# Transcript of Record — Chicago v. Fieldcrest Dairies, Inc. > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386403_0017%3A01 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Transcript of Record - **Published:** January 1, 1942 - **Citation:** 316 U.S. 168 ## Text ‘ TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD « : : Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 191 : a p | sa CITY OF CHICAGO, A- MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO, - KT AL., PETITIONERS, “Us. FIELDCREST DAIRIES, INC. “. . ° ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT "OF APPEALS FOR THE. SEVENTH. CIRCUIT PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FILED OCTOBER 20, 1941. CERTIORARI GRANTED NOVEMBER 24; 1941. ae Oe MMC ME ee Supreme Court of the United States S Fis a Ocrosss Tanz, A: D. 1941. eo ae a) _ CITY OF. CHICAGO, (a Mowscurat: Cibtinugns), BOARD | ., OF HEALTH OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO,. DR. - “ROBERT A: BLACK, Hzattn ComMIssiONER AND Aor’ ING PREsmeENT ¢ oF Boanp | or HeattH or THE ‘Crry oF Cuicaco, ; | Sees: _- Petittoners, e vs. : - ¢ . ek FIELDOREST DAIRIES, (Inc.), | _ Respondent. ee . ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES. CIRCUIT couRT . {OF APFRALA FOS THD ENVENTE CIRCUIT. ~ —— —= —————— —— ) ° e A a ay, 4 + - Se Os ae . Moa. g ae Index to. Printed: theanea of Proceedings .in a 8. i) :. : District Court .............., Arvaqnasectcdssevss di i . Clerk’s Certificate to Volume 1 of Printed Record: ... “6088 2 Clerk’s Certificate to Volume 2 of Printed Record. . ..1224a 3 Clerk’s Certificate to Volume 3 of Printed Record. ... AT ; Index to Proceedings i in U. S, Court of f Appeals: aes Placita ...... Ore Pree Prine “reer C ibe bad 1781 Opinion by Major, J. filed Ang. 4, OURS cckon ess 1782 Dissent by Lindley, D. J..\.....:..... Ne siegesses shee. Decree, entered Aug. 4, sats EDL Aap we ces ages L797 Order staying Mandate, entered Aug. 23, 1941... .1798 _ Designation of: Record............ antewas eshte 1799 | - Clerk’s Certificate .......... pe yecweeevabovcses 1801 "Order allowing certiorari =. * ah ouee 1801 : Nee ' ; iy . ’ ba ° ‘ . ~ a . . . . F ‘ F . . Gg . . . . : : s & FS - ied = 5 ‘ - e q . e . ° : ¢° . Ad Z - ‘ . ‘ 2 * . . 4 . ~ o> - ’ » . *. . f\ ‘ ° 4s ° “ ‘ ’ : ° . . . * & . * bad * . y . 6 ‘ 7 o ° ew . . . prs : . ~ ‘ o . a > . “ e m ? * ) ‘ ; : é o * ¢ ad . s . - —— \ INDEX. Placita ........ ccauess cubes Rei i eee Complaint filed February 2, 1939 .............. err 2 -- Answer filed February 27, 1939........c.... 08005 16 Exhibit A—Reprint of the Mayor Kelly Milk Ordi- _ Nance passed hed City Council J anuary 4, 1935, . tp ORR sith enc teidscckakive Cusstesanerismesess 23° Order referring cause to Master, ehtéred May 12, 1939 123 Notice as to stipulation, filed May 25, 1939........... 124 Order approving stipulation, entered May 25, 1939... .125 © Stipulation as to experiments, etc. ..... wereeeee 125 © Stipulation regarding tests requested by City of Chi-° cago pursuant to stipulation filed June 29, 1939.... 127° Order. approving stipulation with reapect to tests, en- tered June 29, 1939... coknen sakehenkn eee an ete "TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY. Statement by Mr. Schaefer........+...... Swetapace- Eee Statement by Mr. Gariepy..........5.. 06... c cee eee es 135, Colloquy . 137, 155, 226, 373, 687, 849, 854, 880, 893, 1231, 1271 PLAINTIFF’s Whrivuabes. ee eee reese. ‘hikeeesunak 610, 1245 Bergman, Frank H.- ................ \neeteeteeeees 939 _Bunta, Mee eer eter bites ON Seek 857, 891 “Carpenter, A. E. (deposition of). .... atnbiveticksiten 1385 ‘Davis, David J. ......... Fe Re a Tal Eanes ‘scene PE Mg Sites ck eivepeeneads 840, 888, 938, 960° . Faust, Ey R. PeOeSGh cavbasnsad ccna wehawee ents reory ,862 . no ee REEF BENE UR TT euaaul 306, 534 iii veces 1 6 cs Wot pare Oe MG: Vol pee 1 Oy ? & ‘ é : - ii Huber, Philip a ee Fy Geeee Les ankse vee OT Johnston, Florence (deposition of). See er Kasper, Charles J. ................05. eet aiey 360, 372: Keyser, Paul ¥., Jr. (deposition WEN ci jixciweds ao» 1884 King, Bruce ......2.....3....000% Borer iavetecceee. 2 ie, Tee WE no a crn cies 440 ‘Martinek, Matthew J. ..... SP ge a: Arene Ee: oss McNally, William D............. Wordetvecuaens 1251, 1276 ~ ‘Ovvis, Howard .....:....0506:. Perr Ol ee Sh See | Packer, Herbert M. ( deposition of) ae epee z +1355 Peterson, Howard R. ......:. cree rere ... +. -942, 966 Pracha, PEEGIE OE o's gatas s vob ice biwcesss .....:624, 700 Sanborn, John Raymond .......... pen aaa ores 144 re I Be oii oioa ss 9s chaste eens ees. : 612 ‘Stern, Mortimer E.. RG pe ee as a pe oe en ae .. 364 ~~ Taylor, Clinton L. cy bs oaRh wane ea sasneoene 546, 607 PG, TT, oi ies Ske sees sep eas visveeenss eae _Tracy, Paul Hubert ....,........:. Sisoies kaa se I, ee 5h es shaw ap cee ch thcgienes eee 1302 7) NE EA ok xp can dete ao Se ates Veco ae 847 . Woodman, M. J. Si eee pared y ita: Oak Areas Ge Ui ius eae 672 _«. * Yunker; Elkan H. (deposition 5 Rene erate o ee ..1877 Stipulation: ...... Sue Lee VR oaeSY AINE Sy DD waves 689 ; _ Master’s Wrrwess | is, Se es ok Se he a eae bakes a DEFENDANT’S WITNESSES. ; nN RR ae ef eee re peer 1061 Black, Robert A.............. *% RE a ante bed 1225 Bundesen, Herman N. ....... Rha 28 ays Tes Pit 1206 a PPE Cert OATES» Mewweer. Peel F. i... ccficesicacs..: Cocugacinvacey ae ol. X pages 1 to 608; Wol. IX pages 609 to 1294; Wol. ITZ pages 1285 to. a ee ee teen eee Tee bol = = we a - ms ili Pi aes * iartinet, ‘Matthew J. isewee be eeeas eeeuyhen saunas . 1001 Mowter, Memeet so... 5.2 00s laces oo ae Reynolds, Harry J: .....¢........... skbes sis kes ce ‘Rudig, Delmar M. ...... peer e a Pree esy * Tonney, Fred O. ..... anion rrr Aeiiulabicaesine ..1001 Report of Conference with Master........ Poe e cs toes che . Report of Discussion with Master................. :1328 oe = ° ; - ; 4 , PLAINTIFF ’s Exnmrrs No. 4—Report of Dr. Arnold, Dec. 4, 1937, ete... ..1397 No. 5—Letter Nov. 27, 1906-—Packer to Silver Seal : Dairy Products Me, iccewen kek. 1471 No. 6—Letter Nov--28, 1936—Sullivan to Fuller... °4471 | ‘No. 7—Letter. Nov. 30, 1936—Foote. to Fuller... ..'.1472 No. Letter Dee. 1, 1936—Moffett to Silver Seal Dairy Products Co. pe eee eae, | No. -10—Letter Dec. 2,. . 196i. to. Silver Seal tT asco e bees oeRRREOEE eb eyes tees 1474 No..11—Letter Jan. 5, 1937—Williams to Fuller..... .1474 No. 12—Article “Sanitation of Paper Milk Con- , SE ons sc ve panteenas coven cus SPAR No. 13—Photograph of pint glass milk bottles and poe ee Ea CRE MeR ONT N Ty Si 1493 No.14—Photogtaph of quart glass milk bottles. 26.4 1495 No.. 15A—Photographs from: opr heene literatnre of eee Ex-cell-O Corporation ........,........0000% 1498 ‘No. 16—Article “Single Servicé Containers for Milk . A we | gee OP ere erert reer 1503 No. 17—Article. ‘Reasonable Sanitary sapaaccece for oe: Paper Pe ee a a 2 ASOT No.18—Article ‘“When are Milk Containers and ihetty. , ment Clean and Sterile’ ................. 1514 ' No. 19—Report of second conference on Sanitation of Paper Milk Containers, Ete. iecuoaw scutes . epee” = Damen 1 te CUB; Ves. EF pabes CFD te INE; ‘Vel. EEE pages 3888, to - ‘ 4©O S . gle eee ee | _ Article Paine Ciitiaiini for Milk; Prin- a ‘ciples of Sanitation to be observed in .. their Manufacture and Use’’............ 1525 No. 21—Article ‘‘Proposed Standards for Paper Milk. ATT OR EE TOE POTTS VOCE TS Fives 1534 No. 22—Article ‘‘Sanitary Problems in Connection: with Paper Containers for Milk’’.:..... ...1540- No. 23—Letter Feb. 18, 1939—Sanborn to Ewing.. : .1545 No. 24—List of cities using paper milk containers, SN, Se Ns » pa din cee ep ieee lemnuse "1546 No. 25—Letter Nov. 14, 1938—Sanborn to Dwyer... .1548 No. 23—Photograpki of printing press feed—Gardner. ; Richardson Co. ........... i A ALS Poy egiry ee .1549 No. 34—Photograph of carton blanks ready for glu- eee ere ereeee: 1551 No. 35—Photograph of carton blanks ready . for. ship- ping ...:. hin Senne beh 62-4 SK ae seereess ecae No. 36—Photograph of blank ready for gluing, capped. 1555 _No. 37—Photograph of carton blanks printed ‘and ready aA cS ec cha sy chews bb ee bee's « 1557 No. 38—Photograph of finished vata in flat form be packed for shipment .............. piewbe vs 1559 No. 39—Sheets headed ‘‘Samples of Milk Bottle Car- ; tons,’’ tests by Harry C. Fisher............ 1561 No. 42—-Photograph — Model in the Soaker Bottle : 5 , Washer REGU N SEN NGUN SAL ESAS TDR hE bee *-1563 No. 44—Photograph of paper bottle and glass bottle filled with milk at 15 degrees below zero...... 1565 = No. 45—Letter June 23; 1939—Hoffman to Gariepy. . 1567 No. 46—‘‘Study on Self-Purification of Paper’’.... .1572 No. 47—“‘Bacterial Condition of Pure-Pak © Con- NE 8s ors ee nar kala dv ekeae Nes so wre oe %1573 No, 47A—‘Bacterial Condition of Pure-Pak Paraffined Container as revealed by ‘Four Different - Methods” .... 282.502... c cee ge erect sewees LBT4 Vol. I pages 1 to 608; Vol. IZ pages 609 to 1854; Wol. EIT pages 1285 to avTT. f 5 ‘ ¢ @ ie sae i op ih eA No. 48—‘‘ Bacterial Condition of washed and sterilized eactn bottles in two plants in Chicago’’........ . 1575 No. 49—‘‘ Bacterial Condition: of 132 Pure-Pak paraf- ; fined containers from eleven different milk — ee TEER CTT ST Te Tee TT TSE ETT be No. 50—‘Study on the Bacteriological Condition of ee Paraffin. Bath in Pure-Pak Machine’. ss .1576 No. 52—‘‘Contamination of Milk by Pure-Pak Machine where practically sterile milk was bottled’’..1579 . No. 53—‘Number of Bacteria Enmeshed in the Pa- . per used for Dairy Products” ............. .1580 - No. 54—‘‘Bacteriological Condition — of Paper Milk Bis | : Containers before being Paraffined’’ eae 6 . sue. * _ No. 55—‘‘Baé¢terial Contamination of Milk by the pour- ¢ ing lips of Glass Bottles’’..... SSPE Se 1582 No. 56—‘‘Number of Bacteria on and in Paper for . - Pure-Pak Container Pouring Lip’’........ 1583 No. 57—‘‘Bacterial Contamination of Milk by the ,. Pouring Lip of Pure-Pak ‘Containers’’...... 1584 — No. 58—‘‘ Ef ‘ect of Paraffining on Bacteria when con- tainers: were inoculated before Paraffining’’. .1586 No. 59—‘‘Bacterial counts of 50 glass bottles. and 50 : Pore-Pak Containers’? ..............:... -. .1587 No. 60—‘‘Bacterial Condition of Adhesives used in © Ue MN on aise eae 1588 No. 61—Letter Sept. 12, 1939, Fuchs to Rall........ 1589 ‘‘Public Health a. Sanitation Advisory ° Board Acti Single- Service Contain- I Na ot er iks ce cc de sccdes si "1590 No. 62—‘‘Sanitary Aspee s of ‘Paper Milk Con- EE occ OER La A 5S cab hacer Ve Soi ee pene 71591 No. 63—‘ Are Paper Milk Guabiieets Sanitary?””.. .1600 No. 64—Certificate of Incorporation of: Fieldcrest | Dairies, EE EE See ree . Trenh & pages 1 to €08; Vol. II pages 609 to 1994; Vol. TIX pages 1925 to . ae E I I Bo oie acce cin acs 1613 No. 66—Photograph of two trucks containing erated - : IE SN So Soa c dcauea centackaeeen 1619 « No. 67—Photograph of truck containing milk bottle ON cys a was Die cee 4 REG NwAE WERE ea cecnne 1621 No. 68—Photograph of send containing milk bottle GE ssa Seo has donde bese ie kee 1623 No 69—Photograph of Blue Island Bottle Co. build- WR ss 4 6 sens Sieben ss eek Pe 1625 No. 70—Photogiaph of two trucks which crates con- Ole SI SIN sss bins cca 1627 No. 71—Photograph of truck coftaining ‘milk. bottle crates with crated bottles in shed in back- ground’...:..... SPE ewe eh WD Die GA ee -, 1629 _. No. 72—Photograph of crate with RES milk bottles - . +g? WN CNG OW dati ss gabe oa ee ae No. 73-—Photograph of milk bottle at laboratory with w i De Oh PU sree NT Peet a ore pee 1633 . No. -74—Photograph of Solored : ‘man with milk bottle 5 at junk yard 2048 W. Lake Street Ltuyeeeees 1635 No. 75—Photograph of close-up of bottles in front of aks. S068: W Tike Fs ies oss 1637 No. 76—Photograph of empty bottle in- Illinois Cen- : OT UNE foe ts 5.0 0s 55 es as ceeds vees 1639 No. 77—Photograph of junk yard employees loading empty bottles into a. milk bottle crate ...... 1641 © 9 No. 78—Photograph of rgjlk bottle at County Morgue.1643 No. 79—Photograph of push cart man placing empty ia Oe OIE: ON: GRE ins oes wo aac awcestaes 1645 _No. 80—Photograph of E. R. Faust in front of ‘filled Pas. milk bottle crates in junk yard.............. 1647 No. "81—Photograph of man at quarry dump picking — es ~ Vi _No. 65—Certificaté to Ao business in Illinois of Field- up milk. bottle EN ey ye ane ee a 1649 Vol. I pages 1 to 608; Vol. IX pages 609 to 1224; Vol. IIT pages 1225 to 1777. ‘ “ li . Py 4 S? 4 Pa ee wie . sk) Meta Hid of tn Boasts, ei ae aaa 9 sks beet ei ls li A . is tae gh ay 7 ont aia aa ea ° ‘ . * No. No, 83—-Letter Dee. 17, 1937, Arnold to Scott........1651 84—Letter Arnold to Scott. .-. Pee cetethinesawae 1652 . 85—Letter Nov. 12, 1937, Fuchs to Dean, Jr....1656 ° . 86—Letter Nov. 26, 1937, Frank-to Dean, Jr. ....:. 1657 © _ 87—Letter Feb. 7, 1938, Arnold to Scott....... 41658 . 88—‘‘Arnold’s suggestions to Board of Heath Mig MSO ick so ssaesa sti beaxa cane 658° . 89—Letter Oct. 6, 1939, Dashiell to Bundesen. . .1661 ; 92—Letter Sept. 16, 1939, Fuchs to Scott.... . ++ 1662 Derenpant’s ExyIsits. | and 1B—List of questions by Rall submitted to Carpenter~before his deposition, etc. ...... 1663 . 1A—Index- card containing notes of Carpenter. .1664 2—' Microbiology in = and er a UNE acasesaces dg iesbhencbesauab cb anvens 1665 7—‘‘Number of bacteria. enmeshed in the body OE Te SE Sok aokksnsae ce seowanhexsnat 1671 8—Sample receipt stub Board of Health, Bureau Of Daisy: POGGIO. . 564. oe deevceses . 1672 9—Laboratory, card used in bacteriological oan chemical examination of a by Board of RR BO eh ee oes: eee: , 10—Tabulation of bacterial ‘itaih: of empty milk bottles examined - -by Board of Health,: Fe een pe aR ean, ee MON ae 1674 . 11—Record ‘of bacterial content of pan 1 quart milk bottles examinéd by Board of Health, ete. 1674 | . 12—Sample.as exhibit 11, — ‘being tabulation of pint bottles ...... SESE T PTE eee .1675 . 13—Same as exhibit 11, uae: being for 4 quart bottles Riaend See tes ved -Renerernwen lies babi 1675 . 15—Tabulation of iheitiane: record cards show- ’ ing violations but sizeof bottle unclassified. . 1676 sr¥ii F Deeee 1 Wo G00; Vol. HF pages 09 to 106; Vol. HIE pages 1888 to - eee 27333 - = : Viit : — t= No. 16—Section 10, U. S. Public. Health Se ice stand- '. ard milk ordinance ...... ney Mey si . No. 17—Copy of section 10, of Public ‘Health Serv- ‘jee milk 6rdinance ‘as amended June, 1939...1678 = ‘No. 18—Tabulation of samples of empty milk bottles Tad and results of bacteriological en, ee GU ovks vance scccuhackpecusseekesh eure ia 1679 7 No. 19—Tabulation showing results of parafin experi- “ IE 6 nad kaks onde dnb cue eetab ences 1687 Pe No. 20—Report of tests using wet ont dry plaques 2 after being run through paraffin bath, ete. . .1689 « No. 21—Result of tests as in exhibit 20, but experi-. | aoe ments conducted at later time .............. 