Transcript of Record — Frank v. Maryland

Supreme Court brief1959

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ite ss

“oe

eke 2

) a

hee ATT :

aS SRO a

a ee en ke

eee

~. ._ SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES -

: ee OCTOBER TERM, 1958

eee Ae No. 278

AARON D. FRANK, APPELLANT,

| | a

¢ , . VS.

STATE OF* MARYLAND.

APPEAL FROM THE CRIMINAL COURT OF ‘BALTIMORE;

| STATE MARYLAND mit ieee

I NDEX. :

Original Print —

Record from the Criminal Court of Baltimore, State

of Maryland . ee

. Docket entries 7 1 1

. Proceedings in. aa? ‘Maciavete’s Court for the —

Northern District of Baltimore, Maryland , tiatainaesd 3 2

Commitment _.. SS ORNS : “/-: 2

Notice of appeal —.......-... | 5 4

Record from the Criminal Court of ‘Baltimore, Gi Poth

Transcript of proceedings —.-. ea 4

Appearances. : "8 5

Testimony of ‘William’ Howard Gentry— : ‘ “hos

: direct , 3 es

: Offer in evidence 2. ace | ea

‘Testimony of William Howard Gentry— ; ae th abe ecb

| | direct __| ae 8

: Offer in evidence ___...._.. pia . So RB:

— prt :

Recorp Press, PRINTERS, NEw York, N. Y., DECEMBER 2, 1958 _

' @

Record Sosa the Criminal Court of Baltimore,

Maryland—Coentinued

Transcript of proceedings—Continued

Testimony of William Howard Gentry—. :

aes direct . ae

; cross | eons

diver William Johnson—

nk A Sinica eeninebceies™

Verdict I nt bee

Motion to dismiss and “denial ‘thereof Recmmncakestuaingon .

Exhibits: | - |

Eight photographs ‘introduced in “whales by

- the State —

Pamphlet entitled—“Baltimore City Health

Department”, City Health Code”, “Article

| 12 of the Baltimore City Code of 1950” ___...

Stipulation re:transcript of record — pe ae

Baltimore City Charter (Flack’s 1949 edition)

(excerpt)

Motion for verdict ‘of * not - and denial

Judgment __

Letter from Clerk of the Court of Appeals of

Maryland to ‘Benjamin Lipsitz, regarding de-. .

_ nial of petition. for writ of certiorari, dated

April 28; 1958 _...." ;

Letter from Clerk of the Court of heaeale of

Maryland to°Benjamin Lipsitz, regarding case

in the Court of Appeals of Maryland, dated

* June 17, 1958 >. EME DN: AEE CREE Bt Sh

Clerk’s certificate. (omitted in printing) Seat ae

Order noting probable jurisdiction sae

[fol. 1]

In tHE Crimian Court OF BaLTIMorg, |

‘ State or MarytanD _ .

‘oc >. ~ JOomer Entries

_ State or Maryann,

vs.

, i. 3 € }

| Aaron Davin Frank

» 9

Appeal Docket 1958.

; January Term. --

“Number 103.

3 March. 6, 1958 ‘Appeal Certificate Sais the-N wihers Dis-

trict. of Baltimore City—filed. Traverser

tried. and’ found Guilty by Magistrate

_ Henry L. Rogers, on March 6th, ‘1958 aiid

fined "$20.00: and costs: $1.70. |

_ Charge: Violation of Sectign 120 of: Article 12 at Balti-

-. © more City, Code in-that a nuisance is suspended

~ ‘at premises. 4335 Reisterstown Road, owned by -

Aaron Frank, consisted of rat infestation, undue

trash and debris and said Aaron Frank has re-

“fused entry to said —— to said bi H.

< Gentry. .

pee Witness Officer Francis Johnson, Northern |

District and W.-H. Gentry, . 202

Guilford Avenue.

Appearance of Benjamin Lipsitz, Esquire, filed. . & i

March 17, 1958 Arraigned and pleads Not Guilty.

March 17, 1958 Verdict: Guilty.

March 17, 1958 Fined $20.00 and costs—Oppenheimer,

+ Judge. ($20.00 paid 3 in aromas Dis-

trict). .

March 17, 1958 Stipulation filed.

March 17, 1958 Motion to dismiss: filed and_ Denied—

Oppenheimer, J udge. .

“March 17, 1958 » Motion for Verdict of Not Guilty filed

and Denied—Oppenheimer, Judge.

March 17, 1958. _Court costs of- $15.50_paid-Sheriff.

. June 16, 1958 Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court,

-.,* of the United States filed. . Seta

- June 25, 1958 Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the

) : Criminal Court of Baltimore with en-

dorsement thereon, of. disposition of

said Petition. ; .

= ‘Answer to Petition for Writ of Cer- |

‘tiorari.

[fol. 2] 3. Copy of: letter diiicleed to

| Benjamin Lipsitz, Esquire, dated

ae April 28, 1958- advising the disposi-

. - tion in the Court of Appeals of the

Petition of Writ of Certiorari;

"June 25, 1958 °° Transcript -of ‘Testimony filed. Trans-

cript Number. 1591. ;

Clerk’s Certificate: to foregoing paper (omitted i in print. ‘

ing). | | 4

[fol. 3] |

_In, THE Minnieniae CouRT FOR THE NorTHERN Disraicr,

OF. BaLTIMorE, MaryYLanb

CoMMITMENT—March 6,°1958 7 pa

RAN es ae 29—P.B.

‘Commitment to Jail, (in Default of Fine) =

"State of Maryland, City of Baltiniore, to wit:—

. To the Warden of the Baltimore City Jail, Greeting :

Whereas, Aaron David Frank, wh. age 50, herein called -

* sthe Traverser, after having been informed ‘by: ine of his

right. to have a trial by jury on.the charge hereinafter .

mentioned, preferred against the Traverser on the oath ©

of W. H. Gentry and having thereupon declared that he

wished to waive his said right to a trial by jury, jan

by the determination, of said charge by me, and the S

Attorney for the City of Baltimore not having,

trial of said offense, prayed a jury trial on behalf of the

' State of Maryland; was, thereupon, on. this 6t day of

March, 1958, duly tried before the undersign , a Justice

_of the ‘Peace. of the State of Maryland i in and for the City

aforesaid, duly selected to sit at ‘the Northern Police Sta-..

tion House, upon ‘the charge of, and was therupon (sic)

on said trial found guilty of the offense of Viol. .of See:

120 of Art. 12 at BalteCity Code ‘in n that a nuisance is

“suspected at premises 4335 Reisterstown Road, owned by

- Aaron Frank, consisted of rat infestation, undue trash and

‘debris and ‘said Aaron Frank has refused entry to said

‘premises to said W. H. Gentry, on or about the 27th day

of | February, 1958, in Baltimore City, State of Maryland,

and it was thereupon adjudged that the said Traverser

forthe said offense should pay a fine-of $20.00 and $1.70

cents costs; and it was further adjudged that if the said.

sum should not be paid forthwith, the said Traverser

should be imprisoned in the Baltimore City Jail, until such

payment be made or until the said Traverser should be.

