FDA History 07
Home |
|
HISTORY OF A CRIME AGAINST
THE FOOD LAW
CHAPTER VII: ATTITUDE OF ROOSEVELT
by Harvey W. Wiley, M.D., the very
first commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), then known
as the “US Bureau of Chemistry.”
Absurdum est ut alios regat, qui seipsum
regire nescit.
"The world has a sure chemistry, by
which it extracts what is excellent in its children, and lets fall the
infirmIties and limitations of the grandest mind."
Emerson, Essay on Swedenborg.
IN EARLY DAYS
In the early days of the
enforcement of the food and drugs act great
encouragement was given, due to the soundness
of President Roosevelt's views as
to what is whisky. On the other hand the
temporary support of the harmfulness of
benzoate of soda, which lasted for only
a few minutes, was then entirely
abandoned. There was another incident
which led me to believe that the President
thought the Bureau of Chemistry was entirely
too radical in its efforts to carry
out the provisions of the law under the
mandates which the law gave it. Of
course the Bureau simply tried to do,
to the best of its ability, the duties
imposed upon it by the law. All the Bureau
of Chemistry could do was to serve as
a grand jury. Any indictments it might
bring could only be reported to the
Department of Justice and could only be
ratified by the decision of the Court.
Soon after the law went into effect I
was called to the White House by the
President and directed to bring with me
Mr. Harrison, the chemist in charge of
the New Orleans laboratory. At the appointed
time Mr Harrison had not arrived,
due to a failure of the Southern Railway
to reach Washington on time. I
therefore went to the President's office
alone. On my arrival I found the
President in rather an ugly mood. The
French Ambassador had complained to him
that a shipment of vinegar from France
to New Orleans had been refused admission
because of a cluster of grape vines hanging
full of grapes portrayed upon the
label. The analysis had disclosed that
the vinegar in question was not sour
wine, as both name and label indicated,
but was an artificial vinegar made by
passing dilute alcohol, presumably distilled
from beet sugar molasses, over
beech shavings. The shipment was ordered
returned to France, with the
instructions that the grapes should be
removed from the label. This was done but
the grapevine was left. The shipment a
second time reached New Orleans,
whereupon I instructed Mr. Harrison to
send it back as the grapevine was just as
indicative that the vinegar was made of
sour wine as were the grapes themselves.
On reaching the President's office and
explaining why young Harrison had not
accompanied me, he said very sternly:
"The Food Law
is an excellent measure, but it should be administered with
some discretion. Full particulars
in regard to the proper branding should have
been furnished at once."
Explaining as best I could
to the President I quoted the very words of the
law itself, namely that an article was
misbranded if the label bore any design
or device or statement which was false
or misleading in any particular, that as
the executive officer I had no choice
in the matter, but my only purpose was to
execute the law as it was written. The
scowl on the President's died away and a
rather benignant smile took its place.
He grasped my hand cordially and said:
" If the French
Ambassador bothers you again in matters of this kind tell
him to go to Hades."
Inasmuch as I valued my friendship
for the French Ambassador and his for me
very highly, I am certain that no one
would have expected me to use any such
language in any subsequent protest made
from the French embassy in regard to the
exclusion of French products from this
country under the law. Nevertheless, this
incident increased the feeling in my own
mind that the President was not
entirely in sympathy with a rigid enforcement
of the food and drugs act.
He evidently felt that the
Congress had made a great mistake in placing the
execution of the law in the Bureau of
Chemistry. Mr. Loeb, private secretary to
President Roosevelt, was strongly impressed
that the President considered the
Chief of the Bureau entirely too radical
in his views concerning the harmfulness
of preservatives. He thought the Chief
of the Bureau was lacking in diplomatic
discretion. The President was undoubtedly
still of the opinion that an underling
who had the temerity to appear before
a Congressional committee and denounce a
presidential policy on reciprocity had
few, if any, redeeming traits.
