmers' Alliance, California, Dr. C. J. Bell, Delaware, F. B. Thurber, of New York, Mr. Richardson, New York, Mr. Carpenter, Massachusetts, Frank Hume, District of Columbia, Mr. Trammell, Florida. Mr. Gallus Thoman, of the United States Brewers' Association was announced and spoke as follows: "Mr. Chairman-The association of manufacturers which I have the honor to represent, is known as the United States Brewers' Association. Its members produce fully 85% of the malt liquors brewed in our country; hence its utterances reflect the sentiments and opinions of what, for all purposes, may be regarded as the entire trade. By resolutions adopted in open convention about twenty-five years ago, and frequently reiterated on various occasions, both the Association as a body, and its members are pledged jointly and severally to prevent the adulteration of their product, and to assist to the full extent of their ability in the detection, prosecution, and punishment of all persons guilty of adulteration, or of any practices whatever calculated to bring disgrace or discredit upon the industry. Faithful to this policy the Asseciation has at various times solicited, and sometimes defiantly challenged, the most vigorous official analysis of their product, and invariably received from the official analyzers unstinted praise for the purity and wholsomeness of the article they manufacture. Actuated by the same spirit of integrity, the Association has for years sought to bring about the very condition of things which the Brosius Bill,-considering, of course, only its general purport and intent-is designed to create. Surely more need not be said by the accredited representative of that Association to convince you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the Congress, that the brewing industry of this country is heartily in favor of any federal law, applicable to every part of our country, by which the adulteration of drugs, food and drink may be most effectually prevented. Undoubtedly the Brosius Bill is an effort in this direction. But, permit me to say, although conceived in the right spirit, and framed with great sagacity and an uncommon knowledge of detail in many respects, it leaves room for improvements in some others; and it may be taken for granted that this Congress was called for the very purpose of perfecting the bill in the light of such experiences as the persons engaged in the manufacture of drugs, food and drink may, each from his point of view, throw upon the subject. "Where so many desire and ought to be heard, common courtesy should dictate to every speaker the utmost brevity. I shall be as brief as possible. The Brosius bill goes too far in some respects, and not far enough in others. I leave it to the representatives of other industries to say as to whether the penalties for adulteration, when the effect is not only to deceive, but perhaps knowingly to injure the health of the consumer, should not be more severe, more justly fitted to the enormity of the offense. Let others say, too, whether section 7, authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture not only to prescribe how certain products shall be branded-which is perfectly proper-but also to designate the color or colors and shape of packages, labels, and wrappers containing the same-would not mean, as I honestly believe, an unwarrantable interference with the rights of manufacturers, who as a rule. use the color and shape of their packages, labels and wrappers as legitimate, and the only possible means of outwardly distinguishing their products from those of their trade competitorsOthers will probably ask whether the proposed system of safeguarding the purity of certain articles of consumption by certificates of registration, to be obtained from the Department, and of written guarantees, to be given by the manufacturer to the retailer, is absolutely necessary and if so, whether to be really effective, the pertinent provisions of the bill should not be made much more conprehensive in their scope, and purport. These and other minor defects will, in all likelihood, be pointed out by other delegates. "I desire to confine myself briefly to what I conceive to be the most serious shortcoming of the bill, one which, if I construe correctly the sentiments predominating in industrial circles, must inevitably render the proposed measure, so excellent in its general features, very objectionable to a majority of the manufacturers of all kinds of food and drink. I refer to the question of standards. Section 7 reads: 'The Secretary of Agriculture may call upon the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists to determine the standard of any food product (within the meaning of this act) and when so determined it shall remain the standard before all courts.' Instead of according to this section a place of secondary importance in the scheme, the framer of the bill, should, in my humble judgment, have embodied it into the very first paragraph, and instead of leaving the whole question of standards of purity to the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture, he should have made the provisions of Section 8 mandatory. Every delegate present will doubtless agree with me that to the Secretary of Agriculture should be conceded every possible latitude of power and discretion in regard to the rules and regulations which are to govern the analysis of food, and drink; but concerning the standards of purity to which the manufacturers must of necessity conform, and which the courts shall maintain and uphold, the law should be direct, explicit and unequivocal. "Before attempting to carry out the other provisions of the proposed act, the Department should be compelled to have standards of purity unalterably fixed by a competent body of professionals. In the logical sequence of things the fixing of standards must necessarily precede the analyses of food and drinks by the chief chemist of the Agricultural Department, otherwise there would be no sense whatever in determining such standards at any time. "Herein lies the very quintessence of the proposed system in its entirety. The interests of both the producer and the consumer imperatively demand that in each separate case the standards of quality and purity should be fixed and clearly defined, to the end that no doubt whatsoever may arise as to what, under the law, shall be classed as an adulteration. With this requirement the usefulness and practicability of the whole bill must stand or fall. It is "The definitions of the term adulteration, as formulated in Section 6, are good enough so far as they go; but they do not. and in the very nature of things, cannot go far enough in a draft of this character. not sufficient to say that any food or drink shall be deemed to be adulterated if any inferior substance has been substituted, or if any substance has been mixed with it so as to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its quality or strength. "Opinions differ as to the relative nutritive value of many agricultural products, and the manufacturers of articles composed of two or more of these products cannot possibly know just what opinion the chemists of the Agricultural Department may entertain as to the effect of any of them upon the strength and quality of any compound article of consumption. The confectioner, for instance, would be clearly entitled to know whether beet