~ discharged by due course of law; and ,

Whereas, the said Traverser has not paid the . said fine ’

and costs, or any part thereof, byt (sic) therein has. made

(fol. 4] default. Now, Therefore: you are hereby com- —

manded to receive from any officer the ‘body of the said

Traverser and he safely in your Jail and custody until

the said fine’ and costs shall have béen paid or until the

said Traverser shall be thence discharged by due course |

of law. .Given under = hand and seal this 6th day of

March 1958.

- (Signed) “Henry L. Rogers, J.P. (Seal), "Betis

Justice for Northern: District, |

Fine Has Been Paid. Defendant Has Been Released

Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper (omitted i in eat

ing). , ; orig pa

(fol. 5].

| In THE Macusrnare's Count FOR THE Nossa Disrnict,

- Pouce Court

i, : ° a °

Stave oF MaRYLAND .

vs. : :

‘Aaron D. Frank pene

- Notice oF angina 6, 1958

Mr. Clerk: :

Please enter an \Appeal in the ‘above- entitled matter to I

_the Criminal Court of Baltimore. ~ oe

(Signed) Penjpnin Lipsitz, Attorney for defendant.

~ Endorsed thereon, as follows: Appeal. noted March 6

1958, Henry L. Rogers, Magistrate.

: Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper + (omitted ak, print:

me). ped Te ee é

(fol. 8.0... [File endorsement omitted]

<x THE CRIMINAL Court, Part Ul OF BALTIMORE |

3 y Appeal #103/1958 ©

> StaTE oF MARYLAND

Cee a

Aakon Davi Frank

Before Judge Reuben Oppenheimer.

— oe OE :

‘Pransoripe | of Castine, March 17, 1958—

a - Filed June 25, 1958

3 gy aes

Counsel Present: _ a--€

Norman Polski, Assistant ‘State’ S Attorney, for ‘the

State.

Beqyamin Lipsitz, Esq., for the Defendant,

Mr, Lipsite? Before we plead, since there is no ‘indict-

thent or- any information in this case, I would like to have.

the charge read into the record and taken down by the’

Reporter. Will you read the charge, please, Mr. Clerk?

The Clerk: In Appeal, #103 of thie docket of 1958, the

State charges violation. of Section 120 of Article 12 of the

Baltimore City’ Code in that a nuisance is suspected ‘at

prémises 4335 Reisterstown Road, owned by Aaron Frank, .

consisting of rat infestation, undue trash and debris, and

(fol. 9] ‘said. Aaron Frank has refused entry to said prem-

ises to said W. H. Gentry—I suppose he i is an inspector of

the Health Departmegt——: =”

Mr. Lipsitz: I believe‘ so. ; :

The Clerk: On the 27th of February, y >. Sit aera

Mr. Lipsitz: Before we plead, while I am aware of the |

Givner case and while the Court may be reluctant to decide

constitutional questions in the, abstract,. I wish to make a

motion to dismiss the charge, on constitutional grounds, in

open court and I shall file a written motion-to dismiss.

The motion goes on the grounds that Section 120 of

Article 12 of the Baltimore City Code is repugnant to the

23rd and 26th Articles of the Declaration of Rights of the .

—€onstitution of Maryland and is repugnant to the Fourth °

- and Fourteenth Ameéndments-of-the Constitution of the ~

United States in that it deprives the defendant of his right—__.

_to be secure from unreasonable~searches and seizures and

_. subjects him to such searches and seizures, and, further,

_to unlawful tresspasses (sic) on his property and to a wrong-

ful taking there of. We have a written:motion that we many

filed. .I am giving a copy to the State.

“ae

—s

rds

“The Court: I shall ‘te ruling until I have heatd the

testimony.

oe 10] Mr. Lipsita: The plea is nat guilty, court trial. .

Thereupon De

duced on behalf of the Stag, having been first duly sworn

Wititium Howarp at a witness of lawful age, pro- .

according to law, was: examined and testified as follows:

By the Bailiff:

Q. Give the Court your name.

A. William Howard Gentry. ©

Q. And your official position? ©

A. I am a Sanitarian of the Baltimore City Health De- -

partment.

Direct examination. ae ;

By.Mr. Polski:

“ie I direct your uttdation to February 27, 1958. Did

you have occasion to go to 4335 Reisterstown Road with

reference to an investigation of those premises?

A. I did. : ae

Q.: Tell the Court what: you noticed = you got there

- and, what happened next.

The Court: Before you tell me that, ars did you have

occasion to go to those premises?

[fol. 11] The Witness: On February 26th, we had a com- .

, plaint from a neighbor in the 4300 block where the defen-

dant lives. She complained of rats in her basement.

Mr. Lipsitz: Objected to. I move to strike out what the

neighbor said:

The Court: I will aiid out the testimony as to what

‘the neighbor said but permit to remain in the fact that

there was a complaint from the — as to rats in her

- basement. That was the complains?

The Witness: « Yes sir.

The Court: But strike out what the neighbor said.

oe * Then what happened?

¥ . ‘

M——""

A. On inspection. of ‘the complainant’s cellar, we found a,

that she -had rat proofed her cellar all the way ees e

closed all openings in the concrete. :

The Court: In the complainant’ s .cellar.

The Witness: In the complainant's ‘cellar.

Mr. Lipsitz: We object and move to strike. It ‘does: not .

seem. relevant, what the neighbor did.

he Court: Is this part‘ of the a) eae of the neigh-

thot that you made?

he Witne&s: Yes sir.

[fol. 12] The Court: Motion aes

The Witness: In the process of rat proofing the cellar,

she trapped a rat ‘in her basement.

Mr. Lipsitz: Objected to.. He.hasn’t connected the neigh-

bor’s house with this house. ~

The Court: Is this part of the general sea tae a of the

neighborhood that you made?

The Witness: The complainant inféxmed me they figured

the rats were.coming from the corner house.

Mr. Lipsitz: Objected to.. We move to strike.

The Court: Motion granted. You did receive a com-

plaint as to rats in this. immediate neighborhood? ee hae

The Witness: Yes sir. oie

The Court; As a result of the complaint, did you or

not make. an inspection of the houses in the viemity?

_ The Witness: Yes sir.

“ The Court: Was that part of your official duties?

The Witness: Yes sir.

Q. One of the -houses you inspected, was ‘that #4335

Reisterstown Road, the house of the defendant? ir .

= Yow. \

Q.. What happened when you got to #4985 Reisterstown.

_ Road? .

- The. Court: That is the house of the defendant,

[fol.13} Mr. Polski: Yes sir. ..

The Witness? We-first knocked-on.the ie to get i

attention of the occupant. After knocking on the door and

getting no response, we proceeded to inspect, the outside,

of the premises. - ea

—_—

. of February?

Avoutid the area of the f ront poreh, there was consid able

_ debris, dirt, and. trash, and openings pgig ra the front

porch. :

Around the side of the house— ey gira hy,

The Court: Are there steps going up * the house?

The Witness: Yes sir. I have pictures that were taken. —

. Q. Were they. taken while you. were there? *

A. They were taken on the-7th of March, after——

The Court; When. did you ‘make the inspection?

The Witness: On the 27th of February. A$

Mr. Lipsitz: We object to the pictures.

q:: Were you there when the pictures were taken?

ee te Se ee

Q. You went back on the 7th?..

°: A. Yes sik. : ! ga

Q. The pictures taken on the 7th of iii, “do they |

~ [fol. 14]° depict the same condition you saw on the 27th.