1691 4. ‘No. 22—Letter January 13, #936,. Dean Milk Co. to” | PN no sak sc txnnessans ee beeeaaweuee 1692. ‘No. 23—Letter August 2, 1938, Ex-Ce O Corp. to = MIN oo 0s bs osc i bigs eccaeuaeats ..1693 No. 25—Regulation adopted August 6, 1935 concern- = ‘ ing type of milk and cteam to be used i in man- . “ufacture of butter, ete. ...............000- 1695 - No. 26—Regulation adopted Nov. 12, 1935, requiring that milk and milk products be served and dispensed:..to consumer in origina) uno ned container as received from distributor... .1697 No. 27—Resolution adopted J uly 18, 1039, as to use of standard nutrient, agar, prescribed in ‘6th edition of American Public Health Associa-— tion ‘‘Stardard Methods of Milk Analysis’’. 1697 No. 29-—Resolution presented to Board of Health Oct. 16, 1939 with respect to single-servicé con- tainers'for milk ........... PARSE S ERED he. 1698: No. 30—Letter June 27, 1939, Ranan to Bundesen. .. .1705 : Ne 31—Excerpts from minutes of Board of Health ‘meeting May. be errr, Serer erie 1705 —— is Tet pewwe 1-0 cous Wel TF pages 600 to 1004; Vol. IT paeee 1008 avy. ee . ee . . Se ee en ee ee ee 5B meets! li ia . . aad — FOS Ly er ON Ee ee es a Tas - Objections to depositions filed April 27, 1940........1709 Master’s report filed April 27, 19402............. ..1710 Notice of objections filed May 7, 1940................ 1737 Objettions to Master’s report filed May 7, 1940.. . .1738 Notice of motion filed May 14, 1940......... rere. | 2.1750 . Motion for decree filed May 14, 1940:............ 1751 Order continuing motion for entry of decree entered : GLC LUC ceL itu sieuninGmoutvesyesoees ee Memorandum f%ed October 18, 1940...... gakuen’ 1752 * Findings of fact filed October 23, 1940.........:....1756 Conclusions of law filed October 23, 1940:.... ..B...1758 Decree entered October 23, 1940................5. . 1759 Master’s certificate: filed October 23, 1940........ . 1761 Notice of appeal filed Detober ae 1762 Statement of points filed: November 15, 1940........1763 Clerk’s certificate of service..................5. ve + 1765 - Appellant’s designation for short record. re (avsiwe ‘1766 Bond on appeal.............0cesiveccesicseneecenes 1767 Notice of motion (Ui vekaleunbweeunechaewnws oe ieee: . Motion for stay of va, filed October 24, 1940. ic: .’. Order denying stay of decree filed October 2A, 1940. ..1771 . Designation of record.............. aver ehvewbesecens 1772 Order re filing transcript. .........0.......0.s eee ee 1774 Gipuietion ae te COMMS. -..... «0.2. cece cokes. 1774 | Order as to exhibits ....................06 5 ots oe Clerk’s certificate ........ eGR RRas cake Laas oak bute 1776 Stipulation as to printing AUeRiGaybinas ene ccacek ous 1777 ~ ? SaFsE T Paeny 1 6 08s Wok pages e001 se lases Vol pases ines we 4 t a 2215 ~—Pleas in the District Court of the United States for piscita. _ the Northern District of: Illinois, Eastern Division, begun and held at the United States Court,Room, in the City of Chicago, in said District and. Division, before the Honorable Charles E. Woodward, District Judge of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois on | Twenty-third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and forty, being one of the days of the regular October Term of said Court, begun Monday, the Seventh day of Ogtober, and of our Independence the 165th year. oo : ys ~ Present: i ) © Honorgkle John P: Barnes, District Judge. Waiam H. McDonnell, U. S. Marshal. Hoyt King, Clerk. . i) ms ¥ ep _. duly organized and existing corporation under the laws of, ~ 2217 In THE District Court oF THE UNITED Sines, a 2 ¢ Complaint. 2216 An THe District Court oF THE Unrrep Srares - Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. Fieldcrest Dairies, (Inc.) ) -& . vs. : . Bar | of Chicago (a Municipal cor- ration), Board of Health of the Civ il Aetion. ity of Chicago, Dr. Robert A. ae No. 316. v. Black, Health Commissioner and Ss Acting. President of Board of Health of the City ef Chicago. J - -Be'lt Reincasbered, that the above- entitled action’ was commenced by the filing of the following Complaint in Chancery in the above-entitled cause, in the office of the © Clerk of the District Court of the United States for the ‘Northern District of Iilinois; Eastern Division, on this the Second day of February, a. as ->¢ “*.°* (Caption—316) * ° ‘COMPLAINT IN-CHANCERY FOR A ‘DECLARATORY -JUDGMENT—EQUITABLE RELIEF SOUGHT. To the Honorable Judges of the District Court of the United. States, Northern District of Milinois, Eastern Di- vision, in Chancery Sitting: 1. Plaintiff Fieldcrest Dairies, (Inc.)” ‘alleges that it is a the State of M ichigan, and that it is now duly authorized to, and is doing business in the State of Illinois by virtue of a petnnso~ so authorizing it to act and issued by the Secre- tary’of the State of Illinois on November 29, 1937; that . plaintiff was incorporated in the State of Michigan on November 5, 1937, and thereafter duly qualified to transact business in the State of Illinois on the date aforesaid. 2218 . 2. Plaintiff alleges that the amount in controversy | in this —- is in excess of Three en e Complaint. . eee Dollars, ($3,000.00); that the plaintiff is now mg | | daily large sums. of .money in the use of machinery and equipment for the bottling, packaging, sealing and: distri- bution of milk and milk products in ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non- . absorbent single service containers made of virgin spruce . material; that said 2 men are used in the distribution . of milk by the plain id in its sale of milk and milk a products in the County of Cook and in the cities and villages * a. hereinafter described; that said sale of milk and milk prod- “+ — uets is to retail stores and to a large number of consumers in said cities and villages hereinafter described. ° 3. Plaintiff furthéet alleges that it is now. doing business a in the State of Illinois and the purposes and objects for = which ‘it was organized and now exists are: to buy,’ sell, - ‘deal in, manufacture, process, cut, store and ship cream, = - milk, butter, cheese, ice cream, ice-cream mix, sugar, con-. ~ a -densed milk, powdered milk, evaporated: milk, malted milk, . 4 ‘ distilled ‘water, milk products and by-products, ice and all such other articles as may be necessary or may be con- 4 veniently used in connection with the aforesaid mentioned -- +y business or businesses ; to own, lease and manage, directly a or through subsidiaries, dairies and dairy farms, cream: eries and cheese factories, and conduct a general manufac- turing business; that said business is now being carried.on 4 in the vicinity of the City of Chicago by the plaintiff cor- — 3 .. poration and milk and milk products are being ‘sold and Ce. mers in force in said municipalities. : 4. Plaintiff further represents that the mil’ and milk. » products sold and distributed by. it are secufed bottled, © il - . + Complaint. pasteurized and packed at its plant and factory located seventy-six miles northwest of Chicago at Chemung, in McHenry County, in the Staté of Illinois; that said plant, equipment and pasteurization process have been approved by the State of Illinois and permit issued to the plaintiff on Meneses 17, 1938, and on J. a 18, 1939 renewed by the a State of Illinois under which plaintiff now pasteurizes, - bottles, packs and packages its milk and milk products for sale as aforesaid; that milk and milk — sold by the plaintiff are pasteurized, bottled, packed, packaged 2220 and ‘sealed by plaintiff at Chemung, Illinois, at the .. plant aforesaid, in single service containers known‘ and described as ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ which containers are of non- absorbent material; that milk of’ Grade ‘A quality, whipping and coffee cream, buttermilk, sour cream and chocolate milk are sold by the plaintiff in the cities and villages afore- said; that a true sample of said single service ‘‘ Pure-Pak’’ quart container of non-absorbent material in which said. milk is ‘bottled, packaged, sealed and sold to the public is — filed. with this Complaint with the Clerk of this Court and marked Exhibit ‘‘A’’ for identificatign and.made a part of this Complaint by reference thereto” Plaintiff alleges that — - all statements written on said container above-referred to are true in substance and in fact with regard to measure- ment, packaging, pasteurization, sealing, quality of contents and place of packaging ; that said container above described is sterile, sanitary and made of nen-absorbent material, in every respect with regard to manufacture, packaging, seal- ing, quality of virgin spruce material, and all other mate- rials used and entering into the manufacture of said con- | tainer and in its sale containing milk and milk products, complies with ‘all ordinanees and the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the City of Chicago. — 5. Plaintiff attaches thand incorpérates in this Com- plaint, a true copy of the ordinance of the City of Chicago, ‘known as ‘*Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance, Passed by the City Council January 4, 1935 and adopted January 8, 1935,”’ together with all amendments thereto, now in full force 2221 and effect ‘‘for'the establishment. of standards and requirements for milk and milk- products’’ by said -City of Chicago.and incorporates the same said ordinance as apart of this Complaint by reference thereto and said ordinance is identified as Exhibit ‘‘B.’’ 6. Plaintiff further alleges that said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non- absorbent single service container ‘excels all other milk con- © | o - | ie 4 er ots) Ea AR ac tae : action Sa els eh La ee mq . ¢ . . Complain. ce F 5 tainers in and for the protection of human life and for the preservation and protection of public health in the City of Chicago; that it is more economical to use and easy of handling in the use and sale and distribution of Grade A milk and’ milk products to the retail trade in said City | than metal and glass containers? and plaintiff further al- Jeges that said containers used by it daily,contain true and. correct measure and true and correct quality and quantity of milk and milk pro ontained therein, and that, said same measure, quality and quantity are identified and re- cited clearly on the sides of said container. 3 Siraee 7: Plaintiff further alleges that the machinery and. equipment used by it in the bottling, packaging, sealing and . pasteurization of milk.and milk products sold by it in the ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ single service, sterile, sanitary -and non- . absorbent container are such as to prevent any part of any - person or his or her clothing from coming im contact with any surface with which milk or milk products come in con- ' tact with in said proeess aforesaid; that said automatic an machinery used in said process of, bottling, sealing and . =~ packaging of said milk is of a design which does not é 2222 require frequent ‘adjustment during operation so as’ + : to expose milk to the danger of contamination and. all parts of said machinery and equipment can be readily - _ cleaned and are of such construction as to prevent any contamination reaching the inside of the bottler or any — part of said equipment; that all surfaces with which milk @ comes in contact are of smooth, nét readily corrodible. material and the,;same are very accessible for cleaning; . . that the sealing of}milk and milk products bottled and pack- _ aged and sealed in said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ container,is done by said:same automatic machinery and not by hand; that all employees coming! in contact with the milk, milk products and containers aforesaid, including the equipment, wear elean outer garments and’ maititain cleanliness at all times . while engaged in the bottling, packaging, sealing and pas- teurization of said milk‘and rfilk products sold by the plain- tiff; that all vehicles used by the plaintiff for the trans- portation of milk or milk products are completely enclosed and so constructed\and operated as to protect-the milk or milk products: from the sun and freezing and from conta- "mination ; that said vehicles are kept clean at all times and. no substance capable of contaminating milk. or milk prod- ucts is transported with milk or milk products in any such manner so as to permit contamination to exist. Plaintiff. pte eee v aan - he Co plaint. ~ Fu see Pe further alleges that all said vehicles used by it in the dis- tribution of milk or milk products bear its name as: dis- & tributor prominently displayed thereon. _.’ - 8. Plaintiff further alleges that the milk plant-and re- ceiving station at Chemung, Illinois, where its milk _ 2223 and milk prodacts:are bottled, packaged, sealed, pas-- teurized and made ready for sale has been inspected , and approved by the Board of Health of the City of Chi- cago, for the sale of Grade A milk and cream in the City of Chicago at wholesale; that said gt exists at this time - and permit for the sale of said milk,and milk products from -said plant, and of said plant is sh by Permit Number 1527 for said milk receiving station described therein ; that said permit was issued hy said above Board of Health and is in full force and effect at this time ‘and has been ex- tended to the plaintiff herein by the Board of Health of the City of Chicago, and said plant is being daily operated in: conformity with all the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the City of Chicago and all the provisions of _ said ordinance of-said City therein described; that under said permit, thousands of gallons of milk and milk. prod- ucts are now’being sold daily in the City of Chicago. _ 4 ~ 9. Plaintiff further alleges that in.excess of one million’ , ‘*Pure-Pak’’ single service non-absorbent containers are _ being used daily throughout the cities and villages in the United States, by and’ with the consent of their respective * boards of health and health commtigsioners, in the sale of - milk and mu products; that plaintiff at this time, is de- livering milk and milk ,products in. said same above de- scribed containers to several hundred consumers and_{o Te- tail dealers daily in said cities and villages heretofore de- ‘scribed and set forth-in Paragraph Two of this Complaint; | that said volume of business is in excess of Six Thousand Dollars . ($6,000.00) per month at the present time 2224 and said milk and milk products are being sold from and distributed ig: twelve sanitary refrigerated one and a half ton milk trucks, manufactured by International Harvester Company, and said trucks in every. respect com- ply with all the rules and regulations of fhe Board of .’ Health of the City of Chicago and ‘the provisions of the * ordinance hereinabove described in this Complaint. - 10. Plaintiff further alleges that said above. described’. ‘containers are standard milk bottles and standard milk ' containers; are used daily in large quantities of a million in the followjng cities in the United States: Detroit, Cleve- Ps 3g -* ~ : Complaint. binges 7 oN land, Washington, D. C., Toledo, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pa., New. York City, Baltimore, Trenton, N. J., Ardmore, Pa., Boston, Jersey City, N. J. San Fran- - cisco, City of Superior, ‘Wis.,“City of Wilmington, Del., fown of Montclair, N. J., and numerous other large cities ; iat said use of said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ container in said cities and states is, and has at/all times been, by and with the ~ consent and approval of the respective boards of health of said cities and states; that said use in said cities and states has. been, approved and permitted for several years past and the same hasghen ‘and is now without the slightest prej- udice or dang€r to the, health of the millions of users, and the ‘millions of purchasers and consumers of milk and milk - products sold in said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ containers in the cities = - and states aforesaid; that said sales and transactions in said cities and states aforesaid and throughout the United -_ States amount to more than One Hundred Thousand Dollars - ($100,000.00) per day and the money and property — e 2225 used and \nvested in said same machinery and equip- -ment useq@ in the bottling, packaging, sealing and pasteurization-of milk sold in ‘‘Puré-Pak’’ non-absorbent single service containers amounts to approximately Fiye, - Hundred Thousand. ($500,000.00) Dollars. 11. That said “above described containers are standard. ‘milk containers and are excellent for their use from a sani- tary standpoigt; that they are safe and sterile and prevent multiplicity of- handling. and use of the same eontainer | again; they are light for handling and safe and sanitary in sealing, pouring and in the retention of milk for use and consumption from day to day; that said container fully complies with the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the City: of Chicago and the provisions of ‘said ordinance descrjbed with regard to sealing, non-absorbent material, pasteurization and all. other provisions and sec- * tioris of said ordinange dealing with the handling and sale of milk and milk products at retail in the City of Chicago in quantities of less than one gallon; that piaintiff’s place of busiriess,. ats vehicles, methods and equipment used in the sale of-milk and milk products are in every respect - —Aanitary and fit for the uses and purposes of selling milk and milk products-to the public in the City of Chicago; that _ the same comply with the provisions of the ordinance of the City of Chicago, described: above, and the rules and .. regulations of the Board of Health of the City of Chicago . at this time. - — %. es sg a fe 4 o ° a > . Y 9 ere Complaint. | 12. Plaintiff alleges that on January 11th, May 27th and . June 2nd, 1937, requests and applications were made. 2226 to the President of and to the Board of Health of the. City of Chicago for and on behalf of plaintiff for per- mission and, license under said ordinance, licensing and allowing plaintiff to sellg of offer for sale, expose for sale, dispose of, exchange, or deliver, milk, or-milk products for human consumption in- said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non-absorbent: single service container; that said request and application | was made in writing on the days aforesaid and with it, | substantial and considerable statistical data from respon- sible and recognized, authorities on the subject, after due search and investigation, with regard to the safety and sanitary stérile and non-absorbent quality of said container and the same was‘submitted to and filed with. the Board of. Health of the City of Chicago for study, consideration, ex- amination and analysis so that said license and permit to sell milk and milk products might be issuéd to the plaintiff . by the aforesaid Board of Health; that applicatiog and re- quest on behalf of plaintiff was made to and of the Board of Health of the.Cit¥ of Chicago on January 23, 1939, for license and permission to be issued to the plaintiff for the sale of Grade A milk and milk products at wholesale in — the City of. Chicago from the plant hereinabove described ; that on, the 23rd day of January, 1939, plaintiff made re- of and application to the Board of Health of the ty of Chicago for a license or permit to sell milk of: Grade A quality together with milk products in the City of - Chicago and said application and request was made pur-. suant to and in @$nformity with all the. provisions of - 2297 the ordinances’ of ‘the City of Chicago and the rules and regulations of the Board of Health and the pro- . visions of said ‘‘Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance’’; that plain- - tiff delivered with said application a check.in the amcunt . of $60.00 payable.to the City Collector of the City of Chi- cago for said license ¢nd for use of its twelve.trucks to be used in the sale and distribution of milk by plaintiff ,in said containers in the City of Chicago; that plaintiff tend- _- ered submission of any and all other information and data _ Necessary and required or requested by the Board of Health _ of the City of Chicago for the issuance of said permit and license in order te be entitled to a permit or license under said ordinance #hd the rules and regulations of the Board of Health for the sale of Grade A milk and milk products - in said container in the City of Chicago; and plaintiff now Sate . Complaint. Be. stands, and has for a year past stood ready to furnish any and all further information and data requested or required by said Board of Health ‘and to satisfy it that gene is qualified and entifled to use said container in and applications aforesaid, plaintiff has not to date re- - eeivedvsaid license or.permit from the Board of Health of the City of Chicago,or the Heakh Commissioner of ‘the City of Chicago. ; 13. Plaintiff further alleges that it cin now sell Grade A - milk and milk products in said container in the City of Chicago at this time to retail storesefor consumers of milk - and milk products and plaintiff is now ready; _— 2228 and able, and desirous of using said containers in saic . City for the sale of Grade A milk and milk products in Baid container to a large number of stores and retail dealers and to the consumer public; that certain milk dis- | tributors are desirous and reagy to contract with plaintiff to buy from plaintiff.milk:and milk products in said con- tainer at Eight Cents ($.08) per quart; that the Board of Health of the City of Chicago, by Dr. Robert A. Black, acting Health Commissioner of the City of Chicago, after — ' réquest was again made, verbally refused permission: and consent to use said container in the City of Chicago on Jan- -uary 5, 1939; that.said defendants above described con- tinue to deny and refuse plairitiff permission to use said container; that said refusal is arbitrary, capricious, un- reasonable and unlawful, and as a result thereof, causes .. substantial financial damage to the plaintiff daily; and also does other irreparable injury to the plaintiff in an amount of;and in excess of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) at * this time; and said damages continue to increase daily with | said refusal. ; 14. Plaintiff further alleges that on the -5th day of No- - yvembér, 1936, request and application was made to the . - Board of Health of the City of Chicago, under the provi- sions of said ordinance for a license and permission to sell Grade A milk and milk prodtcts to be issued to plain- ’ tiff so that plaintiff would be permitted to use said ‘‘Pure- Pak’’ non-absorbent single service containers in the sale and distribution of Grade A milk and milk products in the City of Chicago; that on May 14, 1937 and to this . 2229 date plaintiff has been refused or denied a permit _ for its use and said denial continues daily; that said denial and refusal is, under the provisions of said ordi- e City of Chicago; and plaintiff further alleges that to said request — 7? is mY ee a 10 | Complaint. etn nance and the rules and regulations of said Board of Health with regard to the distribution and sale of milk and milk products by plaintiff in-the City of Chicago, un- ‘reasonable, capricious, discriminatory, invalid and in vio- lation of the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Illinois and the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America; that said refusal of said permit and license to the plaintiff by the Board. of Health of the City of Chicago’at this time is unlawful, unreasonable, capricious and without any basis from a health and sani- tary standpoint under the provisions of said ordinance ‘and the rules and regulations.of the Board of Health; that said refusal has, and does irreparable damage to the plain-»' tiff daily and has resulted in sub8tantial damages and re- sults in the taking -of plaintiff’s property without due process of law, to great damage of the plaintiff in the Joss of sales,. profits, trade, customers, valuable contracts, and the loss of gains from the sale of milk and milk products’ in said City of Chicago. daily. -15. Plaintiff. further alleges that it verily believes that. its use of the.‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non-absorbent : single service container in the City of Chicago without said permit or ‘permission’ from the defendants will result in resistance and interfegance by the said defendants; and plaintiff verily believes that it will be prosecuted in courts of com- petent jurisdiction-and that it will be otherwise harassed, : annoyed, interfered with and resisted by said. re- 2230 spondents if said contziner is used in this City, as aforesaid, without permission being first givén by — said deféudants; and plaintiff further says that said inter- ference will result in the loss of large sums of money to - the plaintiff daily; and do other irreparable injury and. much damage to plaintiff’s business. Pie 16. Plaintiff further alleges that said container is used daily by and with the consent of the State Department of - Public Health of the-State of Mlinois; that said container complied with ail the pertinent and relevant provisions of the statutes of the State of Illinois with regard te all sani- tary and health measures now in force for the protection .and preservation of public health and for the promotion of the general welfare of the residents of the State of - Tilinois. . 17. Plaintiff further alleges that said hereinbefore de- . scribed ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ containers are now used daily by ¢ Nee cae J ets Herrin \ Complaint. s 1 | cube approved milk §na dairy plants in approxi- ~ mately two hundred municipalities in the. United States of America; that several of these ‘sdid milk plants are. operat- - ing under the provisions and rules and\regulations of the United States Public Health Service Standard Milk Ordi- nance, similar. in substance to the‘ordinance and rules and regulations of the City of Chicago and Board of Health of the City of Chicago; that the operations ofthe plaintiff _ in the sale and distribution of Grade A milk and milk prod- ucts in said containers outside of the City of Chicago have been approved by the State Department of Public Health’ - of Illinois and said operations given,a rating of over ninety _ pereent. (90%), which rating exists at this time. 2231 18. Plaintiff further alleges that said described : conduct of the defendants in this controversy is, dis- criminatory, unreasonable, unlawful and prejudicial to the . plaintiff without any. just cause in fact or in law; and said conduct results in daily irreparable damage to the plain- .tiff and deprives the plaintiff of the equal protection of ‘the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Section Two of Ar- ticle Two of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and - Section Thirteen of Article Two of the Constitution of the State of Illinois; and said acts of the defendants in this controversy deprive the plaintiff of its property with- . out due process of law. see | _ 19. Plaintiff states that in and by the provisions of said “*Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance of the City of Chicago’’ hereinabove referred to and incorporated in this Complaint by reference thereto and attached as Exhibit ‘‘B’’ it is provided in part as follows: sas | “«3090. Labeling and Placarding. All bottles, cans, packages, and other containers enclosing milk or any milk 1a defined in this ordinance shall be plainly marked or labeled with the following and: only such other informa- tion as may be désignated by the board of health: , — _ 1. The name ofthe contents as given in the definitions in this ordinance. , ve _ 2. The word ‘‘pasteurized’’ only if the contents. have - been pasteurized. an ee 3. The word ‘“raw’’ only if the contents are,raw. 4. The ngme_and address of the producer if the con- tents are raw, and the name and address of the plant at - ~~ Se . Kee Sete Complaint. which the contents were pasteurized if the contents. were pasteurized. 2932 5. In the case of vitamin D milk, the designation “vitamin D milk,’’ and such other information as may be required by the board of health. 6. The permit-number. 7. Onall cans, bottles and other containers of pasteur- ized or certified milk, the words ‘‘to be-sold”’ and there- after the day of the week of which the milk or milk prod- uct is to be sold to the final consumer, the height of the letters of the day of the week to be not less than 3/16 inch on bottle caps, and not less than 5/8 inch on tags attached. to each container when contained in cans. 8. On all cans and other containers of milk and milk préducts received by pasteurization plants from receiving stations, the day of the week received by the receiving station. . 9.. The, word ‘‘milk”’ shall not appear or be uded on ‘any label, cap, receptacle, or container for any products except those defined in this article as milk, skimmed milk, buttermilk, cultered buttermilk, vitamin D milk, and any ‘other products designated by the board of health.” - 20. Plaintiff further alleges that the pertinent regula- tions of the Board of Health ‘of the City of Chicago under said ordinance concerning this controversy areas follows: | ‘*All caps or labels on, cans, bottles and other contain- ers of pasteurized milk, cream and skimmed milk shall in- clude the words ‘‘before’ noon’’ after the words ‘‘to be . sold.’’ ‘A proof-print or sketch of the bottle cap or cover, « or | of the can tags and labels showing the size and arrange- ment of the lettering thereon, shall be submitted and ap- ~~ proved by the board of health. “When milk or milk préducts are ericlosed:i in bottles or ' glass jars, the name or address blown:into such bottle or glass jar, or otherwise indicated thereon, shall not be other than or different from that which is indicated on the “ey, or cap thereof. ” 2233 21. Plaintiff further alleges that in and. AY Section es 3094 of said ordinance, it is provided as follows: any milk or milk products sold in quantities of less than one gallon shall be delivered in standard milk bottles; provided, however, that nothing herein contained | | shall be constrved to prohibit on soda fountains,: : res- fom . Complain’. | : ee ee — : ° taurarits, and similar establishments from dispensing milk -- or milk products from sanitary dispensers approved by the Board of Health * * °.’’ : oe ee 22. Plaintiff states that a footnote to this said section _ prepared by the Board of Health and published with said — ordinance provides with respect to’ the purpose of using” the standard milk bottle: i ES eee “The use of standard milk bottles for delivering milk and milk products in quantities less than one gallon.is re- ‘quired in order to prohibit delivery in such containers as buckets, fruit jars, etc. which may be difficult to wash and to subject to adequate Jactericidal treatment, which cannot be filled and cappéd with the proper A oa yan used for — purposes, and which it.4s often difficult to label prop- erly.”’ : , eta Ps re ’ 23. Plaintiff alleges that the provisions of said ordi- nance do not prohibit the use of the ‘‘Pure-Pak’?on-ab- sorbent single service container hereinabove \described; that no rule a1jd regulation of the Board of Health prohib- its the use of said container and the denial by the defend- ants of permission and license to the. plaintiff to use said above described container is’ unreasonable, arbitrary, dis- - - eriminatory and unlawful, and without any basis under the provisions of said ordinance and the. discretion therein permitted to the Health Commissioner. of the City of Chi- cago under the provisions of said. ordinance witl regard ‘to the approval or disapproval of the milk container 2234 to be used in the sale of milk and* milk products in‘ the City of Chicago, is invalid, unlawful and capri- cious, and results in discrimination at will, whim or caprice .—&and without good cause or merit so as to prejudice plain- tiff and to deprive the citizens and milk consumers of the _ City of Chicago of the right and opportunity to purchase and receive milk of Grade A quality and milk products in . sanitary, sterile bottles or “Pure Pak”? containefs at -a price equalling that charged for milk of the same quality #nd quantity sold in glass container# or other packages . at retail, in restaurants, hotels, and other dispensers of food and.food products in the = Chicago; that said ordinance contains no definition of a ‘‘standard milk bot- , : tle’’ as used in said sections and paragraphs nor do any footnotes and explanations of the sections and provisions of said ordinance describe. in any form or manner, or in detail, what a ‘‘standard milk bottle’’ is, its shape, size, - 14 : 4 Complaint. or the material out of which said receptacle must be made; - that said ordinance with regard to its restrictions and pro- hibitions, if any ‘exist, against:the use of ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non- - absorbent single service containers in the City of Chicago is unconstitutional and invalid and results in the depriving of plaintiff of due process of law and equal protection of - the laws contrary to the aforesaid Amendment to the Con- «stitution of the United States; Section Two, Article Two - | of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and Section — Thirteen, Article Two of the Constitution of the State of Illinois; that said ordinance as applied to plaintiff’s 2235 use of ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ nor-absorbent single service con- - tainers and their prohibition in -the use and sale, or offer for sale, of milk and milk products in the City of. Chicago, amount to the taking and damaging of the prop- erty of plaintiff without just compensation in violation of . Section Thirteen, of Article Two of the Constitution of the State ag Illinois, and ‘said classification and discrimination .— is void. | . SARA AON A a nrc a Wherefore, plaintiff prays: : 1. That this Honorable Court enter a declaratory judg- ment in this controversy construing the law as to certain — acts of defencants described herein and finding that: i. (a) Said ordinances:herein described, and all the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the City of Chi- cago do not prohibit and prevent plaintiff from using said ‘*Pure-Pak’’ ngn-absorbent single service container in the City of Chicago for the sale‘of Grade A milk and_milk products; or.to further declare that the use of said ®Sbve container inf the City of Chicago is not contrary to or in. violation of said ‘‘Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance’’ or any other ordinance and the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the City of Chicago. | — (b) Or, to declare or decree that said ordinances of the City of Chicago and the rules and regulations of the Board of Health, in so far as they attempt to deny and prohibit . and apply to the. plaintiff in. its use of said single service _ container above described, are -invalid, unreasonable and _~ _ discriminatory and unconstitutional and of no. 2236 foree and effect with regard :to prohibiting the use _. of said above container by plaintiff in the City of ~ Chicago in its sale of Grade A milk and milk products. . \. 2. And plaintiff further prays that it be awarded a, re ee Complaint. . See writ a injunction, restraining the defendants heeoiin from in any form. or manner prohibiting and interfering with thé, plaintiff in the, use of said ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ non-absorbent _ single service ‘container in the sale of Grade A milk and — milk products in the City of Chicago. - _. 3 That plaintiff be awarded all other relief in. ‘the _ premises necessary and proper and in accordance with law, equity and good conscience concerning its present and future use of said container; and concerning and with re- ' gard to all health ordinances of ‘the City of Chicago:and - said ‘‘Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance’’ and the rules and ‘regulations of the Board of Health of the City ofyChicago; . ' that the defendants herein and each of them be ruled to plead or answer this Complaint at a short date to:be de- termined by this Court (and as is provided by the rules of this Court) .and that upon issues being -joined- on said pleadings in this controversy, and all motions therein, the ° - , same be set | y this Court for early hearing and dis: ; position; and further that all other orders be entered in¢ ‘this cause with regard to any early disposition of this con- troveray, as is by rule of this Court now provided. : Fieldcrest Dairies, (Inc.), _ Plaintiff. By: S. E. Dean, Jr., , * Dae Aethetend Agent and ——- Gariepy & iechina : ° By Fred A. Gariepy, ; Matthews, Kaleth & Shapiro, By Thos. A. Matthews, | Attorneys for Plaintiff. . °. 2 2237 State of Illinois; County of Cook, ee ald S. E. Dean, Jr., on oath deposes and says that he is ‘the duly ° ‘authorized agent and officer of Fieldcrest Dairies, (Inc.) ; that he has read said Complaint above by him, sub- seribed and knows the contents of the same; that said Com- plaint is true in substance and in fact; that as to gaid alle- gations with’ regard to information and belie therein stated, affiant says that he believes the same are true. | : 8. E. Dean, Jr., ia | eT : *. ry ere | ~ x ‘ Answer. | February, sees. ‘Subscribed and Sworn to before me, - this 2nd day of "William Jacobs, ; (Seal) : Notary Public. Endorsed: Filed Feb-2 1939 at 9:47 o’clock A. M. Hoyt King Clerk. Plaintiff’s Exhibit ” attached to coyplaint is omit- ted at this point as it appears in the record as — A attached to the Defendant’s Answer. o - 2240 kad om, tout, the Stith day 00 Fereary, kD: 1939, came the Defendants by their atttorneys and © filed in the Clerk’s Court of said Court their certain An- swer, in words aad figures . es to-wit: 2241 Ix THE Disraicr CourT OF THE ee States. Erin ee: : , 0 ANSWER. The ‘defendants, the. City of Chiaaes: the members of the Bogard of Health of the @ty of Chicaga, arid Dr. Rob- ert A. Black, Acting President of the Board of Health of the City. of Chicago, by Barnet Hodes, Corporation Coun- . sel, and: Walter V. Schaefer and Charles P. Horan, As- sistant Corporation: Counsel, their ‘attorneys, answering the. complaint in this case say: 1. The City of Chicago has a population of approx- © imately three and one-half million. .During the year 1937 an approximate dajly average of 277,000 gallons of milk were sold for consumption in the City ‘of Chicago. During | the same period an approximate daily average of 27,500 © gallons of cream and 20,750 gallons of milk products,,. such as buttermilk. and chocolate - milk, were sold for consump- tion in the city. — 2. Milk, when properly produceid, processed and han- -\ dled, is. the most nearly perfect human food. There is Pure milk is an in no article of humap food more generally used han milk. . hispensable item in the diet’of infants — - and children,. and it is.likewise an important. con- 2242.stituent part“of the diet of most invalids, and the aged and infirm. Far more milk is consumed by in- % Answer. ei Sree | fants and children than is °consumed by all of the other . age groups in the population combined. oy 3, Although milk is an excellent human food, it is also’ an excellent medium for the growth ‘and transmission of ‘bacteria. The precise factors which make milk an ideal . food for human beings of all ages also make milk a per- fect food for bacteria. ene mea ws °©=—sS4.:sSttatistics collected by the United State ~Public Health Service show that during the decade ending with Ahe year 1934, there was in the United States an annual faverage of 43 reported epidemics eausing widespread ill- ness and numerous deaths which have been traced directly a improper milk supplies. Most of these outbreaks have beet typoid fever epidemics, but unwholesome gmilk has scarlet fever, dysentery and poliomyelitis. Impure milk ~ supplies have also resulted in the spread of bone and. _ glanduler tuberculosis and infantile diarrhea, as well as in the sprehding of diStases of an epidemic nature. _ 52 Because of the grave menace to the health of the. _ public generally which is inherent in an impure milk sup- _ ply, and also because of the extreme susceptibility of in- fants and children, who are the principal consumers of milk, to the Presence. of disease .organisms, impurities, ~ ‘adulterants and forcign substances of all types in milk, the maintenance of 2 pure and wholesome milk supply is . one of the principal concerns of municipal government, © and has long been so recognized. . _ 6. The United States Public Health Service has mani- fested its recognition of the relation of pure and ‘whole- some municipal milk aepoee -to the national public health by the establishment o¥ a division to render assistance to ‘municipalities in formulating and enforcing regulations eorncerning the production, processing and distribution _ of milk, and in recent years the United States Public 2243 Health Service has formulated its ‘‘United States __ Public Health Service Standard Milk Ordinance and . Code,’’ and has actively urged the adoption of. the ordi- nance and regulations which it: formulated, or of legis- lation containing equivalent public health safeguards, by municipalities throughout the country. - | 7. The health of the public-cannot adequately be pro- tected against the hazards of an impure milk supply un- less every step in the production, processing and distribu- >: ‘also caused epidemics of septic sore throat, diphtheria, . ° 18 Answer. FE tion of milk is carefully safeguarded in such a manner that disease organisms present in milk are eliminated, and _ the possibility of the introduction of disease organisms, impurities, adulterants, or any foreign substances into | milk is prevented during its production, processing and — ‘distribution. 8. Tuberculin tests for cattle are required i in the State , of Illinois and almost,uniformly throughout the count The plant and equipment of the farmer who, produces mi k for consumption in fluid form, as well as the plant and - equipment of each person subsequently. handling such milk _ during the course of its processing and distribution, are’ regulated with a view to preventing the possibility of the contamination or adulteration of milk. 9. The General Assembly of the State of Illinois. has - conferred authority upon the City of Chicago: ‘‘To do all acts, make all regulations which may be necessary or expedient for the promotion of health or the suppression.of disease, »” (Til. Rev. Stat. 1937, Ch. 24, Par. 65, 77.) : 10. In the exercise of the powers onitervel upon it by. the General Assembly for the protection of the health. of the inhabitants of the City, the City of Chicago and its Board of Health have adopted an ordinance.and rules and regulations pertaining to the production, processin; _and_- distribution of milk, a copy of which ordinance and rules and regulations is attached hereto, and marked Ex- hibit ‘‘ A.”’ g 2244 ««i11.. . The ordinance and the ‘ciliata of the city’ concerning the production, processing and distribu- tion of milk cover every phase of the-handling of milk ' from the cow to the consumer because improper handling of milk in the distribution thereof can and will nullify - the effect of sanitary production and processing. Included in the ordinance and .regulations of the City of Chicago are the provesions assailed hy the plaintiff i in this case, which are as follows: Mvwitiantty | ¢ a | milk products sold in quanties of less than one gallon shall be delivered in standard milk ~ bottles: * * *’’ (Revised Chicago Code of 1931, » git amended, Section 3094.) i . : ‘ Answer. "190 a . ~ Item “10p.—Construction and Repair of Equipment and a a a Containers. > All equipment and containers with which milk or milk products come in contact shall be constructed in such man- ner as to be easily cleaned and shall be kept in good repair. Satisfacto mpliance.—This items shall be a un to - have been satisfied if: « - = | =p (1) All surfaces with which milk comes in ct cqn- sist-of smooth, not readily corrodible meta: .or ‘&nbroken . vitreous material, and’ . “ oe _ (2) All joints are soldered flush~with the surface or otherwise fitted to avoid open seams, or the surface, if vit- reous, is continuous, and Ee Sis . . ' (3) All surfaces with Which milk or milk products come in contact are easily accessible for cleaning, and are | self-draining, annd ee aes (4) All containers and other equipment are in. good re- pair, free of breaks and corroded’ places, and .(5) AH equipment and containers. usedare approved by the board of health. ”* * *’’ (Item 10p. of regula- tions of board of health suppleniénting Section 8093. of the Revised Chicago Code of 1931, as amended.) 12. The use of paper containers for the distribution of milk is a relatively ‘recent development.’ Only within the past five years has the paper manufacturing industry be- come aware of the existence of. public health problems in connection with the use of paper containers for articles of food and drink. The attention of the paper industry has Ween devoted. primarily to securing favorable‘ con- sumer reaction to its products, and has ‘been devoted in only a secondary sense, and in very recent years, to the soggy osm problems inherent to the ust of paper con- iners. 5 5 ® ; ; o 2245 13. The Board of Health for the City. of Chicago --s has carefully watched developments in the field of production of paper containers for milk and milk products ~ and has investigated the merits’ of all types of paper con- ‘tainers from a public health point of view. The de- fendants are informed and verily believe that no. paper container for fluid milk and milk products has so far been ‘ _ developed which is sterile, non-absorbent or sanitary. The defendants allege as a fact that the so-called ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ : ° . container is neither. non-absorbent nor sterile, nor is it - § 7 — 20 a etc Answer. a sanitary container for the distribution of milk and milk. roducts. No permit hasbeen issued by the Board of ealth of {the City of Chicago for the use of the ‘so-called... _‘*Pure-Pak’’ container, or any other type of paper con- tainer for the distribution of milk or milk products in the’ City of Chicago. No paper container has evér been used . | for the distribution of milk or milk products in the City of Chicago. 2 ae? . 14. The refusal ‘of the Board of Health to permit the use of paper containers: for the distribution of milk and . _ milk’ products in the City of Chicago-has been in the per- . formance of its duty to protect the health of the inhabi- - tants of the City of Chicago, and has been pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Chicago and ‘the rulés and -reguiations of the Board of Health. It has in no sense been arbitrary, capricious, unlawful or discriminatory. 15. The defendants admit that the plaintiff is distribut- ing milk and milk products in so-called ‘‘Pure-Pak”’’ con- tuiners in some of the suburban communities in the vicinity ‘ of Chicago. The defendants also admit that the Board of Health has issued Permit No. 1521 to the plaintiff for the operation of a milk receiving’ station at Chemung, II- linois; but deny the allegations of paragraph eight of the complaint that ‘said milk receiving station has been in- spected and approved by. the Board of Health for the sale of Grade ‘‘A’’ milk and cream at wholesale in the City of Chicago. The defendants specifically deny that the Board of Health of the City of Chicago has inspected and 2246 approved the pasteurization plant of the plaintiff at emung, Illinois,,and allege that no milk or milk products pasteurized in said milk receiving station are be- ing. sold or may rating | be sold in the City of Chicago. 16. The defendants bave no knowledge or information ‘wafficient to form a belief as to the truth of the following allegations of the complaint: (a) As to the allegations of paragraph one concerning _ the corporate organization of the plaintiff. | (b) As to the allegations of paragraph two concerning the amount in the controversy and the alleged expendi- tures of the plaintitff. . | (c) As to the allegations of paragraph three concern- ing the objects of incorporation of the plaintiff. (d) As to the’allegations of paragraphs three, nine,’ ten and seventeen concerning the use of so-called ‘‘Pure- ‘ 4 i s Answer. . 21 { . ‘ ‘Pak’’ containers in certain specifiéd cities and compliance _ - _ with the applicable health reguldtions of said cities. a (e) As to the allegations of paragraphs nine and ten of the complaint: concerning the financial volume of the business done by the plaintiff and others in the. distribn- tion of milk and milke products in the sd-called ‘‘Pure- Pak’’ containers, and concerning the amount of money pe vested in equipment for making said containers. Se (f) As to the allegations of*paragraph thirteen of the complaint concerning the financial injury alleged to, result to the plainttiff because of the deféndant’s refusal to per- mit. the use of*so-called ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ containers for tlte distribution of. milk and milk products in Chicago. (zg) As to the allegations of paragraph sixteen. con- . cverning the consent of the Department of Public Health of the State of Illinois as to the use of said so-called **Pure-Pak’’ containers. ; 2247 17. The defendants have no knowledge or, informa- tion sufficient to form a belief as to the. truth of the allegations of paragraph four of the complaint concerning the issuance and renewal of a permit for the pasteurization © plant of the plaintiff by the State of Illinois; butdefendants allege that the issuance or the renewal of such «hermit has ‘no bearing upon the legal right of the plaintiff to sell milk pasteurized at said plant within the City of Chicago. 18: With respect to the allegations of paragraph seven | “of the complaint defendants deny that the paper from which » the so-called ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ containers are made, the metho of manufacturing and processing said paper, and the -mg- chinery and process vig 27 fa in forming and filling said containers are such as will adequately protect the public — when such containers are used for the delivery of milk. p He 19. The defendants deny the allegations of paragraph eleven of the complaint, and specifically deny that the so- called ‘‘Pure-Pak’’ container is a standard milk bottle or standard milk container. - : | 20. With respect to the allegations of paragraph fifteen of the complaint the defendants admit that the ordinances - of the Citr of Chicago and the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of .the City of Chicago pertaining to the production, processing and distribution of milk, will be enforeed, and that the violation of said ordinances will be prosecuted. The defendants have no knowledge or informa- ee . Answer. ‘ee tion sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of, the other allegations of paragraph fifteen. . 21. The use of paper containers, iffcluding the so-called © ‘*Pure-Pak’’ contain for the distribution of milk and milk products in the City- of Chicago is prohibited by the - ordinances of the City and the rules and regulations 2248 of the Board of Health. Said prohibition‘is a proper __ exercise of powers -validly conferred upon the City by the. General Assembly of the State of Illinois for the protection of the public health of the inhabitants of the City; © its enforcement deprives the plaintiff of no rights guaran- teed-to itsby the Constitution of the United States or of the . State of Illinois. : , = City of Chicago, a Municipal Corpora- ; _ tion, the Board of Health of the City of Chicago, Robert A.-Black, ae - Health of the City of Chicago, . : ee Defendants, By Barnet Hodes, | Corporation Counse Walter V. Schaefer, ) Asssstant Corpo ation! . | Counsel of the Cily-of Chicago, . Charles P. Horan, ; } Assistant ‘Corporation ont ak Counsel of the City of ‘Chicago, . * | Their Attorneys. ae ae acting President of the Board of : ou E — —- a = . 4. As ¥, Byte Pee oe fae Ok it had, kt, A , + SE ie ee Dal ak Sit, le . iy . . - - Exhibit “4. : 23 22490 EXHIBIT “A”. 2250 -« Reprint Of. The . Mayor Kelly Milk Ordinance , ' ‘Passed by the City Council ; e% ey January. 4, 1935 r and of the | . | . 3% i Rules and Regulations ate - of the Chicago Board of Health ay : : Adopted January 8, 1935 | for: the. establishment of . ~ Standards and Requirements - For Milk And Milk Produets (Cut) * : ‘ City of Chicago Edward J. Kelly, Mayor Board of Health . Dr. Herman N. Bundesen, President ; » 1933-1935 o? _ The City Council * r : Chicago Honorable Edward J.. Kelly) Mayor Ald. J. M. Arvey, President Pro Tem. Peter J. Brady | i Edw: J. Padden | , City Clerk a 4 Chief -Clerk Ward John J. Coughli és nd Ward William L. Da PB Aigo 3rd Ward Robert R. lain 4th Ward B. A. Cronson te ro La James J. — Jr. ; ard John F. Heal | . —” Wth Ward Thomas J. Daley ; | _ 8th Ward David L. Sutton yor , 9th Ward Arthur: G. Lindell ' , 10th Ward William A. Rowan eae 5 ; 11th Ward Thomas A. Doyle . : ; 12th Ward Byran Hartnett ae ae . 13th Ward vn 3 Egan : r; _ Exhibit “A.” ; 14th. Ward James J. McDermott - ; 15th Ward James F. Kovarik | : 16th Ward Terrence F. Moran / ~ 17th Ward Frank J. Corr 18th Ward Harry E. Perry 19th Watd O. E. Northrup 20th Ward William V. Pacelli 21st Ward John J. Lagodny 22nd Ward Henry Sonnenschien 23rd Ward John Toman — 24th Ward J. M. Arvey . 25th Ward James B. Bowler 26th Ward Frank FE. Konkowski 27th Ward Harry: L. Sain 28th Ward George D.. Kells. 29th Ward Thomas J. -Terrell 30th Ward John S. Clark 3lst Ward Thomas P.‘Keane . 38nd Ward Joseph P. Rostenkowski 33rd Ward Z: H. Kadow * , 34th Ward Matt Porten 35th Ward Walter J. Orlikoski 36th Ward George W. Robinson B 37th Ward Roger J, Kiley 38th Ward Henry J. Wieland 39th Ward James J. Hurley. 40th Ward Joseph C. Ross - 41st Ward James: C. Moreland 42nd Ward Dorsey R. Crowe © * 43rd Ward Mathias Bauler SL 44th Ward John J. Grealis } sa 45th Ward Edwin F. Meyer ° . 46th Ward Oscar F. Nelson 47th Ward Albert F. Schulz 48th Ward John A. Massen-——— 49th Ward George A. Williston 50th Ward James R. Quinn ' Committee on ; Health ve TerrellChairman ; Ross, Vice-Chairman; ‘Sutton, Egan, Moran, Northrup, Kells, Orlikoski, Robinson, Kiley, Wie- ' _ land, Moreland, Meyer, Schulz, WillistonsArvey (ex officio). _ Exhibit “A.” : 25 .Board of Health oes Dr. Hernan N. Bundesen, Srcihdent: Dr. Louis E. Schmidt, Secretary; Dr. Francis A. Dulak, Prof. Edwin O. Jordan, Mr. Harry J. Reynolds, Members. ‘ 2251 * " Milk and Milk Products — Standards, and —" Section a 3082. Definitions. 3083. Sale of adulterated ‘and: sdaheiusiiod milk or - milk - products prohi’ ited. 3084. Permit to sell—vehicles to bear. permit peneuaiitt ' © revocation of permit—hearing. 3085. Sale of milk or milk products—license reqiatred: 3086. Application—se i grb license for each place of busi- ness—change of location. © . 3087. License fees. .3088. #Vehiclues to display license emblem on windshield. - 3089. Revocation. of license. * 3090. Labeling and placarding. ‘ _ 8091. Inspectidbn of dairy farms and milk plants report er - to be posted. : 3092. Examination of samples. . 3093. Kinds of. milk—requirements. 3094. Dipping—delivery - containers—delivery at cana’ - tined places. 3095. Products shipped from beyond limits. 3096. Notification of disease. *. ; 3097. Suspicion of infection—procedure. * 3098. Limit of time of sale. 3099. Penalty. (For purposes of explanation: The ordinance is printed in heavy-face type as used in this sentence. The rules and regulations are > printed i in light face type as used in this sentence. - The public health reasons are printed in smaller light- face type as used in this sentence.) CZ , ; seth 26. : Exhibit “A.” 3082. Definitions.) The following definitions shall ap-— ply in the interpretation and the enforcement of this article: ~ _ (A) Milk. Milk is hereby defined to be the lacteal secre-. - tion obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows, excluding that obtained within fifteen days before and five days after calving, or such longer period as may be necessary to -render the milk. practically colostrum free, - which contains not-less than eight and one-half per cent. _ of milk solids-not-fat, and not..less than three and one- ' fourth per cent of -milk fat. - fdr Public health ‘reason.—The food value of milk depends upon its solids-not-fat and its milk-fat content (which, in turn, determine the content of proteins, carbohydrates, - minerals and certain vitamins). If either of these ws re- * duced below the range for normal market milk, the food ' value is reduced. Practical experience shows that three and one-fourth per cent milk fat and eight and one-half r cent solids-not-fat are reasonable minima for mixed- erd milk. Colostrum tends to produce intestinal disturb- ances in children, and milk is apt to contain colostrum if ri eng within fifteen days befere or five days after ealving. ~* ree Satisfactory compliance.—This definition shall be deemed to have been satisfied: Se (1) When there is no evidence that cows are milked within fifteen days before ‘or five days after calving, and when no colostrum can be detected in the milk. , ' (2) When the milk-fat content, as. determined by. the , Babcock, Mojonnier,’or other recognized test; is three and one-fourth per cent or more. (3) When the milk solids-not-fat content .is eight: and one-half per cent or more, as determined from the milk-fat percentage and the specific gravity, or by other approved. methods, provided that failure to satisfy this requirement shall be regarded as merely presumptive evidence of water- ing, and that this evidence shall be confirmed by eryoscope, _ refractometer, or other approved test for added water. | (4)° When the milk is clean, free of sediment, and has a normal flavor, odor and appearance. © (5) When the milk comes from cows which have been t _ properly, fed. f ; (B) Milk Fat Or Butter Fat. Milk fat or butter fat is the fat of milk. «© , : 5 : WN) — | Bahibit “A” oe (C) Sweet Cream; Sour Cream. Sweet cream is a por- ‘tion of milk.which contains not less than eighteen per cent | milk fat, and the acidity of which is not more than 0.20 © 2252 per cent, expressed as. lactic acid. Sour cream isa -- ” portion of milk which contains not less than eighteen per cent milk fat, and the acidity of which is more than 0.20 per cent, expressef as lactic acid. ; - (D) Skimmed Milk. Skimmed milk is milk which has a milk fat eontent of less than three,per cent. : 5 (E). Milk Beverage Or pte Sg ° - . milk beverage ov a skimmed-milk beverage ®& a food com- pound or confection consisting of milk or skimmed milk, . . as the case: may be, to which has been added a syrup or’ flavor consisting of wholesome ingredients. 