sugar, or any saccharine substance derived from any other vegetable product is deemed inferior to cane sugar in such a sense as to make its use an adulteration under the act. Unless by a recognized standard this knowledge is imparted to him, how is he to judge whether his merchandise comes up to the standard which any of the Department chemists-and there will have to be many of them—may happen to have established for his own guidance? The standard for food and drink should be quite as clearly determined and fixed as the standard which, under the bill, is to apply to drugs. Unless this indispensable requirement can be attained, the whole scheme will be objectionable because it would lack the only conpensating feature that could reconcile both the consumer and the manufacturer with the necessity arising from the scheme, of creating a very large number of new federal offices, and inflicting upon all food manufacturers considerable burdens, whose weight would be out of all proportion to the benefits that can possibly be derived from so insufficient a measure. There is, however, another very important aspect of this question. The delegates to this meeting are aware of the constitutional provisions which limit the powers of Congress in this matter; they also know that the adulteration laws of the various states differ very materially; and they undoubtedly appreciate, as the brewers do, the necessity of an absolute uniformity of laws throughout the land. The establishment of standards by a competent federal commission would have the effect of removing all these impediments. In the interests of the industries in their own states the legislatures throughout the country would most assuredly adopt these standards, and should they hesitate, their industrial and commercial constituents would demand immediate action. This being my firm conviction, I would propose to amend section 8 in such a way as to make its provisions mandatory. But I would go further. Chemists alone cannot establish the standards required; they need the assistance of the physiologist. The medical departments of the government could readily be called upon to assist in this work. I would go still one step further. In order to render the outcome of this all-important work as perfect as possible, the Standard Commission should hear and consult the duly accredited representatives of the manufacturers for whom it is intended to establish standards. Amended in these particulars, section 8 would read as follows, (the original phraseology being retained as nearly as possible.), viz: "It shall be the duty of the Secretary of Agriculture to call upon the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, and such officers, not less than five, as the President of the United States shall select from the medical departments of the Army or the Navy, and the U. S. Marine Hospital Service, and five chemists to be selected by the American Chemical Society, to determine, jointly, the standard of all food products, (within thə meaning of this act,) and when so determined such standards shall guide the chemists of the Department of Agriculture in the performance of the duties imposed upon them by this act, and shall remain the standards before all courts. It shall be the duty of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists and the medical officers before mentioned, to confer with and consult the duly accredited representatives of all industries for whom standards shall be established under the provisions of this act." I have but one more statement to make with regard to another feature of the bill. The last proviso of paragraph 8, of section 6, by which the manufacturer would under certain circumstances have to be held liable for the adulteration of his product after it had passed from his place of business, into the hands of the retailer, cannot be justified from any conceivable point of view. Besides being illogical and unjust it is very much in the nature of a srong incentive to adulteration by dishonest retailers, and could easily be used by them, if they be maliciously inclined, or inspired by a fancied wrong or by other motives, to injure the manufacturer. It is to be hoped that this point will receive, either here, or in the Congress of the United States, that attention which it undoubtedly deserves. Mr. Kline of Philadelphia addressed the Congress as follows: ADDRESS OF MR. KLINE. "The members of this Congress who are here representing the drug and pharmaceutical interests, in order to facilitate the work which they felt would come before this Congress, got together yesterday and held several meetings, and have all agreed upon what they would like to have in reference to legislation as proposed in this measure, if it is to come out of this Congress as receiving their endorsement. I take it that the object of this Congress is to provide in a measure, modifications and corrections of crudities and errors that are present in this bill, however carefully it may have been drawn. The attitude of the druggists, wholesale and retail, in coming to this Convention, I think I am justified in saying, was one of interrogation, as to whether it was possible, feasible or advisable for them to join in with some of the interests here in advocating the bill, drawn upon the lines in which it has been sent to us. I believe, however, that I can show as I go along, that they have agreed upon a method which I trust will commend itself to every member of this Congress. The first question that arose was as to legislation proposing to cover both food, drinks, and drugs. How far are the druggists and pharmacists ready and willing to go in the direction of placing under the jurisdiction of the Agricultural Department, and of agricultural chemists the control of drugs? The suggestions we make provide for that which will secure the benefit to be derived from the addition to agricultural chemists of pharmaceutical chemists. There is a hesitancy in accepting legislation of the Agricultural Department without some modification, and so, Mr. Chairman, in order to arrive at an understanding, which we believe, will greatly facilitate the consideration of this question so far as drugs are concerned, we would like to present these suggestions, and to get the sense of this meeting as to whether we will be permitted as a part of this body to urge these suggestions through the Legislative Committee to the Committee in Congress having the bill in charge. We have not the difficulty which the last speaker referred to, as you are well aware, of having no fixed standard. We have a fixed official standard, therefore we do not have that difficulty to deal with. We do have other difficulties to deal with which we think will be obviated if our suggestions are carried out. " Mr. Kline then submitted a series of amendments to the Brosius bill, which were generally discussed and some agreed to but, as will be shown later, the whole matter was referred to the Committee on Legislation. Dr. McMurtie offered a resolution (7) which was referred. Mr. Redsecker moved that the Congress proceed to the consideration of the Brosius bill by sections. Mr. Flanders of New York moved that the Congress re-consider the vote by which it was decided to consider the bill section by section, and refer it to the Committee on Legislation; which after considerable discussion was lost by a vote of sixty-nine to fifty. |