A. Exactly. i ee

| "OFFER IN. Evmence

b. “My. Polski: Your Honor, we offer the pictures.

-Mr. Lipsitz: Objected to. hen.

The Court: Overruled.

-d Produce the pictures. |

% *

(Thereupon; : the witness produced . a group of : ee

graphs. | eae Renae oe, iS ts

Q. Who took these pictures (indicating) ?

A. I took them ‘in, compelty with Mr. Charles Carroll,

another sanitarian. - vee

Q. Is he in -court today? Ses pact

‘A. He isin court today: z

Q. Describe these pictures——

Mr. Lipsitz: Objected to.

The Court: The pictures speak for aia Te I think.

_ Mr. Lipsitz: How many are there, Mr. Bailiff? —

-’The Bailiff: ee are — pictures. » y

Viervianiis ‘the pictures just offered in evidence were .

passed up. to the Court for its inspection. 4 Gare é

The Court: These are all of the front of the. house?

(fol: 15] “The Witness: .T

the rear of the house. You an see a long view from the

alley. mee ae OE ee i

ose are of the front steps and -

\S ‘

| *.Q. Going back to vines 27th , what did you see when

- you went to the house? What was the condition you saw? |

A. The condition of the house was an ‘extreme state of

‘decay. The rear of the porch, the foundation, were coming

away. There was a deep pit:wnder the rear porch and an

“oil tank. There were concrete: blocks, debris and trash. On a‘

the north- side ‘of the house, there was a cellar opening.

Tt had been partially boarded up. | aN

. The Court: Is.it a row house? -

The Witness: It is. a detached, frame house : completely

detached.

. The opening in the side. of ‘the cellar where they had

tried to board it up was about six by six inches.

~The shutters on ‘the ‘residence were. nailed.. You could

see the nails: from the,side. sata

In the rear of. the:house, there was a’ pile, later identified

-as rodent feces mixed, with straw and trash and debris to

approxitnately half. a ton.

The appearance of the feces led me to believe it was

rodent feces, probably chinchilla. The defendant told me

. [fol. 16] he had been raising chinchillas but some children

had stolen them. :

Q. After finding those conditions on r the outside, wilint’

did. you do?

A. While we were inspecting the rear of the ilasiace:

the defendant came, around the side. I. did not know his

_ name at the time.

_ SHe said: “What are you tala on my saduadaig I nid

that we were from the Health Department and we are in- ;

specting your ,premises’ for rats-and that we had found

considerable evidence of recent rodent infestation. I asked

the defendant would he permit.us to inspect: his basement

area for rats. He. denied us entrance,

_ I then showed him my identifieation and read him Section

_ 6, Article 12 of ine Baltimore City Code and he informed

me he had plenty of money and he did not mind paying

’ a fine.

Q. What is that section you tiferved tot

Fe The Court: Yes, that has to be offered i in evidenee..

ae 3

_OrrEn IN Evipence

Mr. Polski: We offer it in evidence.

The Witness: Section 6—— : Vs

Mr, Polski: “That is not the section he is indicted under

[fol..17}° this morning. | He is indicted under Section 120.

We offer that. |

_ Mr. Lipsitz’: No. hdestion. I will ask the State’s At-

’ tornéy if he will not stipulate to the inclusion: of the —

es Article in the record.

The Cotrt: Yes, that is by agreement of: liad. )

Mr. Lipsitz: I have drawn up a stipulation, the entire ©

Article 12 and certain sections of the Charter of Baltimore

__.City in order to make the record complete.

- The Court: Any objection? aera, &

. Mr: Polski: No sir. .

“The Court: You may read. the etek: ne

Mr. Polski:. The Section he read to the defendant says:

“If any person shall knowingly obstruct or resist the Com! |

missioner of Health, or any person by him appointed, in

‘the execution of the powers to them given, or in the per-

. formance of the duties enjoined on them by this or any

-other Ordinance’ in relation to the public health, such per-

son shall forfeit and pay a sum not exceeding $200.00:”

Q.°Was any mention made at the time of this —— ;

120? .. :

. w& Na A Goons oe

-Q.- What happened after ihat? ea ;

‘{fol.18]- A..The following day, Webtuary 28th, after’ I

‘had gotten: in touch with the sanitary police, Officer Me- -

_ Allister, he suggested that I go out in company with Officer |

“ Curlotta and Officer’ Bridénbach and see if we could not

gain entranee by arbitration. :

. 8 % , .

° ‘ A ae a

®.. nok we

oe, ? . ”

z . “. ° “S% ; - . . ~

. . ;

. . i _B- %

2 iF . ee er

= - = E . ‘ ie

Mr. hintin® Objected to sini we move to strike.

~ The Court: Sustained. What happened?

.. The Witness: In. the company’ of Officer. Bridenbach:

- and ‘Officer. Curlotta,. we went to the defendant’s ee 5;

~on February 28th. ~

~The Court; About “~what_ time of the day did ‘you go.

‘there?

.. The Witness: About slices o’cloelt in. the morning, to

see if we could, through arbitration, gain entratice to in-

spect. No one answered the door. I proceeded to reinspect

the premises .in the. company of Officer: Bridenbach. and 2

Officer Curlotta.. ;

*. The Court: You-mean the exterior ~.

‘ The Witness: ‘Yes sir. ~.

Q. What happened. | ee ;

A. We felt the onl hing't to i in that case was to have ~

the defendant in equrt under Section 120 of Article 12 so

“us into his residence. ; e RE.

Q Mi. Lipsitz: I object to ‘that part of the witness? s answer:

as to what the Judge might do. oon

_The Court: Sustained. ~

Q. You are referring to. Section 120: “Whenever the

~ Commissioner of Health shall have cause to suspect that:

a nuisance exists in any house, cellar or enclosure, he may

-* occupier shall refuse or delay to open the same and admit .-

a free examination, he shall forfeit and pay for every such

refusal the sum of Twenty Dollars. Wess

A. That is right.. on

“Q. Was Mr. Frank. unianied into Court?

_A. He was. . |

Q. Were you prebent at the time oe the court trial? ©

A. Yes sir.

The Court :.. What court do you pars ,

The Witness: ~The Magistrate’s court at the Northern:

’ Police Station, Magistrate Rogers. -

Mx, Polski: I have no further questions. , :

The. Court: You did not’ go into the |: ae

—

[fol. 19] ‘that maybe the Judge could convince yam to let’ .

‘demand- entry therein in the daytime; and:if the owner or | -

* Tol, 20) The Wits: I hiive not made an inside i inspec. -

tion.

Cross examination. .

; By Mr. Lipsitz:

Q. How long have you sient a Health Department Sani-

: tana ; df

' A. One: year.

o Do you work for a aiiaalad division or dotnet

A. I am connected with the Bureau of Rodent Control.

Q. You referred to “we” inspected when you testified. :

. Wéth regard to the first inspection, who: was with you that

day?

""- A, We are now in the process of training multiple dwell-

ing inspectors.' I had inspectors Crane and Harberg, who |

- are now multiple dwelling inspectors, with me. |

" ' Q. Were they both F accu when you spoke “with Mr.

* Frank? ,

A. Yes.

‘Q. What time of the day did you wes that first inspec-

tion, which was on February 27th?