2 (F) Buttermilk. Buttermilk is the ‘product which re- _mains when fat is removed from milk or cream in the process of churning. It contains not less than eight and one-half ‘per Gent of milk solids-not-fat. . (G) Cultured Buttermilk: Cultured buttermilk is the product resulting from the souring of treatment, by a lactic _ acid culture, or other treatment approved by the board © of health, of milk or milk products. It contains not less than eight and one-half per cent of milk solids-not-fat,. and shall be pasteurized before adding the culture. . (H) Vitamin D. Milk. Vitamin D milk is milk the vita- - min D content of which has been increased by a method and in an amount approved by the board of health. : (I) Reconstituted Or Recombined Milk and Cream. Re- constituted or recombined milk and cream are. products ' resulting from the recombining of milk constituents with — water or other combining substance in accordance with the rules and regulations of the board of health, and which com- — ply with the standards for milk fat and solids-not-fat as . defined herein. — ; All milke and mille products used in reconstituted or re- combined milk and cream shall conform to the requirements set forth in the ordinance and rules and regulations of the board of health pertaining to milk and milk products. No person shall reconstitute or recombine milk, or any milk products to be served or sold, without first ini _the-approval and permission of the board of health. (J) Milk Products. Milk products shall be taken to | i ) Ca + \ ‘ * & e:. (. a + Eahibit “A.” mean and include sweet cream, sour cream, vitamin D. milk, buttermilk, cultured buttermilk, skimmed milk, milk bever- ages, and skimmed-milk beverages, 2nd such other products as may, from time to time, be designated by the board of health. oe : This item shall include all miik products which are -used in the manufacture of ice-cream and other frozen confec- tions of a similar nature, such as butter, milk powder, — skimmed-milk powder, and cream powder, condensed, con- -- -centrated and evaporated milk-and skimme¢ milk, and other milk —— designated from time to time by the board of health. oi : (K) Pasteurization. The terms ‘‘pasteurization,’’ ‘‘pasteurized,’’ and similar terms shall’ bé taken to refer to the process of heating every particle of milk or milk —- .uets to. a temperature of not less than 144° F., and holding at such. temperature for not less than 30 minutes in par- ~ teurization apparatus approved by the board of health, provided that approval shall be limited to apparat hich requires a combined holder and indicating ther eter temperature tolerance of not*more than 14° F., as shown | by official tests with suitable testing equipment, and pro- , _ vided that such apparatus shall be operated as dir by 1 the board of health and so that the indicating thermometers - * and the recording thermometer charts both indicate a tem- . perature of not less than 144° F., continuously throughout, the holding period. - Provided that nothing edntained in _ this definition shall be construed as disbarring any other process which has been demonstrated as of at least equal efficiency and-is approved by the board of health.* | (L) Adulterated Milk And Milk Products. Any milk or a milk product not conforming with the requirements. of composition and ‘sanitation required by this article, or to which any substance has been added, except as may be specifically permitted by the board of health, shall be deemed adulterated and misbranded. a ae Any milk or milk produci shall be deemed to have bee misbranded if it is not labeled in accordance with the re- “ quirements of Section 3090 of this article. : 2253 (M) Milk Producer. A milk producer is-any per- son who owns or controls one ‘or more cows, a part or all of the milk or milk products from which is sold. * For the discussion of the eniorcement of this definition, see Section. 3085, item 16p, Grade A Pagteuribed “Milk. > ee “eae eee a: (N) Milk! Distributor. A milk distributor is. me, & son who offers for sale, or sells, or delivers to another, _ | _any milk or milk products for human consumption. (O) Dairy or Dairy Farm. A dairy or dairy farm is any place or premises where one or more«cows are kept, a part or all of the milk or milk mene from which ees uP or delivered. (P) Milk Plant and Milk Receiving Station. A milk plant is any place, or premises, or establishment where milk or milk nan vag are collected, handled, processed, stored, . bottled, pasteurized, or prepared for distribution. A milk receiving station is any place, premises, or establishment where milk is collected, handled, or processed preparatory to pasteurization elsewhere. .— . (Q) Board ‘of Health. The term, ‘‘board of: health,’’ shall mean‘the board of health of the City of Chicago, or its authorized representative. (R) Average Bacterial Plate Count, ies Redue- tion -‘Time, and Average Cooling Temperature. Average bacterial plate count shall be taken to mean the logarithmic average of the bacterial plate counts of the last four con- secutive samples, taken upon separate days. Average re- duction time shall be taken to mean the arithmetic average | of the reduction times of the last four consecutive samples, taken upon separate days. Average cooling temperature | shall be taken to mean the arithmetic average of the tem- peratures’ of ‘the last four consecutive samples, taken upon separate days.° (8) Inspection Period. The inspection period shall be such period of time as thé board of health may designate, within which compliance with this article and. the rules . and regulations.of the board of health shall be determined - for all milk and/or milk products, provided that the.in- spection period shall in no case exceéd six months. (T) Bactericide. The term ‘‘bactericide”’ shall be taken to mean any bactericidal substance or process ap- -~ proved by the board of health. _There are several dactericides which may be used in te a discussion of bacterial plate count ‘and reduction time, see ion 3083, Setten neta regulations. For a discussion of ae temperature, | Sar and 17p. X - om “ ¢ aw ie Bahibit A.” complying with this ordinance.” These consist generally ; of calcium hypochlorite, sedium ss aucacaen, or vertain chloramine solutions. Calcium hypochlorite —Calcium bilbochlorite (chlori- nated lime) is a chemical compound used. as a disinfectant. A satisfactory method of preparation is to make a. - smooth, watery paste of 12 ounces of calcium hypochlorite, “ adding’ the water in very small quantities at first, and bringing final wolume of.this stock solution to one \ gallon. This solution should be kept tightly stoppered. in .. | a’ cool, dark place. An earthenware or brown glass jug is a satisfactory container. One tablespoonful of this stock solution to each gallon of riffSé water will make a solution of an effective strength, which will not be so stgong as to injure hands or udders. A fresh stock solution should be made every ten days, and any old solution hheows away or uséd to deordorize privies, etc. A highly concentrated calcium hypochlorit is available - which is more stable and more soluble than ordinary chlorinated lime.’ chlorfne 2254 solution is used as a spray, the excess solution whi _ ©The above. instructions assume that’ the strength will be ~ roughtly one hundred parts per million or more. It is believed\thit, as a matter of precaution, no ch!orine solution should be used saa its strength ee ee te ee Tee er ee N \ Q : \ . ¥ ° re hid “es ee _ runs off or collects im\the equipment shall contain-at least 50 parts per million.” _ The testing outfit consists of two test tubes approxi- mately 7/16 inch by 4 inches, one of which contains ortho- tolidin. The other is fitted with a meditine dropper and is used for testing the chlorine solution. It is etched the 2'c. c. and 5 c. c. levels so as to : mpke, ossible the . dilution of the svlution to be tested to two-fifths of its original strength, thus diluting an original solution of 60 parts per million or more to one of 20 parts per million or. more,. which, as above stated, is the critical poffit for the formation of tle precipitate when hypochlorites are tested. Before any tests are made-with the apparatus, the medi- cine dropper should be ‘tested to determine. whether it de- livers drops of the proper size. To do this, simply count the number of drops required to fill to the first mark of the testing tube. Ifthe number required lies between 30 and 50,- the dropper is satisfactory. If not, discard it and secure one of the proper size. . he 2 Directions for the Chlorine’ Test. (1) Rinse the testing tube and its dropper thorgughly with clean water. 7 . | : _ (2) Fill the testing tube tothe lower mark with the chlorine solution to be tested, using the dropper for this purpose. (Avoid including floating particles.) (3) Fill to the second mark with clean water, using the - dropper for this purpose.. ° (4). Add one drop of orthotolidin. . (5) Hold the upper part of the testing tube firmly with ‘one hand and tap the lower end of it sharply 50 times with one or two fingers of the other hand. (6) If, in the case of hypochlorites, reddish or brown-. - ish particles separate out within five minutes, the solu- tion testéd contains at least 50 p. p. m. of available chlorine. * This test has been devised by the Office of Milk Investigatiohe of the United States Public Health Service and measures that part of the chlorine which is quickly available. # ; - The test makes use of the fact that when the proper amount of orthotolidin is added to a chlorine solution containing 20 parts per million- or more, a precipitate is formed,- except .that in the case of. certain chloramines the solution becomes cldidy.at chlorine concentrations having a two-minute bactericidal st equivalent to at least the bactercidal strength of 20 parts per m um hypochlorite. 5 : . a ; . E % es ‘ 2 ° P \ = 32 Exhibit ‘‘A.’’ ; ae If, in the case of certain chloramines, the solution becomes cloudy within five minutes, the solution tested has a bac- tericidal strength for a two-minute exposure equivalent to ‘at least the bactericidal strength of 50 p. p. m. of sodium. ~ ‘ hypochlorite.°° | sak Other bactericides.—The board of health will not permit the use of orm of.actericide until it has satis- fied itself by its own or oter official tests that they are satisfactory for use-in connection with milk handling, and that. they are of adequate strength. Under no. circum- stances shall formaldehyde or other*preservatives be used. (U) Person... The word ‘‘person’’ shall mean ‘‘per- son, firm, corporation, or association.”’ geen ca ; (V) Goat Milk, Ewe Milk. Goat pfilk; ewe milk; are the fresh, clean, lacteal secretions,fee from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking/ of healthy animals other than cows, properly few and kept, and conform in -name _ .to the species. of animal from which they are obtained, and shall comply with all of the requirements of this article and the rules and regulations of*the board of health, with | reference to pasteurized or certified milk, except for such ~ modifications. as the board of health may deem appropriate. ~ 3083: The Sale of Adulterated or Misbranded Milk or Milk Products Prohibited.) No person shall produee, sell, offer, or expose for sale, or deliver, or have in possession with intent to sell or deliver, any milk or milk products, all . or any part of which is ultimately delivered or consumed in the city of Chicago, which is adulterated or misbranded. All milk and milk products, which do not comply with the requirements as set'forth in the rules and regulations of the board of health and/or the ordinances of the City . of Chicago, may be condemned, and the shipper, producer . or distributor, in whose custody or possession said milk or milk products are at the time of condemnation, shall cause’ . the same to be destroyed or retétned to the producer or. shipper thereof, within such time as may be designated by ~ the board of health. | ; , —_ In order to determine whether a certain commercial preparation is strong enough for: dairy use when mixed as directed on the label, mix a — portion as directed on the label, then dilute half and half, and test for SO parts per million by means of the above-described test. If a pre cipitate appears, the directions upon the label may be approved.. Other- wise, such larger quantity of the stock solution should be used by the dairyman as will give a satisfactory test. _ : _ ae 3 Exhibit.‘‘ A.”’ eee nae cae 33. If at the end of such time said milk or_milk-products have not been destroyed or returned, said milk or milk products shall be destroyed by the, board of health, and the permit of the possessor revoked. — 3084. Permit}to Sell. Vehicles to Bear Permit Number —Revocation of Permit—Hearing.) It shall be unlawful for any ‘person to bring into or receive into the city of. . Chicago, for sale, or to sell, or to offer for sale therein, or to have in storage where milk or milk products are sold ex served, any milk or milk. product defined in this. — 2255 article, who does not possess a permit from the board of health, and on whose vehicle there does not appear in a conspicuous place the name and address of the milk distributor and the permit number and such other identi- - fication in such manner as required by the board of health. Such permit may be revoked by the board of health upon’ the violation by the permitee of any of the provisions of . this article or of any of thé rules and regulations of the board of. health, or in any emergency when, in the judg- ‘ment of the board of -health, the milk or ymilk product O25 handled by.the permitee has or may become a public health menace, or in any case in which the permitee refuses the board of health the right of entrance to any dairy farm, . milk plant, or vehicle, or other place where milk or milk products are kept or stored, for the purpose of inspection or the collection and examination of samples; provided that the permitee shall, after tbiding by such revocation, - upon request have the right of a hearing before the board of health.* Saeed raed ys 3 There shall appear upon each outer side of every vehicle used for the transportation’ of milk or milk préducts a — notice containing the words, ‘‘board of health -permit;’’ ° and, immediately thereafter, the permit number of the dis- tributor, in figures not less than three inches high and one and one-half inches wide; also the name and place of. busi- ness of the distributor, and the word ‘‘milk’’ and/or the words ‘milk products’’ in a prominent place, and in letters — not less than six inches high, and of such other dimensions as are approved by the board. of health. ! ’ All milk and milk products distributors shall furnish * This section permits the board of health to prosecute any persons who : beh meng milk without notifying said board, and thus without it nspected. The periodic inspection principle of the ordinance essary that the permit be renewed annually. s . 