ROOSEVELT FAVORED LEGISLATION
During the progress of the
campaign for pure food legislation, and especially
during the last one or two years when
apparently public sentiment was
sufficiently aroused and unanimous to
warrant the expectation of a speedy
successful issue, I felt that President
Roosevelt was heartily in favor of this
legislation. The appearance in 1906 of
Upton Sinclair Is novel entitled "The
Jungle," brought public opinion to the
pitch of indignant excitement. President
Roosevelt was eagerly in quest of a law
supervising the packing of our animal
food products. The time of the session
was so nearly at an end, that it seemed
hopeless to bring in a meat inspection
bill as an expansion of the food and
drugs bill. It was deemed best, therefore,
to try to engraft the meat inspection
bill as a rider on the agricultural appropriation
measure. I am not aware
whether at that period it was a violation
of the rules to introduce legislation
on an appropriation bill; at the present
time it is. At any rate, a rider
satisfactory to the President was offered
to the appropriation bill in the House
of Representatives. It was not adopted,
however, except after serious mutilation
of the measure. The chairman of the House
Committee on Agriculture, Mr.
Wadsworth, thought the offered measure
was too drastic and uncalled for by those
engaged in our meat industry. President
Roosevelt was greatly disturbed at the
changes made in the measure, but was powerless
to prevent such modification as
the House Committee on Agriculture thought
desirable. It is not quite certain
whether the Agricultural Appropriation
Bill carrying these meat inspection
provisions became a law prior to, or subsequent
to the food and drugs act. Only
a search of official documents could determine
this fact. Nevertheless, it is a
matter of some importance, for if the
appropriation of the Department of
Agriculture was approved subsequent to
the approval of the food and drugs act,
any disagreements between the two acts
would be construed by the courts in favor
of the later bill. In point of fact, no
effort whatever was made by the Bureau
of Chemistry to enforce any provisions
of the meat inspection law. The reason
for mentioning these matters here is because
President Roosevelt's intense
interest in the meat inspection bill seemed
to obscure, at least for the time
being, any interest he had in the food
and drugs act.
I had the good fortune to
know somewhat intimately two or three of the
newspaper men who had the ear of the President
and I learned from them that the
President's interest in the food and drugs
act was genuine and unreserved.
Particularly I knew well Harry Needham,
intimate associate of the President. Mr.
Needham subsequently met an untimely death
in an accident in an aeroplane in
Paris. As was recited in the chapter on
"What is Whisky," I learned from Mr.
William Loeb, the President's private
secretary, his great interest in that
matter. This was subsequent to the passage
of the food and drugs act.
I had close relations also
to two other men who had more or less free access
to President Roosevelt. These were Mr.
Mark Sullivan and Mr. Robert M. Allen. I
have secured interesting data from each
of these gentlemen in regard to
President Roosevelt's interest in the
passage of the pure food bill. Mr. Allen
has furnished me with the following data,
which I have permission to quote. he
says:
"I do not believe
that President Roosevelt had shown any interest in the
pure food law prior to 1905. 1
feel without any doubt that Roosevelt sincerely
and earnestly supported the passage
of the act after his message to Congress
in December, 1905. When he took
this stand it was characteristic of him to
back it. Hapgood, Sullivan, Needham,
and Gilson Gardner were close to the
President, as was also Dr. Abbott,
editor of The Outlook.
"The White House
had a strong influence on their activities for the bill.
Needham told the Dalzell story
at the time it happened. If it is true, and I
believe it was true, Roosevelt's
statement to Cannon that he would call
Congress into extra session if
they did not pass the food bill, was one of the
decisive factors in bringing the
bill to a vote in the House. There are so
many people, like the writers that
I have mentioned, so earnest in their
feeling that Roosevelt strongly
supported the passage of the Act from the fall
of 1905, that I do not want you
to make any mistake in this matter in your
memoirs. You have a big and important
message to get over. The country needs
it."