A. About two thirty, betw een two oe two thirty i in thei —

afternoon. is 2.

Q. What was the’ ‘adie ‘of the person em made the

7 -complaint that led you to make this inspection?

A.. We do not have to give that information.

{fol. 21] Mr. Polski: L would object -any way. e don't

believe it is relevant..

The Court: I’ sustain the objection as to any conversa-

°* ‘tion with the person who made the complaint. :

Mr, Lipsitz; I am asking the identity of the person ae

ing the complaint. I.think it might be material. __ /

. Mr. Polski: Objected to.. : Sib

‘© The Céurt: There is aude testimony as toa complaint. :

of rodents in the neighborhood., I think the witness gaye

the address of the person who made: the complaint. I see

no, objection to giving the name as well. You may give -

the name. ‘It goes to whether or not there was reasonable

cause to suspect | that a nuisance existed.

4 . * F

4 t < . : 3 e

ae 3 is

The Witiess: Mrs. ‘iia. 4319 Reisterstown Road.

She is in a very highly nervous state.

The Court: Strike that.

| Q. How far is 4319 Reisterstown Road from the defen- |

dant’s house? oe -o.

A. About eight houses, about three hundred feet.

~ Q. You have testified about the exterior appedrance of

this house. You have mentioned certain structural defects.

A. That is ‘right.

[fol. 22]. Q. Structural defects: are not your-concern, as a

cs — Department Inspector, are they?

A. Where they relate to the harborage of vodents and

dus possible entry inte promises (sic) they are.

Q. Yowsaid the porch was falling down?’

' A. The accumulation of debris from the falling porch

had also fallen under the porch which constitutes, a rodent —

lharborage.

Q. Did you make a seb to. the: health division?

__ A. Rodent Control is primarily concerned with structural

defects that will permit, rodent harborage in the exterior or °

interior of buildings. The notice we send takes in allgphysi-.

eal defects.

Q. Did.you make a report to the buildings inspeetion

department? | :

A. I did not. _ Say ee

The Court: You may give tie reason, if you wish. —

Mr. Lipsitz: I think he has already. |

Q. You didn’t see any trash of debris inside?, 3

A.I have not been inside the premises. an

Q. Then the answer is? 7 \

A. No. .

[fol. 23] Q, Thank you. ie to the ‘outside of the houte,

you mentioned a pile of rodent feces and straw.

_A. Yes sir.

Q. How! long were you on the premises on the day of

your first inspection?

_A. About twenty-five minutes.

Q. You made a caréful examination of the outside of the

| premises?

A. From the outside of the premises, everything was so

apparent. that a minute inspection was unnecessary because

violations existed.

Q. Did you notice Mr. Frank’s flower bed in the rear

yard?

A. I noticed no flower bed: There weré some bushes.

_ Q. Didn’t Mr. Frank complain about .prowlers having —

‘ ,pulled flowers from his flower bed? en ¢

A. No. | ery

Q. Are you familiar with a’ compost pile?

A. Yes.

Q. Wasn’t this vile, in fact, such a compost pile? ;

A. The outward appearance or evidence did not indicate 7

a compost pile. ‘There were tin om bottles, and paper

a ee :

(fol. 24] Q. There was also straw aia jeaves!

A. Straw and debris and feces. From the shape and |

- eolor I surmize (sic) pa were some rodent feces « some

kind. -

Q It is not: against, a Health Department rule ‘ have

== compost pile, is it?

' A. Not unless it constitutes a nuisance.

Q. If a nuisance exists on the outside of the premises

- Is it part of your duties to serve a notice for that?

i ie

Q. Did you serve ‘notice on Mr. Frank for any nuisance

_you found on the outside on February 27th?

_ A. I sent Mr. Frank a notice. We only have one stenog-

rapher. The notice was sent on March 13th.

-Q. That was after the trial in the Magistrate’s court?

A. It ‘was.

Q. This compost pile was a good distance from the house.

The Court: That is a question?

Q. This pile that you have described. was a good distionss

from. the house, wasn’t it? ¥

A. About thirty feet.

~The Court: About: how ing is the lot?

[fol.25] The Witness: About forty. feet deep.

The Court: How wide is it on n Reisterstown Road?

The. Witness: I would say about eighty-five o or one hun-

dred feet:

Mr. Lipsitz: We will stipulate—the dietesedaink tells’ me

‘the lot is fifty feet by one hundred and thirty-seven feet;

fifty feet on Reisterstown. Road,. north and south, and one pps

hundred and thirty-seven feet in depth, east and west |

towards Park Heights Avenue.

_ Q. The notice. you have served on Mr. Frank for debris

outsidé does that refer specifically to this pile?

~ A. Thave it with me in my case.

The Court: That is the best evidence.’ ¥en are calling

‘for the production of the copy? > 3

Mr. Lipsitz: I wouldelike to see it before the’ witness

testifies. cite 7 enor a ‘ 7 |

~ The Court: Yes. at Saas as Gone

(Thereupon, the witness handed Mr. Lipsite -@. ‘paper

for his examination.) : }

Q. What is the-answer to the. enepeah

A. Yo. "|

The Court:: dive you putting this copy of the notice

‘[fol. 26] in: evidence? ma

Mr, Lipsitz: I am not inclined to. If the State eae

later, I have no objection to it. I wanted that one point °

from the witness. He consulted the notice for that purpose. |

The Court.: Read it. |

_ The Witness: “Mr. Aron Frank, 4335 Reisterstown Road, ,

~ Baltimore 8 Maryland. Mr. Frank, owner, faces Reisters-

town Road:

1, Clean and remove all trash and debris es the yard

and maintain same in a clean and sanitary condition at all

times,

“2. Remove all trash and debris from under front and

rear porches.

“3. Surface the yard area, including the side yard, to a.

distance of at least ten-feet from the rear Rica | wean wall

with four inches of concrete. :

“4, Provide all cellar windows with Aacesal removable,

screens of galvanized hardware cloth of one quarter inch

inieeh; of such construction the Mandeeni cloth extends to

outer edge of the frame. boa *

’ “5. Provide proper regulation galvanized metal garbage

- [fol. 27] containers with tight-fitting metal lids which are

to be kept on the containers at all times.

“6, Eliminate rats from the premises by trapping or

Poisoning. adiataes eee

Q. You: have testified that this is ile ¢ consisted i in Part of

‘rodent, feces, ;

A. Idid. |

Q. Would you say it iia’ chiefly of rodent. feces or

- other material? |

A. I would say it was. mixed with straw Pa other ma-

terial. How much was feces, I could not determine.

Q. Can you specifically, identify what kind of rodent feces

you say was on the pile? - is

“A. From the eonversation With Mr. Franka chincillla “

8, (sic) is a rodent. It is seventeen inches long approximately.

_ with a six inch tail. The feces of chincillas (sic) are about .

the same shape as rat feces. "Chinchillas feed off pellets

‘and grass. The feces were green, of the same shape as —

rodent feces. .

Q. Were they rat, feces? -

A. Rodent. | aes

Q. Were they rat ‘feces—specify. ‘

A. I specify they were rodent.

[fol; 28] Q. ‘They might have been chinchilla feces. ©

A. They might possibly.

Q. When you testified in the Magistrate’s court, when you

‘were cross examined on what kind of feces they were, you |

said you only supposed they were rat feces.