34 * Eahibit “A.” , the board of health. with the names and addresses of all itinerant milk and milk products vendors to whom milk is delivered, and with the names and addresses of all milk producers, plants and receiving stations ‘supplying said , ‘distributors with milk or milk products. © 3085. Sale of Milk or Milk Products—License Re- quired.) No person shall sell or offer for sale, expose for sale, dispose of, exchange or deliver, or with the intent so to do have in his possession, ‘care, custody or control, milk or milk products for human food, without having obtained a license for that purpose. - : 3086. Application—Separate License Required for Each Place of Business—Change of Location.) Any person desiring to be licensed, in accordance with and pursuant to -the provisions of this article, shall make application in- writing therefor to the board of health. - " Such application shall conform to the general provisions of this article relating to applications for licenses, and the rules and regulations of the board of health, and shall state the name and address of the applicant and the:loca- tion of the ‘place at which it is desired or intended to ¢arry on such business; it shall also contain a description of the business which is to be engaged in, the description and. number of vehicles to be used by the applicant (if any), and such further information which may be required by the board of*health. PEI ' The board of health, upon ‘receipt of such application, shall investigate or cause te be.investigated, the place of business deseribed. in such application, and the vehicles, methods and equipment intended to be used by such appli- ; cant. . If such applicant, the place of business, and such ve- ' hicles, methods and equipment are found by said board of health to be in a sanitary condition and fit for the uses and purposes to which they are iritended to be put, they shall transmit such application to the Mayor with the ap- proval thereon,-and the Mayor shall thereupon issue or cause to be issued to such applicant,-upon the payment “ by him to the city collector of the license fee as therein. provided, a license attested by the city clerk, authorizing such applicant to carry on, engage in and conduct the busi- ness of distributor of milk or milk products in the city, in _ the manner and at the place designated in such application, | . and. to employ in and about such business the: num!.r of — ‘wagons or other vehicles designated and described in such / PT Man TS Re ae a OM We gy 0 4 =a . ode tet « et ge wine ge eee one * Exhibit ‘A.”’ « ° 35 - application, for and during the period for which such’ license is issued. © No license issued’ hereunder shall entitle or authorize the licensee named therein to carry on, engage in or con- duct the business of distributor of milk or milk products in any place or places other than that described and set out in such license, and a separate license fee shall be 2256 paid for each and every place at which such business is carried on, engaged in or conducted; provided, however, that if any licensee shal] desire to carry on, ‘en- gage in or conduct the business of digtributor of milk or milk products at more than one place of business and employ the same wagons or other vehicles at each place of _ business, he shall not be required to pay more than one license fee to the City of Chicago for each such wagon or other vehicle. If any person licenged under the provisions of this - article, shall sell, transfer, assign.6r change the location of his place of ‘business, application for a transfer or assignment of license shall be made to the board of health, and no such business so sold, transferred, or assigned, shall be conducted or carried on at such location until such ap- plication shall have been made and —! by the board - of health a's herein provided. - 3087. License Fees.) Every person selling or Sane ing of milk or milk products shall annually paysa license | fee as hereinafter provided. Every person selling, offering for sale, exposing for sale, . exchange or delivery, or disposing’ of milk or milk products , in and from any milk plant or milk receiving station, shall. pay an annual license fee graded according to the size of such establishment, as evidenced by the number of wagons or motor vehicles run, as follows: ‘Running not more than one wagon or motor. VPM voce ccccescccsccccccepeccvecne $ 5.00 Running 2 to 3 wagons or motor vehicles... 10.00- Running 4 to 5 wagons or motor vehicles... 20.00 Running 6 to 10 wagons or motor vehicles.:. 40.00 Running 11 to 15 wagons or motor vehicles 60.00 Running 16 to 25 wagons or motor vehicles. 100.00 Running 26 to 35 wagons or motor vehicles.140.00 Running 36 to 50 wagons or motor vehicles. 200.00 Running 51 to 75-wagons or motor vehicles. 300.00 Running 76 to 100 wagons or motor vehicles .400.00°, _—— over 100 D wagons or motor vehicles. 500.00 “- «> 36 Exhibit A": Such person shall also pay an additional annual! license fee for each-vehicle used for the delivery or sale of mitk _or milk products, as follows: One horse wagon or not to exceed one ton truck or motor vehicle......... hiveanees $10.00 Two horse wagon or truck in excess of ca- pacity of one ton and not in excess of two | ER eee ee eee 15.00 Truck in excess of capacity of, two tons.... 25.00. Provided, however, that distributors of milk operating independently of any licensed depot, or in connection with or from any milk plant or receiving station located outside of the aity of Chicago; and delivering, selling. or offering milk or milk products for sale in the city of Chicago, shall pay an annual license.fee of fifteen dollars foreach wagon, . and twenty-five dollars for-each motor vehicle operated in the city o icago; and provided, further, that eve person selli incipally milk or milk products in bu at wholesale, either as dealers, jobbers, brokers or agents, shall pay ah annual license fee of fifty dollars for each establishment from Which such business is conducted, and an additional fee for each vehicle operated, as follows: ‘One horse wagon or not to exceed one tori ' truck or motor vehicle ............. +» «$10.00 Two horse wagon or truck in excess of ca- pacity of dhe ton and not in excess of two ¢ COMO cosdwcccceredecs TETETPETEPEE EET Eee - 15.00 Truck in excess of capacity of two tons’.... 25.00 _ 2257 +=3088. Vehicles to Display License Emblem on’ Windshield.) No person shall sel, offer for sale, or ‘convey, or cause to be conveyed on er in any wagon, or other vehicle-or to be delivered thereftom any. milk or. milk products, unless such wagon ‘or other vehicle shall - have affixed to the ono. ome part of the windshield of such vehicle, a license emblem on which shall be stamped a number corresponding to the license number of the milk 9 Echibit “A.” | 37 distributor, by whom such vehicle is used, and also the words ‘‘Chi ? and ‘‘Milk,’’ together with the year for which the milk distributor using such vehicle is licensed. Such license emblem shall be obtained from the city clerk at the time the license is issued. .. i Neon : It shall he the see | of the city clerk to change annually the predominant background color of such licensé emblem. | id emblem shall be impervious to weather and incapable of being removed without being destroyed. A license to . distribute milk or milk products, as provided’ for tunder . the provisions of thjs gfticle shall be void and of no effect unless such license ‘emblem described in this article shall ~ be ‘in the manner provided for. ecto 0 license emblem shall be permitted to remain affixed to the windshield of a milk vehicle after the period for which such emblem ‘was issuefi has expired. 3089. Revocation of Lieense:) All licenses granted pur-, suant to this article may at any time be revoked by the Mayor for violations of the provisions hereof, or the rules ) — and regulations of the board of health, or for any other | good and sufficient cause. ~ —_. ie ‘3090. Labeling and Placarding.) All bottles, cans, pack- ages, and other containers enclosing milk or any wr Ss Mp yet defined in this ordinance shall be plainly marked or — labeled with the following and only such other information ~ as may be designated by the board of health: 7 1. The name of the contents as given in the definitions in‘ this ordinance. : : 2. The word ‘‘pasteurized’’ only if the contents have been pasteurized. . ’ . 3. The word ‘‘raw’’ only if the contents are raw. Be 4. The name and address of the producer if the contents are raw, and the name and address of the plant at which ee were pasteurized if the contents are pasteur- 5. In the case of vitamin D milk, the designation ‘‘vitamin D milk,” and such other information as may & required by the board of health. fie 6. permit number. re ¢ _ 7. On all cans, bottles, and other containers of pasteur- _ ized or certified milk, the words ‘‘to be sold’’ and there- _ after the day of the week on which the milk or milk product is to be sold to the final corisumer, the height of the letters. of the day of the week to be not less than 3/16 inch on 38 @Eahibit “A.” -g bottle caps, and not less than 5/8 inch on tags attached. to each container when contained in cans. 8. On all cans and other containers of\milk and milk -products received by pasteurization plants from receiving required by the board of health. 4 . stations, the day of the week received by the. receiving station. ; ol 9. The word ‘‘milk’’ shall not appear or be used on any label, cap, receptacle, or container for any products except those defined in this article as milk, skimmed milk, butter- milk, cultured buttermilk, vitamin D milk, and any other products designated by the board of health. | All milk produced shall be delivered daily to a milk“re- ceiving statidn or a pasteurization plant. All milk received by pasteurization plants must he . pasteurized within such time of production or receipt by the receiving station as may be designated by the’ rules and regulations of the board of health. rt Pie Every restaurant, cafe, soda fountain, or other establish- ‘ment serving milk or milk products in bulk shall poe d at ,a all times, in. a place designated by the board of lrealt notice approved by the board of health, giving all infor- mation required in this section, and such other information ilk only is to be delivered from a dairg farm to a receiving station or pasteurizing plant, and all milk pro- duced for pasteurization shall be delivered daily to a milk receiving station or a pasteurizing plant. All milk re- ceived by “een yoarer plants must be pasteurized 2258 within 24 hours of production or receipt by the re- ‘ceiving station. ea od Cans, tanks, or similar receptacles of milk or milk prod- ~ nets delivered in or into the city of Chicago shall be sealed . with an unbrokén wire or metal seal, at the place where such milk or milk prodycts are- placed in such cans or recep- - — except where expressly exempted by the board of, e t 4 2 F ‘ ” The original tags or labels shall remain on all cans,” tanks, or similar containers until the milk or milk products —_ containers are emptied therefrom for processing or. sale. | ape All caps or labels on cans, bottles and other containers of pasteurized milk; cream and skimmed milk shall include. the words ‘‘before noon’’ after the words ‘‘to be sold.”” A proof-print or sketch of the bottle cap-or cover, or of the can tags and labels showing the size and arrangement of o@ Exhibit ‘A? ) 39 the lettering ‘thereon, shall be submitted to and approved , by the board of health. When milk or milk products are enclosed in bottles or glass jars, the name or address blown into such bottle or | glass jar, or otherwise indicated thereon, shall not be other than or different from that which is indicated on the cover or cap thereof. : ie . Milk products placed into storage or frozen, for periods exceeding seven days, shall be stored or frozen in the orig- inal container and bear the original tags or labels on such containers. A record shall be furnished to the board of health of the place and date of storage, kind and amount of product, and a record shall also be furnished of the time said milk’ product is removed for use. Dried milk and-milk products ‘and butter shall bear the board of health permit number stenciled on the outside and inside surfaces of the barrel, tub or other container, in letters at least one inch in height, and butter shall also bear said mark stamped on the top surface of the butter in each tub or container in the following letters and figures: C. B. H. (permit number). . 3091. Inspection of Dairy Farms and Milk Plants—Re- rt to Be Posted.) At least once during each inspection (period, the board of health shall inspect all dairy farms - and all milk plants whose milk or milk products are in- tended for consumption within the city of Chicago. In case the board of health discovers the violation of any item of sanitation, it shall make a second inspection after a lapse of such time as it deems necessary for the defect to be remedied, and the second inspection shall be used in de- termining compliance with this article. Any violation of any item of this ordinance on two consecutive inspections shall be cause for immediate revocation of permit. . One copy of the inspection report shall be posted by the | _ board of health in a conspicuous place upon an inside wall of one of the dairy farm or milk plant buildings, and said inspection report shall not be removed by any person except the board of health.. The original copy of the inspection report shall be filed with the records of the board of/health.*® * The first sentence of this section should not be taken to imply that one inspection per inspection period is a desirable frequenéy. It should, in- stead,‘be regarded as the legal minimum. In actual practice, it is desir- able to inspect every dairy farm at least two or three times during each inspection period and évery milk plant at least every two weeks. As often as possible, inspection of farms should be made during milking time, and of plants while pasteurization or processing is in progress. “o ° Q oe... ark Exhibit ~4:"" A dairy or milk plant may immediately’ have its a revoked without waiting for the end of the i a ee if two successive inspections disclose one or »\violations ‘of the requirements. Even if the two vio not re-.. _ fer to the same item of sanitation, this nals svertheless be cause for immediate revocation of permit. The inspector should -post one copy of the inspection re- port at the.dairy or milk plant, and said report not be removed, altered or defaced by any. person except the board of health.** Every inspection report shall be. receipted for upon the place designated on the face thereof, except that if inspec- tions are made in the absence of the proprietor or his ~ agents, the inspection report should be nevertheless, . but, in addition, a written notification should be mailed to said proprietor. - 3092. Examination of Samples.) Bee inspection period, a number of —, of milk or roducts from each dairy farm and eac on rate days and examined by the board of health. _ Samples of milk and/or milk products from stores, cafes, per fountains, restaurants, and other places where milk or milk products are sold shall be examined as often as the -board of health may require. Bacterial plate counts shall: be made. in conformity: with the latest standard methods recommended by the American Public Health Association, or arly other method approved by the board of health. Examinations may imclude such other ‘chemical and gh | sical determinations -as the board of health ma ' necessary for the detection of adulteration, ex- 2259 aminations to be made in accordance with the latest standard methods of the American Public Health As- sociation and‘ the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, or any other method approved by the beard of health. Bacterial plate counts, uctase test, and cooling temperature results shall be given to the producer or dis- tributor concerned as soon as determined if said ‘Tesalts _ fall without the limits prescribed. Samples may be taken ‘by the- board of health at any time “— to the final de- livery of the milk. or milk produts. roprietors of | stores, cafes, restaurants, soda fountains, vale er similar © "Phe milk-house wall of the farm and the wall of the plant office are effective locations. , gt Exhibit ‘' A.’’ 41 places shall furnish the board of health, —_— its request, with the name of ‘the distributor from.whom their mi _ and/or milk products are obtained. Bioassays of the vitamin D content of vitamin D milk shall be made when uired by the board of health in a laboratory acceptable to it for such examinations.. — a . Samples of milk and milk products shall be paid-for at — the market price upon request. - Four or more samples of a given milk supply shall be examined before —s to determine the average bac- terial quadity of the milk. It is required that at least four samples be taken from each supply during each inspection’ , Period. | Bacterial Plate Counts and Reductase Tests It is required that grade A pasteurized and certified milk fall within certain limits of average bacterial ‘plate counts or average reduction time as determined by the reductase test. : focgt Public health reason.