I have the following statement
from Mr. Mark Sullivan, also :
"I cannot say
that I have any positive recollection of ever having
discussed the pure food bill specifically
with President Roosevelt. I did
discuss it very often with Harry
Needham and with R. M. Allen. I also did
discuss it occasionally with yourself,
as you will remember. Based on my
recollections of conversations
I had with Needham and Allen, my strong belief
is that Roosevelt not only believed
in the Pure Food Bill but was energetic in
getting it passed. It is true that
the pure food bill.and the railroad rate
bill were before Congress during
the same session. I think it possible, or
even likely, that Roosevelt's major
interest was in the railroad rate bill,
because at the time that was the
great controversy; but I have recently been
over the records sufficiently to
show that Roosevelt gave powerful aid to the
pure food bill."
Mr, Sullivan then discusses
another overlapping and supplemental measure, the
meat inspection bill.
To continue the quotation:
"That Roosevelt
threw immense energy into the meat inspection rider there
can be no doubt whatever. In effect
the one went with the other. Roosevelt's
pressure for the meat inspection
bill is proved by scores of documents and
publications in old newspaper files.
The two bills, the pure food bill and the
meat inspection rider, went through
the lower house substantially on identical
dates. Everybody thought of the
two as one."
To this I wish to add my
own recollection and impression at the time. I was
fully convinced that although Mr. Roosevelt
came into action late in the fray he
was enthusiastic and earnest in his support
of the pure food and drugs act. It
was not until nearly five years later
that I had any intimation whatever that I
was wrong in this opinion. I did feel
that I was under a serious handicap at the
White House by reason of my opposition
to Cuban reciprocity.
HON. JAMES R. MANN
Leader in the House of Representatives
for the enforcement of the Food Law
Two important statements were
made to me in 1912, after my resignation from
the Bureau of Chemistry. Mr. James R.
Mann, leader of the final fight in the
House for the food bill, thought the President
not only was indifferent about
the matter, but considered the measure
the work of impractical cranks. Mr.
Roosevelt made a similar statement in
a letter published in a Kansas paper at
that time. Senator Heyburn, who led the
final fight in the Senat% showed me a
letter written to him by Mr. Roosevelt
while the bill was under discussion,
begging him to cease his efforts for such
an impractical measure, and aid him in
passing a bill to restore to the Naval
Academy three students who had been
dismissed for drunkenness. Even if it
be granted that the President favored the
food bill, it is perfectly clear that
he took the most active part in pre
venting the Bureau of Chemistry from enforcing
it.
ORIGIN OF THE WHITE HOUSE PREJUDICE
The prejudice which the President
had against the Chief of the Bureau of
Chemistry was most pronounced. It arose
early in his administration when he was
urging Congress to pass the law remitting
part of the duties on imported sugar
coming into this country from Cuba. I
have no desire to criticize the President
for his attitude in this matter. At that
time the planter and manufacturer of
sugar in Cuba scarcely got a cent a pound
on his product. All the nations of
Europe producing beet sugar were paying
large bounties on beet sugar when it was
exported. The result was that practically
all the sugar consumed by Great
Britain, which was one of the great sugar
consuming countries of the world was
cheapened by bounties paid by France,
Germany, Belgium, Russia and Austria on
exported beet sugar. Sugar was so cheap
in London that the makers of cane sugar
in the West Indies had lost the greater
part of their trade. At the time (1902)
the United States was considering the
subject of a rebate of import duties on
sugar to Cuban planters a congress called
by beet-sugar producing countries in
Europe was sitting in Brussels considering
the question of abolishing export
duties on beet sugar. Sereno E. Payne
of New York was chairman of the House
Committee on Ways and Means before which
the question of rebate on Cuban sugar
was under consideration. I was very much
embarrassed on receiving a summons to
appear before that committee. I had no
sympathy with the proposed legislation. I
had devoted many years of study to the
domestic sugar problem, in investigating
the possibilities of extending our domestic
production from sorghum, sugar beets
and sugar cane. I was naturally a high
protectionist on sugars imported from
abroad. I went to the Secretary of Agriculture
and explained to him that I was
opposed to this legislation but that I
did not want to appear in opposition to
the President's plan. I asked him to communicate
with Chairman Payne and have
him withdraw the summons. The Secretary
said:
I am just as
much opposed to this legislation as you are but being a member
of the President's cabinet I can
not say anything; I think the committee ought
to know the truth about this matter.