A. I said they were rodent feces.

Q. When cross examined,’ didn’t you ultimately state it ..

was just a supposition on your part that they were rat

feces? :

A. I said rodent.

Q.. They could just as well te chinchilla as ‘rat feces!

‘A. Rodent.

ey CS Lipsitz: Will your Honor ask him to answert

The Court: “Is not a chinchilla a rodent? ~

The Witness: Yes sir.

- The Court: Is there any different (sic) from a health as- .

_ pect between rodents which are rats and rodents which are

chinchillas t prerks BESS aeaaeel

The Witness: I intain—a nuisance—if he could

— chinchillas in the place to such a degree that they

re attracting Tats. in the a, ceperanatd — ‘constitute ~

a 5 wales. :

* Q. Did you in your siialain made whieni | you — the

(fol. 29] warrant for the defendant’s arrest asad him in

that with chinchilla infestation? ?

A. I charged ‘him with nothing except ——- us entry

a ‘to inspect the premises. .

. On the grounds that you had cause to suspect rat

infcstation$ . :

A. Rodent infestation.

Mr. Lipsitz: May I see ‘the committment? (sic)

(Thereupon, the Bailiff handed a paper to Mr. Lipsitz.) —

— Q. I am reading to you from the Magistrate’ s committ-

ment :—(sic) “Violation of Section 120 of Article’12 at

‘Baltimore City Code in that a nuisance is ‘suspected at’ '

premises 4335 Reisterstown Road, owned by Aaron Frank,

consisted of rat infestation, undue trash and debris and

said Aaron Frank has refused entry to said premises to said

W. H. Gentry”. You did not charge him with any chinchilla

infestation,

A. At the time it was suspected there were inside saliciie. oe

It could be-rat infestation. :

_ Mr. Lipsitz: Your Honor, I contemplate contending with

the State’s Attorney but not the witness.

The Court: The document for which. you have called

{fol. 30] speaks for itself in any case. You have asked the

witness to interpret. |

_Mr. Lipsitz: .I am trying to get the witness to specify

what kind of feces he claims to have seen. In the warrant,

‘he claims t to have. suspected rat infestation.

_ at premises 4335- Reisterstown Road, owned by Aaron

The Court: The wording is “that a nuisance is suspected ff

Frank, consisting of rat infestation, undue trash and debris

ran oe ‘It speaks for itself. —

<« You will not swear that these feces are rat feces?

Mr.. Polski: .Objected to. - r

The Court: Sustained:

-Q How many rats did you suspect from. your inspection

nee! in ‘this house?

Mr, Polski: Objected: to.

The Court: Sustained.

*-Q, “Infest,” I conceive means a large number of rats.

Do you agree? — ) |

Mr. Polski: Objected a

- “The Court: Sustained.

_ ’, Q. I will read you Webster’s definition of “infest.” This

is Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth edition. “Infest,

[fol. 31] a verb, transitive—to trouble greatly by numbers

or by frequency of presence; to assail persistently and in

numbers.” Do you agree with that? _

Mr. Polski: Objected to:

The Court: Sustained.

- Q. How many rats did you see when you inspected this

". property of March 27th? , Sar

“Mr. Polski: Objected to. oa]

The Court: If, you want that—overruled, | A

The Witness: None. |

Q. How many rat holes did you see—and I believe that

February 27th is the date, not March 27th—how many rat

_ holes did you see on that day?

Mr. Polski: Objected to. He can say there were holes .

and assume they were rat holes. |

- The Court:- The witness may answer and explain.

The Witness: On my inspection, I found several en-

trances to the interior of the dwelling.

— ee

meee

The Court? You do not mean human entrances?

. ‘The Witness: Openings into the dwelling that could

be used by rodents.

Q. Will you swear that you ilies any rat holest

[fol. 32] Mr, Polski: Objected to.

The Court: Sustained.

Q. Did you not in the Magistrate’s court testify on 1 ross

examination that you had‘seen no rat holes at all?

_ A. You cannot define a rat hole as an opening.

~The Court: The question is what’you testified to on that

point before the Magistrate.

-Q: Did you not before the Magistrate ies TOSS

examination that you had seen no rat holes on the day of

your first inspection? es ooeee

A. Yes. . :

Q. Thank you. Did you have a search warrant ‘ie: you

went to these premisest, .

_A. I did not,

Q. Did not Mr. Frank say to you that he would let you

in his house if you had a search warrant? |

A. He informed'me that “you will have ‘to get a search

*’ warrant if you want*to get in this house.”

‘. Q. Thank you.

| Q. Was there any immediate emergency confronting you

‘as to getting into this house? Yes or no.

A. Yes. : .

, (fol. 33]. Q. State what. it was. |

A. May I address the. Court _on-this? -

The Court: Yes, you: are asked to wcll s your answer.

- - The Witness: In the pursuance of my duties, I have a

very large territory. The fall and summer months are our

heaviest which means travelling all around the neighbor-

nace Complaitits are ‘our main source of information. _

When finding a situation as.I found, it is our duty to

clean up the situation as early as possible to prevent fur-

ther infestation of the neighborhood. We can only do that.

a a thorpugh inspection.

a 7

aetee ae

4 is .

'Q, ‘Could you not just as well have gone into the house

* one hour or two hours later as ‘at the time you demanded

_ entry? |

A. The Gites dant refused entry. ;

Q. I didn’t ask you that. Could you not. just as well have «

made your inspection one hour of two hours later than at

the time you demanded entry?

A. I could not. I had two students I had to release at

three o’clock. I have to be in the office at three thirty

‘évery day to take care of my reports. . , 7

Q. You had no knowledge of the condition of this house’

(fol. 34] until a neighbor ealled it to your attention?

_A. It is a-rule when we inspect a neighborhood to inspect

the adjacent houses to the area where you find roquats may -

be harboring. | |

The Court: Repeat the niaion.

(Thereupon, the Reporter repeated the question -—“Q.

You had no knowledge of the condition of this house until .

a neighbor called it to your attention?”) .

- The Witness: In: my territory, I have passed by Reistera-

town Road several times—— |

‘— ~The Court: This part of Reisterstown Road or some other 2

part? °

The: Witness: This part. I was under the impression it

_- Was a vacant dwelling. I was snowed under i in work.

Q. Was the emergency then an emergency in your. work?

A. Rodent infestation is always.an emergency.

-Q. You did not notice this emergency on ad prior

trine passed (sic) this house?

A. I did not stop.

Q. ‘What other houses -in the scsleticiiwaa did you in-

spect after you got this complaint on February 27th?.

. Mr. Polski: Objected to.

[fol. 35] The Court: Overruled.

The Witness: 4319 and 4325 or r 4327.-

The Court: What? — yet pamela

The Witness: 4319-——— : :

Q. You inspected three houses? |

A. Two houses, it was either 4325 or 4327.

Q: You inspected the house where 7 got the complaint

about Mr. Frapk’ s house?

A. Yes.

Q. And you inspected. Mr. Frank's house?

A. And another house.

Q. What was the. address of the other: house? =

A. Either 4325 or 4327, is ate

-.Q. How many houses.are there:1 in that block? + 0

A. About eight.

Q. Did you not, as a matter of fact, in your testimony |

‘in the. Magistrate’ s court state on your cross examination

- that there was no emergency, present when you Gemanded :

your entry? © 7

A. I did not. °

Q. You had ample time,. did you sat. to go and get a

search warrant if you SO chose before making your in-

spection? ..

