In this connection I desire to state that the understanding of the trade respecting branding of food products is not one which should always guide the officials in charge of the pure-food law. The object of the law is the protection of the consumers particularly and not of the trade. The addition of the word “Hotel” to the word “Champignons” in no way describes the character of the product except to those who are initiated in the secrets of the trade. After all, the consumer is the one who suffers, as he eats the mushroom sauce, which is not made of mushrooms at all, and thus the deception is complete, although the purchaser may understand the character of the goods. It is extremely doubtful whether under the terms of the law such goods would be entitled to importation under any name, as they certainly are not to be considered as edible. They should bear the label “FRAGMENTS AND SCRAPS FROM MUSHROOM CANNERY,” or “CHAMPIGNONS, PIECES AND STEMS” in order to be properly described. I am not able to see why the patrons of hotels and restaurants should be subjected to a deception of this character. I beg to say, therefore, that your explanation does not satisfy me respecting the suitability of this invoice for entry.

(F. I. D. 20.)
STATEMENTS ON LABELS REGARDING HEALTH LAWS OF OTHER COUNTRIES.

May 17, 1905.

I beg to call your attention to a shipment of beans.... We note after the legend “COLORED WITH SULFATE OF COPPER” the additional legend “ACCORDING TO FRENCH HEALTH LAWS.” Inasmuch as the French laws do not apply to this country, the addition of this phrase is regarded as a complication of the labeling, having for its object to influence the consumer respecting the character of the added product. Inasmuch as the Congress of the United States has placed upon this Department the duty of deciding upon the wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of substances added to foods, we regard such a label as an attempt to forestall the judgment which this Department may render in accordance with the act of Congress above referred to. While in the present instance we would not consider the addition of the second legend as a cause for rejecting the articles, your attention is called to the undesirability of any such statement appearing upon the label, and it is suggested that in the future it be omitted.

Attention is further called to the fact that in so far as we can discover by a study of the French laws there are no regulations therein respecting the addition of sulfate of copper to food products. In this respect, therefore, the second phrase, “ACCORDING TO FRENCH HEALTH LAWS,” must be considered as a misstatement. It may be that the addition of copper is not forbidden by the French law, but we do not believe it is added under any regulations thereof. It will be decidedly advisable to omit the phrase.

(F. I. D. 21.)
RELABELING IMPORTED FOOD PRODUCTS AFTER ARRIVAL IN THIS COUNTRY.

May 26, 1905.

The purpose of the law in regard to labeling is clear, namely, that the labels should be properly attached at the time of packing the goods. Should exceptions be made to this principle and importers be allowed to relabel goods offered for import after inspection and refusal of entry, it would be impossible to secure a proper compliance with the terms of the law. Manufacturers and exporters in other countries and importers in this country would prefer in these cases to import the goods as usually labeled and thus, if the invoices were not inspected, they would enter without delay. If, on the other hand, the invoices were inspected they would feel that they could then exercise the privilege of relabeling. A courtesy of this kind to one importer would necessarily be extended to all, and for this reason a proper compliance with the purpose of the law would not be secured. The request for permission to relabel is therefore denied.

(F. I. D. 22.)
ILLEGIBLE OR CONCEALED LEGENDS ON LABELS.

May 29, 1905.