(Quoted from memory.)
I replied that I also thought
they ought to know the truth, but that I didn't
see any difference between his telling
them the truth and 1, who was only one of
his assistants. The result was, however,
that I had to appear before the
committee. I was two days in giving them
the data which to my mind clearly
disclosed that the trouble in Cuba was
not due to our import tax, but to the
giving of bounties in Europe on exported
beet sugar. I quote from the hearings
of the Ways and Means Committee.
"It follows as
a logical conclusion, therefore, that the people who come to
this committee for relief from
the low price of sugar should strike at the
true cause, not the false one,
of the evil of which they complain. * * * Their
cause should be pleaded in the
Parliaments of Europe, not in that of America;
their plaints should go before
the Reichstadt, Bundesrath, and the Corps
Legslatif, and not before the American
Congress. The place to plead their
cause is before the Congress of
Brussels, not before the Ways and Means
Committee of the Congress of the
United States. "
RECIPROCITY WITH CUBA
THE COLLOQUY WHICH UNDID ME
(Hearings Before Committee
on Ways and Means, Fifty-Seventh Congress, First
Session, Wed., January 29, 1902, Page
572)
MR. RICHARDSON: You have
read the report of the Secretary of War?
DR. WILEY: Yes, Sir.
MR. RICHARDSON: And the recommendation
of the President?
DR. WILEY: Yes, Sir.
MR. RICHARDSON: And General
Wood?
DR. WILEY: I have not read
that, but I have heard of it. I have read the
other two, however.
MR. RICHARDSON: You do not
agree with them in the recommendations in respect
to the treatment of Cuba on this question?
DR. WILEY: I do not.
MR. RICHARDSON: I ask you
this, doctor, for this reason: Do you contemplate
remaining in the Agricultural Department?
Is that your ideal (Laughter.)
You need not answer if you
do not wish. I ask simply because I have heard
that you did not.
THE CHAIRMAN: You need not
answer that question, doctor.
MR. RICHARDSON: Not unless
he wishes to.
MR. HOPKINS: I do not think
that is proper.
MR. RICHARDSON: I do not
want him to answer it unless he is willing to do so.
MR. ROBERTSON: That has not
anything to do with the case.
MR. RICHARDSON: The object
of my question is just this, Mr. Chairman, as I am
frank to state, and he need not answer
it if he does not wish to do so: I have
understood that the doctor contemplated
leaving the Agricultural Department and
going into the sugar-beet industry. Whether
that is true or not I do not know.
DR. WILEY: It is the very
first I have heard of it. (Laughter.) Mr. Chairman,
it is the first intimation of the kind
I have ever had. I thought the gentleman
implied that I would be removed because
I did not agree with the Secretary or
the President. (Laughter.)
As I left the committee room,
a famous artist, Mr, Augustus C. Heaton, who
had been in attendance, handed me the
following rhyme:
"A chemist both learned and witty
Came before a sugar committee,
And O such statistics and learned
linguistics
He poured upon Recipro-city."
As it turned out it was no
laughing matter.
The result of my testimony
was what I had anticipated. President Roosevelt
was furiously angry. He sent at once for
Secretary Wilson and ordered him to
dismiss immediately that man Wiley. The
Secretary pleaded for my life,
explaining that I did not go up there
willingly, but had earnestly tried to have
my subpoena recalled. The President relented
and said to let it go this time,
but to tell Wiley never to do Such a thing
again. The result was that I never
was a favorite at the White House as long
as Roosevelt was president. I was not
surprised, therefore, to find that he
took the lead in so limiting the
activities of the Bureau of Chemistry
as to deprive the Chief of that Bureau
from performing the functions placed upon
him under the law.
|