—It is widely accepted that the bac- terial plate count of milk is an index of the sanjtary quality of milk. A high count does not necessarilY mean that ' “disease organisms are present, and a low count does not necessarily mean that disease organisms are absent; but a high bacterial plate count does mean that the milk has _ either -come from diseased ers,: has been milked or - handled under undesirable conditions, or. has been kept warm enough to permit bacterial growth. This means, in =is interpreted * Whitewash formula.—The following formula for whitewash has given satisfaction: I sca Wasevhk ues me cthiniecun 2 pecks - Spanish whiting (barium sulphate). pe cnaShes-cucé Vee nenecca te Se errr peer een Peer ee Abia SAECO SASSA CARED AES 1 peck . {i C. separated by spaces at least -inch wide: The walls and ceiling should be flushed down as often as necessary>~ _ Rubbish shall be kept remeved from the milk house. ‘Coagulated grease shall mot be permitted to accumulate in corners and crevices of the washing vat or between the — vat and the wall. . ‘ Flies which enter the milk house i in spite of good screen- ° s*** For these reasons the milk house should preferably be located _ . where the natural drainage is good. Wastes from the milk room shal}, be disposed of as indicated for. barn -wastes under item 6r (a). The dairymian may be guided by the-@llowing suggested approximate inilk house dimensions. - Suggested Floor Space -of Milk House wn! Milk outpyt Existing. | -_ Future. ‘ingallons: milk houses : “milk houses : Under 20: .. 4x 12°x 19 -20-50 : ° 107° x19 12x12” 50-100 . 10’.x 12’ 12° x 14’ Over 100:) 19x14’ 12’ x 16’ See Farmers’ Bulletin. No. 1214. g ? 7 > ? ‘ > eo 58 Oe Babibit eal ing should be killed daily by means of fly paper, fly traps, or fly-killing sprays or powders, or other mears.. | This section forbids the location of gas meres in the - milk room. | Item 10r. —Toilet, Every dairy farm shall be provided wih ‘one or more ‘sanitary toilets conveniently located, and constructed, op- erated, and maintained in accordance with the recommen- dations of the board of health so that the waste is inaé- _ - cessible to flies, and does not pollute the surface soil or | contaminate any water supply. \ Public health reason.—The organisms of typhoid hover, dysentery, and ¢olitis are présent i e body wastes of pers - ee with*these diseases. In’ the case of typhoid ~- fever well persons (carriérs) may discharge the organisms — in heir. body wastes. If a toilet’is not fly tight and so ¥ constructed as fo prevent overflow, infection may:be car- — ried from the excreta to the milk by flies, or through the = of water supplies or streams. in viich the cows .."' wade ‘ .. Satisfactory compliance. —This item shall be deemed to : have been satisfied if:. 2266 (1) There i8 one or more flush toilets connected to a sewer system or to a residential sewage disposal. plant and constructed and operated in’ accordance with plans and instructions of the board of health, or — (2) A chemical toilet or pit privy is provided, con- ' structed and operated in accordance with plans and in- structions of the board of health. (3) There is no evidence of bua defecation or urina-, tion about the dairy premises except in the toilets pro- vided Tor these purposes. . (4) Any other requirements of the board of health are satisfied. af Provided further, that’ (1) and (2) sh#ll inalude at least * Yhe following minimum standards: A. Flush toilets ——At dairy farms provided with water : under pressure, fitish toilets are preferable and their in- - _ stallation.shall conform to the board of health plumbing. ‘ regulations which 4Nall incindé (a). water pressure at all - . times sufficient to*fill the toilet reservoir; -(b) toilet bowl of non-absorbent material, rim-fush, properly vented and f. cod ji @. ses , ‘ Sool ra tee, ot ". trappedjand with tight joints; (c)' toilet placed in a well lighted and ventilated room which does not open: directly in to the milk room; (d) fixtures protected against freez- ing; (e) any ather requirement of the board of health. _ Satisfactory dis 1 of the effluent- from such toilets should preferably be into a sani sewer system, other- - wise treatment in a sepfic tank shafild be required and the effluent a into the, soil.” If proper soil is not available, the effluent shall be disposed of in accordance with the rules of the board of health. | i The' following shall be considered defects in flush toilet . installations: (a) insufficient water pressure or volume; (b) leaky plumbing; (c) clogged sewers as evidenced by overflowing tpilet bowl; (d) broken tile lines or clogged disposal field; (e) dairy cows having access to the effluent . below the sewer or disposal field discharge; (f) the efflu- ent coming to the surface of the ground in the absorption ° field; (g) toilet-rooth floor soaked with urine or other dis- charges; (h) offensive odors or other evidence of lack of _ cleanliness; (i) violation of any other requireme ) the board of health. : B, Chemical "sets —In areas where pit toilets might menace water supplies, or where a sufficient volume. of ‘water for the operation of flush toilets is not available, the - chemical toilet may be accepted: provided it (a) has a re- ceiving tank of acid-résisting material with an opening | easily accessible for cleaning; (b) has a bowl of nonab- sorbent material sufficiently elevated above the receiving basin to avoid splashing the user; (c) has the tank and bowl vented with at least a three-inch screened pipe, pre- « — ferably of cast iron, which extends at least’ two feet above . the roof line; (d) has the tank charged at proper intervals with chemicals of ‘a bactericidal nature gnd concentration ; (e) is placed in a well-lighted and ve ted room which does not open directly into the milk r dairy barn; (f) has an effective method of final dispotal ineluding burning, burial,°or leaching vat or cesspool ‘Where such cesspool will not endanger any water supply. The following shall be considered defects in a chemical toilet installation: (a) violation of any of the above re- quirements; (b)} disagreeable odors indicating too. infre- quent charging with chemicals, or inadequate concentra- ..— tion of chemicals in the charge; (c) evidence of improper disposal of the tank contents; and (d) lack of cleanliness _ . in the toilet compartment and room. O° Bahibit “A,” €. Pit toilets—For satisfactory compliance the follow- ing specifications shall apply: sete ate _ (a) Location.—Pit _ ernous or loosely stratified: formations, nor in close prox- * jmity to shallow wells. \ The. location of the pit shall -be - consistent with the requirements ,of item llr. The pit should preferably be at least 50 feet'distant from any well, spring, or other source of domestic water supply and, -if possible, upon ground sloping from the water supply. A ilets shall not be installed in cav- ~ distance of less than 50-feet will. be permitted’ only upon... specifichbapproval of the board of health.. (b) Thé pit—The pit shall have an original minimum capacity of not less than 60 enbic feet and shall be so exca- vated that the cribbing, when inserted, chall make a firm, : uniform contact with the earth walls on all sides. ls _ (e) Pit cribbing.—The pit cribbing shall extend not less than three inches above the original ground line, and to _ the full depth of the pit except in rock formation or in _ very tight sofl, in which cases the lower section of the . cribbing may be omitted. Sa. ae Ay (d) . Pit. curbing.—In case of, concrete 6r metal-slab * privies, an- additional collar of reinforced concrete shall constructed.around and just outsidevthe top of the pit cribbing on which to set the slab. ThisgcoMar shall be at © least three inches wide and extend down at, least four inches into firm earth and up to the'top of the pit cribbing. . In the case of wood-slab privies, if such a concrete collar is not constructed, there shall be constructed,in lieu thereof .a mudsill ofeat least 2-inch by 4inch material around. and just outside the :top of the pit cribbing. This sill ' 2267 shall be at least as long and ag{wide as the privy floor - | or pit cover and shall be set on well-tamped earth. —_. (e) Pit Mound.—An earth mound ‘shall be banked by © tamping the excavated earth in layers around the pit curb- | ing and level with the top of the curbing. for a distance of not less than 18 inches, then outward to. meét the sur- 7 —" ground surface with a slope. not-greater. than in 3.. ah “ys : f . {f) Seat riser—The bench or, seat ‘risér shall have an inside clearance of not less than-I8 inches to the front. and rear walls and not less thah 12:inches to the side walls: _ The top of the seat shall be not Tess than 12 nor more than 16 inches from‘ the floor. The seat riser shall be‘so con- | y’ ” ° ; : LN Q . -” \ ° OS i eee Glo ~ structed and. bonded with the floor as to prevent seepage “" through the riser onto. the- floor. ’ (g) * Seat cover.—The ‘seat opening shall be. covered with a lid, hinged ‘so as to provide a clearance of not less _ than three inches horizontally between the back of the seat opening and the lid when raised. The-lid shall be so con- structed and installed thft when closed it will exclude flies. - (h) Vent pipe.—The pit sliall be vented from the riser -~ toa point outside the building by’a flue or vent pipe having a cross-sectional area of not less than’seven square inches, . The joints shall be tight and the opening screened with46- ‘mesh copper screen wire. ce ns (i) Floor and riser.—The floor and riser shall be built’ of impervious material or tongue-and-grooved lumber, in a manner to exclude flies. The floor and bench, or riser, for. a single unit shall cover an area of at least 16 square feet. __ {j) | Superstructure—The house” shall be rigidly con- ~ ‘structed and shall provide privacy and protection from the ‘elements. Except where climatic conditions ‘prohibit, the building shall be ventilated by leaving a 4-inch opening at the top of the walls just beneath he roof. The building should preferably be covered with % roof having a pitch of at least 1 in'4 and with an overhang of not less than 5 inches front, 13 inches back, and 9.inches on each-side, | with a facing board not less than 4 inches wide extending ‘around the entire margin of the. roof. (k) Drain board.—In order to deflect rainfall from the house foundatipn, a drain board at least 30 incheg wide _ shall be placed at an‘ angle of approximately 45 degrees at | -the base of the building and in such manner as’to extend « beyond the edge of the roof; or, in lieu thereof; the roof . >» may be provided with a gutter with the discharge end = not less than 18 inches beyond thé edge of the roof. . 3 ? (1) -Maintenance and operation.-The following shall considered defects tm pit-toilet installations; (a) evi- dence of caving around the edges-of the pit; (b) signs of- overflow or other evidence -that -the pit is full; (c) seat covers open; (d) broken, perforated, or unscreened vent Pipe; (e) uncleanliness of any kind in the Jet building; (f) toilet room opening directly into milk réem er dairy barn; and (g) evidence of light entering pit except through - when seat cover is raised; (h) violation of any other requirement of the board of healthh —§ «- . r et, ; eA . eres Exhibit “A.” e : Item lir Meas Suet. The water supply forthe milk room and dairy barn shall be properly located, constructed, and operated and shall ‘be easily accessible, adequate, and of a safe sanitary quality. . . Public health reason—A dairy farm water supply should ,be accessible so as to encourage its use in cleansing and we cooling operations ; it should be adequate so that cleansing -and ‘rinsing will be thorough; and it should be of safe, sanitary quality in. order to avoid the infection of milk utensils, _ A slightly polluted water supply ,used in. the rinsing of dairy utensils and containers may fe far more dangerous than a similar water supply used for drinking purposes . only. Bacteria grow much faster in milk than in water, | and the severity of an attack of a given disease depends largely upon the size of fhe dose of disease germs taken into the system. Therefore, a small number of disease organisms .consumed in a glass of water from a slightly polluted well may possibly result in no harm, but if left in a milk vessel which has been- rinsed with the water may, ~ after several hours growth in the milk, result -in a case of disease. ° “Satisfactory. compliance. —This item shall be deemed to have been satisfied: ( 1) When the water supply is easily accessible ‘to the milk house and the dairy barn. . (2) When the water supply is, in the jndeniont of the inspector, adequate in quantity to promote sion wale and proper cooling. - (3) When no surface or cistern water ante is used except under conditions approved by the board of health. - (4)° When the source of water supply is a publie water supply approved by the board of health, or a spring, dug. ‘well, driven well, bored well, or drilled well whic complies with the following specifications ; provided that items (c), (f), and (j) shall be required only for water-supply struc- tures which are installed subsequerit to the first inspection based upon these reqnirements : At least one inspection shall be made each inspection ‘ period to determine whether the location, cofstructior, and operation of the supply comply with the specifica- ° =o ‘ 3 m , - : ars : oe, a -Behibit (A? 63 tions which follow. Bacteriological results on samples _ 2268 of water shall comply with the U. S. Treasury Stand- [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386403_0017%3A01. Public record. Not legal advice.