-[fol. 36] Mr. Polski: Objected to. =

The Court: Sustained, We have been over. this.

Q. I suggest to you that you, could just as-+well have — .

- whade your inspection later the same day or some other

day, is that not so?

Mr. Polski: Objected to.

The Cort: ,Overtuled. .

The Witnes?: We have complaints every day. We have

to take care of complaints as they come in.

~Q. You came back the following day?

A. I did.

Q. So you could just. as well have made ‘your inspection

on thie second trip? ,

A. In company with Officer Bridunbech. and Officer Cur:

lotta, we made another inspection, tried to see the defen-

dant, but we were unable to-get in the door. We made.

another inspection. I wanted some witnesses.

Q. As.a matter of fact, did you fail to apply for a search

warrant because you figured the Magistrate might not.

‘issue it?

Mr. Polski: , Objected to. Bt a } 3 [v

The .Court: ‘f Sustained, | ae |

[fol. 37] Q. Tell me your reason for not applying for a

search warrant in this instance. ae

-———Mr. -Polski: Objected- to.

bot The Court: Sustained.

id you swear out the whivied: on | which. the defen-

dant was arrested? 7

- A, I did. sien ta 7

Q. Before whom? ~ _-— 5 - 3 ene

A. Magistrate Levin. et

- «The Court: Give the full name.

-Mr. Lipsitz; Marshall A. Levin.

. The Witness:. Of the Housing Court. He was taken

- over at the Northern that afternoon | ag o’clock.

Q. Are you familiar with Section £80 of Article 12 of the

Baltimore City Code, 1950 edition, 3

‘A. Yes.

Q. Will. you tell us what part of that section gives the

right,to have this defendant arrested?

‘Mr. Polski: Objected to.

The Court: Sustained.

Q. Were you present when the arrest was made? ©

Zraq \

[fol 38] Mr. Lipsitz: That is all.

_ (Testimony of witness concluded.)

Mr. Polski: Your Honor, counsel has given me this:

stipulation whieh I cannot sign because it goes beyond

Article 12 and includes Section 6.of the Charter and spe-

Ree’ four separate peraeranrs which I do not ave

- before me.

_ Mr. Lipsitz: I believe: we can look at those alas and

- €ounsel can-agree or disagree. I may say these are the

_ sections of the City Charter referred to by Judge B

in the opinion in the Givner case. I exclude the results ae

M4 .

Oe Re ee a.

at which esaky oils to the Fire Dieitinant, ete. These set

out the Health Department aspect of it.

Mr. Polski: I don’t see where Section 6 would be in

_ this book. ee }

____Mr. Lipsitz:~ Maybe'I can find it for you.

Mr, Polski: That will be very nice.

Mr. Lipsitz: I am reading from the Baier City

- Charter, Flack’s 1949 edition, Section 6 “General Powers.”

Shall I read them into the record? |

The Court: I don’t believe that’ is necessary.

Mr. Polski: Paragraph 1, 11, 5, and 24:

[fol. 39] Mr. Lipsitz: Paragraph 1 is -about general . |

powers. Paragraph D is” entry: on private property. Para-

graph il is health and nuisance. Paragraph 24, I_ believe, ’

. delegates police power.

Mr. Polski: In additigncit will be all of Article 12.

Mr: Lipeites—Whieh } s the health article of the Balti-

more City Code... .

‘Mr. Polski: ‘I hav no , objection. |

Mr. Lipsitz: Wilt you sign the stipulation.

. (Thereupon, Mr. Polski signed the stipulation, |

The Court: Have ¥« you any other witnesses, a e

_. Mr. Polski: No sir.

Mr. Lipsitz: Your Honor, I would now like to make a

motion both in open court and in writing for a verdict of

“not guilty:

_ The motion is on the: constitutional ground that Section

120 of Article 12 of the Baltimore City Code denies to the

defendant his right to be secure from unreasonable searches

_ and.seizures and/or from unlawful tresspass (sic) of his .

property and/or a wrongful taking. of his property, all in

violation of both the 23rd and 26th Articles of the Dec- *\

laration of Rights of the Maryland Constitution.and of

~ . the Fourth.and Fourteenth Amendments of ‘the’ Federal

[fol. 40]. Constitution...The said. section is repugnant to

each and all of the said Articles and Amendments and i is,

therefore, invalid.

( Thereupon, Mr. Lipsitz made his a aekaaoe to roe Court’

in suppert of his motion. )— |

( Avenue.

The Court: I deny your motion to dismiss and your

motion for a'directed verdict which in-essence is a demurrer ;

to the evidence. I think the State has made out a prima

facia (sic) case. That motion also is denied. |

Mr. Lipsitz: I will. call one witnes he sake of the —

record. I would like to call the -arres ny who is

here but the State has not called him. I am not sure of Ris -

name. Will you give it to me?

Mr. Polsky: (sic) I don’t know it.

Thereupon: ae y

~ Orricer Francis Wiu1amM JOHNSON, a witness of lawfal

age, produced on behalf of the Defendant, having been first:

duly sworn according to law, was examined and testified as

follows:

‘By the Bailiff; _ .

fe Give the Court your name hd district,

A. Officer Francis. ‘William Joh son, Northern: District.

{fol. 41] Direct examination.

By Mr. Lipsitz:

Q. Are you the Officer who arrested Mr. Frank?

A. I arrested the subject at about-four twenty-five. P. M.

on March 5th. That was on a warrant that was handed to

me at four o’clock that afternoon. .

Q. Who handed you thé warrant?. |

A. My bailiwick Sergeant. ; é

°Q. Where was Mr. Frank? /

A. Sitting in his antomenie in the 2700’ block Baldman

: x

Q. Did you give him a copy of the warrant?

A. As I testified in the Magistrate’s court, there is’ no

copy. It.is just the original warrant,

Q. You did not give him a Copy of the warrant?

A. No.

. Did you read him the warrant before you arrested

‘ him? let

ae 2. oe

maid

_ Q. At what point did you read: him the warrant? |

A. After I had asked him if he was Mr. Aaron.Frank, — .

I then asked him for some identification to:make sure he

[fol. 42] was.the subject invélved. I said I had a warrant ~

—for-his arrest for_the following charge and- the warrant

read like this—— “

The Court: Did you read him the warrant?.

The Witness: Yes sir.

. The Court:- The warrant ‘aus already ets introduced.

Q. Read it. ..

A. This is a. A. COpy of my arrest adil with the charge

on it. !

Mr. Polski: Objected to. I see no reason n to read it.

The Court: It does no harm. | -

' Mr. -Polski: It prolongs the agony.

- “The Court: Overruled. . 3 |

°"Mr. Polski: Offer the warrant. The. Officer | is. on the io

stand. Doesn’t the warrant speak for itself?

Q..Do you have a copy of the warrant?’ 7

A. Ihave a copy of my: arrest acta with the charge

'- on it.

Mr. Polski: Where is ‘the original arrest warrant?

