Page:Foods and their adulteration; origin, manufacture, and composition of food products; description of common adulterations, food standards, and national food laws and regulations (IA foodstheiradulte02wile).pdf/640

 F. I. D. 44-45. Issued December 4, 1906.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY,

H. W. WILEY,.

FOOD INSPECTION DECISIONS 44 AND 45.

(F. I. D. 44.)

SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF FOOD-INSPECTION DECISIONS.

From the tenor of many inquiries received in this Department it appears that many persons suppose that the answers to inquiries addressed to this Department, either in letters or in published decisions, have the force and effect of the rules and regulations for the enforcement of the food and drugs act of June 30, 1906. The following are illustrations of the inquiries received by this Department:

Must we stamp all goods as conforming to the drug and food law, whether they have alcohol and narcotics therein, or not?

On a brand of salad oil, which is a winter-strain cottonseed oil, can it be sold under the brand of salad oil, or must it state that it is cottonseed oil?

It seems highly desirable that an erroneous opinion of this kind should be corrected. The opinions or decisions of this Department do not add anything to the rules and regulations nor take anything away from them. They therefore are not to be considered in the light of rules and regulations. On the other hand, the decisions and opinions referred to express the attitude of this Department in relation to the interpretation of the law and the rules and regulations, and they are published for the information of the officials of the Department who may be charged with the execution of the law and especially to acquaint manufacturers, jobbers, and dealers with the attitude of this Department in these matters. They are therefore issued more in an advisory than in a mandatory spirit. It is clear that if the manufacturers, jobbers, and dealers interpret the rules and regulations in the same manner as they are interpreted by this Department, and follow that interpretation in their business transactions, no prosecution will lie against them. It needs no argument to show that the Secretary of Agriculture must himself come to a decision in every case before a prosecution can be initiated, since it is on his report that the district attorney is to begin a prosecution for the enforcement of the provisions of the act.

In so far as possible it is advisable that the opinions of this Department respecting the questions which arise may be published. It may often occur that the opinion of this Department is not that of the manufacturer, jobber, or dealer. In this case there is no obligation resting upon the manufacturer, jobber, or dealer to follow the line of procedure marked out or indicated by the opinion of this Department. Each one is entitled to his own opinion and interpretation and to assume the responsibility of acting in harmony therewith.

It may be proper to add that in reaching opinions and decisions on these cases the Department keeps constantly in view the two great purposes of the food and drugs act, namely, to prevent misbranding and to prohibit adulteration. From the tenor of the correspondence received at this Department and from the oral hearings which have been held, it is evident that an overwhelming majority of the manufacturers, jobbers, and dealers of this country