Foods and Their Adulteration / Origin, Manufacture, and Composition of Food Products; Description of Common Adulterations, Food Standards, and National Food Laws and Regulations Papyras Classics

← Foods and Their Adulteration / Origin, Manufacture, and Composition of Food Products; Description of Common Adulterations, Food Standards, and National Food Laws and Regulations

Chapter 154

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 are determined to do their utmost to conform to the provisions of the act, to support it in every particular, and to accede to the opinions of this Department respecting its construction. It is hoped, therefore, that the publication of the opinions and decisions of the Department will lead to the avoidance of litigation which might arise due to decisions which may be reached by this Department indicating violations of the act, violations which would not have occurred had the opinions and decisions of the Department been brought to the attention of the offender.

James Wilson,
Secretary of Agriculture.

Washington, D. C., December 1, 1906.

(F. I. D. 45.) Blended Whiskies.

Many letters are received by the Department making inquiries concerning the proper method of labeling blended whisky. Manufacturers are anxious to know the construction placed by the Department upon this particular part of the food and drugs act of June 30, 1906, and to ascertain under what conditions the words “blended whisky” or “whiskies” may be used. The following quotation from one of these letters presents a particular case of a definite character:

On account of the uncertainty prevailing in our trade at the present time as to how to proceed under the pure-food law and regulations regarding what will be considered a blend of whiskies, I am taking the liberty of expressing to you to-day two samples of whisky made up as follows:

Sample A contains 51 percent of Bourbon whisky and 49 percent of neutral spirits. In this sample a small amount of burnt sugar is used for coloring, and a small amount of prune juice is used for flavoring, neither of which increases the volume to any great extent.

Sample B contains 51 percent of neutral spirits and 49 percent of Bourbon whisky. Burnt sugar is used for coloring, and prune juice is used for flavoring, neither of which increases the volume to any great extent.

I have marked these packages “blended whiskies” and want your ruling as to whether it is proper to thus brand and label such goods.

My inquiry is for the purpose of guiding the large manufacturing interests in the trade that I represent.

In a subsequent letter from the same writer the following additional statement is made:

The reason for wanting your decision or ruling in this matter is just this: No house in the trade can afford to put out goods and run the risk of seizure and later litigation by the Government on account of the odium that would be attached to fighting the food and drugs act.

The question presented is whether neutral spirits may be added to Bourbon whisky in varying quantities, colored and flavored, and the resulting mixture be labeled “blended whiskies.” To permit the use of the word “whiskies” in the described mixture is to admit that flavor and color can be added to neutral spirits and the resulting mixture be labeled “whisky.” The Department is of opinion that the mixtures presented can not legally be labeled either “blended whiskies” or “blended whisky.” The use of the plural of the word “whisky” in the first case is evidently improper for the reason that there is only one whisky in the mixture. If neutral spirit, also known as cologne spirit, silent spirit, or alcohol, be diluted with water to a proper proof for consumption and artificially colored and artificially flavored, it does not become a whisky, but a “spurious imitation” thereof, not entirely unlike that defined in section 3244, Revised Statutes. The mixture of such an imitation with a genuine article can not be regarded as a mixture of like substances within the letter and intent of the law.

James Wilson,
Secretary of Agriculture.

Washington, D. C., December 1, 1906.

F. I. D. 46, as amended. Issued March 22, 1907.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY,
H. W. WILEY, Chief of Bureau.