The Witness: Probably atthe station. oa

_Q: What you are reading is not the ‘actual oe 4

A. This is just .the charge on the warrant. ,This’is a\

[fol. 43] copy of the original arrest register. © °° Ss ‘

Q. That is an exact. copy of the warrant? BEN hes

‘A. Yés, as to the charge. “Violation of Section 120 of

Article 12 at Baltimore City Code in that’ a nuisance, is

suspected at premises 4335 Reisterstown Road, owned by

Aaron. Frank, consisted of rat infestation, ‘undue trash

and debris and said Aaron Frank. has refused entry to

said premises to said W. H. Gentry,-in Baltimore City,

State of Maryland, on or warps the 27th “of February,

1958.”

Q. You didn’t read him the warrant until after: you got .-

hing i in the po}ice car?

A. I read it te him after I sahad him if .he. was Mr.

‘Anton Frank and # he had any identification, He showed

me a Maryland driver’s license and also a union card with |

’ his name on it, EN

. While we were sitting in the police sais car. tdiqwhich ‘

\. I am assigned awaiting the arrival of the wagon in the

.2700 block. Baldman Avenue, it ‘might have seen once or.

. ‘two times, but there was one word, in there—I will find the

word in_a minute—“consisted,” that ‘was the word. I

thoyght it meant. “consisting” “and it was “consisted.” Mr.

Frank also read the warrant at that time. I had handed it

‘[fol. 44} to him. He commended (sic) on that also.

Mr. Lipsitz: Thahk you, = Nectbe erat y

Mr. Polski: Step down. | aoe

(Testimony ‘of - witness coricluded.) -

- Mr. Lipsitz: Your Honor, . I renew my motion’ for. a

verdict of not ‘guilty and for the sake of protecting ‘the

~~ yeeord, I will renew. my motion to dismiss.

The Court: Both motions. are denied. Is there any. fur

ther evidence?

Mr. Lipsitz: No sir. The argument woild. be Gitta’ to : :

‘the — made in support of the. motions. That i is all.

re Verpicr

= The Court: , The: verdict” is s guilty. ‘The fine ‘is. pe

‘dollars and costs. iach. ‘i

Mr. Lipsitz: Thank you. : as : oe

[fol. 45) . :

In” THE Crimi an Corr OF BaLTIMORE

[Title omitted] —

“.. Morton to DisMiss aND Den1aL THEREOF—

f Filed March-17, 1958

Now comes the defendant, Aaron D. Frank, by Benjamin"

Lipsitz, his Attroney, (sic) and moves the Court ot (sic)

' Dismiss: the warrant upon which he was arrested and to .

dismiss “the charge laid herein against him, and for rea-

- sons says:

1. That the ordinanive i: the Mayor and City Councis .

(sic) of Baltimore under which the defendant is charged a

and for alleged violation of which he ‘was arrested viz.,

- Section 120.of Article 12 of the Baltimore City Code, 1950

Edifion™ Article 12 is ‘entitled “Health”. The -sub-title

- under which Section 120 is codified is “Nuisances and the

- Prevention. of “Disease”. Section 120 itself. is, under. the

sub- heading “Removal of ' Nuisance” y)- reading as follows:.

. 120. Whenever the Commissioner of Health shall have. a

cause to. suspect that a nuisance exists in any house,

-cellar‘or enclosure, he may demand entry. therein in the |

daytime, and if the owner or occupier shall refuse or -

delay to:open the same and admit a free examination,

he shall forfeit and pay-for every such refusal the

sum of Twenty Dollars”. .

» on its face denies to the defendant his ight ‘to be : secure

/ from unreasonable searches and seizures and subjects the -

. defendant to unreasonable searches and/or seizures of his

. property and/or an unlaw resspass (sic) thereupon

and/or a wrongful taking thereof, all in violation both

| of the 23rd and 26th Articles of the Declaration of Rights

» of the Constitution of Maryland and of the Fourth and

[fol. 46] Fourteenth Amendments to: the Constitution’ of -

4 the United States and said ordinance is repugnant to each

* and all of said Articles and Amendments and is therefore

invalid and the arrest of the defendant for alleged viola-

tion ot said ordinance and the charge made against him

“

ot?

under ental, pnliiniaiioe are therefore unlawful ‘and/or in-

valid. eee

e 3 a for other reasons to be given at the hearing of

this motion._- cae o

( (Signed) Benjamin Lipsitz, Attorney fo defendant

: Cletk’s Certificate to foregoing. paper (oimitted i in prem.

ing). 3 :

Endorsed pene as follows: Denied Oppenhimer,

Judge 3/17/58. ae me

: .

ee ee ee

fal: 7)

Is THE Caner, Count OF Binion, Manviaxp

Exngerrs—Eight photographs weiauad) in evidence by

the State:

[fol. 48]

aed

¢€ . *

Health Céde, “Article ie of the Raltiinore eCity Code

of 1950. m/

| . (See Opposite ) I

~ ¢

4 ee be

~ “s

\ ;

\ 4 ?

: 3

\, P

oN ee

Ts “A,

NOTE \

i Page. 37 Geltinece city Code of 1950" \

is on cards 2.- 3 and 4. ;

)

. oe ° : ‘; t v

8 : , | rae

{fol 155) . | uses

| iy THE Criminal Cover OF BaLrmiore ;

\ | 7 - [Title omitted]

\ SriPuLaTioN RE TRANSORIPT or Recorp |

_ It\is stipulated and agreed between the State and ws fit

defendant that Article 12 of the Baltimore City Code,

1950 Edition, and all ordinances of the Mayor and City

Council of Baltimore contained in said Article 12, (and

Section 6 of the Charter of the City of Baltimore, Flack’s |

1949 Edition, and, specifically, Paragraphs (1), (11), (5)

and (24) thereof ») be part of the record in this cause ds

fully as if said Article, ordinances, Section or Paragraphs

were read into the record or were*formally introduced in

evidence. -

‘(Signed) Norman Polski, Nida State’s Attor-

ney for the City. of Baltimore,

( Signed) Benjamin Lipsitz, Attorney for Defendant...

Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper ( omitted i in print-_

ing). :

[fol.156]- | } Bay

CHARTER AND Pustic Loca.’ Laws. OF BaLTimore CITY.

(Flack’s 1949 Edition)

1+ @ * . * ’ y* * *

pe oS : Battimore City CHARTER

Mayor anp Crry CounciL OF BALTIMORE

eee ie. * *. | ee 7 oe. .

‘ GeneraL Powers.

1898, ch. 123, sec. 6. 1945, ch. 548, sec. 6. 1946, Res. 18,

sec. 6. Mes

or The Mayor and City Council of Raltiuote shall bisa

full power and authority to exercise all of the powers .

heretofore or: hereafter r granted to aw 97 the Constitution _

> 39

- : ee “

of Maryland. or i any Public General. or Public Local *

Laws of the State of Maryland; and in particular, without

limitation upon the foregoing, shall have power by ordi-

nance, or such other. method as may be provided for in its _

- Charter, subject to the’ provisions of.said Constitution and -

Public General Laws:

_ (1) Bumtprnes ene C en

Pp. LL. (1860), Art. 4, secs, 29, 993, 864, 943. P. L. L.

. (1888), Art. 4, seés, 121-124. 1892, ch. 10. 1998, ch. 123,”

sec. 6. 1904, ch. 616. 1906, ch. ‘797. 1910, ch. 704, City

Charter | fate sec. 62 1918, sec. 6. 1927, sec. 6. P. L. L. -

(1930), Art. 4, -sec. 6. City Charter (1938), sec. 6(1).

1945, ch. a sec. 6(1). 1946, Res. 18, sec. 6(1).

To regulate the location, construction, use,. operation, ©

‘maintenance and removal of buildings and structures, or

any part thereof, of. every kind. :

= \o ——-—@ . * Se * *

E-_(5) ENTRY ON ‘Private Propiry |

1945, ch. 548, sec. 6(4).. 1946, Res. 18, sec, 6(5).

To enter, by its’ officers or. agents, the land or posses-

sions of any person for the purpose of carrying out the

powers enumerated in this Section 6, :

. ee 2 * « oe

(11) H&aLTu AND NUISANCES

[fol. 157].).-P. LoL. (1860), Art. 4. sec. 797. 1886, ch. 396.

1890, ch. 509. P. L. L. (1888), Art. 4, secs. 378 ‘and 400.

1898,.ch. 123, sec. 6. City Charter (1915), sec. 6. 1918,

sec. 6, 1927, sec. 6. P. L. L. (1930), Art. 4, sec.. 6. City

_ Charter (1938), sec. 6(9). 1945, ch. 548, sec. 6(10). 1946,

Res. 18, sec. 6(11). ~ .

o>. To provide. for. the preservation of the health of all

persons within the city; to prevent the introduction of

contagious diseases within the city, and within three miles

of the same upon Jand, and within fifteen miles thereof

_ upon the navigable waters leading thereto; and to prevent

and remove nuisances.

: ,

. ae * ; ° 7 * -—¢ Cb * ? ma

so”

: ing )e — ; C

. and 26th Articles. of the

& &

(8 ) Pouce Powen |

P. L..L. (1860), Art. 4, sec. 32, P. L. L. (1988), Art. 4,

* see. 721.’ 1898, ch. 123, sec. 6: City Charter (1915), sec. 6.

1918, see. 6. 1927, sec. 6. P. L.-L. (1930), Art. 4, see. .6.

City Charter (1938), sec, 6(18). 1945, ch. 548, sec. 6(22).

1946, Res. 18, see. 6(23).: ;

To have and exercise within the limits of Baltimore: City.

| all the power commonly known as the Police Power to the

same extent as the State has or could exercise said power

within said limits; provided, however, that: no ordinance

of the City or act: of any municipal officer shall conflict,

impede, obstruct, hinder ‘or’. interfere with the poweérs of |

the Police Commissioner.

) Py

* * ” 7 * =: -*@

Clerk's Certificate to foregoing paper, (omitted in print.

[fol. 158) ae ee “pt

Iw THE CRIMINAL Court OF BattTimore

“* [Title omitted) | :

Motion. FOR Ce or “Nor ica TY”. AND “DentaL -

THEREOF—Filed. March 17, 1958 |

Now comes the defendant, Aaron D. Frank, by Benjamin

Lipsitz, his attorney, and moves the Court for a verdict

of “not guilty” on the ground that the -evidence in this .

cause is legally insufficient to sunny his conv iction, in

asses Tae

a Section 120 of Article 12 of the Baltimore City ‘Code,

1950 Edition, denies to the defendant his right to be secure

from unreasonable. searches and seizures and subjects the

defendant to unreasonable searches and seizures of his

property and/or an unlawful trespass theréupon and/or

a wrongful taking re all in violation both of the 23rd .

Jeclaration of Rights of the Mary- |

land Constitution and of the Fourth and Fourteenth Ainend. ;

ments to the Constitution of the United Statés and said

“Beetion | is repugnant to each. and all of said Articles and

’ Amendments and is therefore invalid. ze

_ 2.» The evidence <in this cause establishes that the rm

fendant was arrested for and is charged with refusing to.

open his house to an unlawful search and one which, would _-

deny him his right to be secure from unreasonable searches

and seizures, would constitute an unlawful tresspass (sic)

/ upon his property and/or ‘a- wrongful taking thereof, all

in violation both of the 23rd and 26th Articles of the

Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of. Maryland and

{fol.159] of. the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to

the Constitution of the United States.

' 3. Even if this Honorable Court holds in favor of the

validity of. the aforesaid Section 120 of Article 12 of the

Baltimore City Code; 1950 Edition, the evidence. in this.

‘eause fails to establish the existence of ‘“‘cause to suspect

that a nuisance exists” in defendant’s house, referred to in

the evidence, at the time when entry to said house was

demanded by the witness William H.. Gentry.

4. And for other reasons to be given. at the <Siidetie of

-this motion,

(Signed) Benjamin Lipsite, Attorney for Defendant.

| Cierk’s Certificate to foregoing paper (omitted in n print-

ing). : ;

" adorsed thereon, ws follows: Denied, Oppenheimer, :

Judge, 3/17/58. )

[fol. 160]

IN THE CRIMINAL Court OF Bauritone

Appeal Docket 1958.

J anuary Term.

Number 103.

March: 17, 1958—Fined $20.00 and ‘ats OGeeenaone |

i, nines re 6, 1958

March -6, 1958—Appeal Certificate from the Northern

: - District of Baltimore City—filed. Trav-

erser tried and found Guilty by Mag- :

- -istrate Henry L. Rogers, on March 6th,

1958 and fined $20.00 and costs $1.70.

Charge: a —Violation of Section. 120 of Article 12

-\ , at Baltimore ‘City, ‘Code in that a

” wuisance is suspended (sic) at premises .

4335 Reisterstown Road, owned: by

. Aaron Frank, consisted of rat infesta-

tion, undue trash and debris and said

Aaron Frank has refused entry to said

| premises to said W. H. Gentry.

; r)

* , ee ' Bs * * a *

March 17, 1958—Verdict : Guilty.

Judge. ($20.00 eee in Northern aes ;

trict).

[fol.174] | | | |

In tHE CriminaL Court oF BALTIMORE

THE Court OF APrEals—-ANMAPOLIS, MaryYLAND

peer seein 28, 1958

Ri tain Lipsitz, Weg, 3 |

Attorney at Law —

1525 Mathieson.. Building’

Baltimore 2, Maryland. ,

Dear Mr. Lipsitz: ee gir een

The Court has eblaidened your. “Petition for Writ of

Certiorari to the Criminal Court of Baltimore”, filed on

® March 22nd, 1958, and the answer thereto; filed on April —

‘17th, 1958, in the case of Aaron D.-Frank vs. State of M ary- S

“land, and for your information; “9 petition was denied _—

on April 20th, 1958.

_ + Very truly yours,>

| Clerk

JLY/ojr : |

ee: Office of the State's Attorney of a

Baltimore. City,

Att’n: Norman Polski, Esq.

Office of the Attorney General,

Att’n; James H. re, Jr., » Esq

COPY i

; Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper (omitted i in print-

ing). ?

: : ¢

A ke Oa es

} In THE CRIMINAL , Court OF BaLTIMORE

Court oF Apprats o¥ Maryann, | :

J. Lioyp Youne _ ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND |

Clerk

PRT ar Leh Oe, 4 June 17, 1958

Benjamin Lipsitz, Serene \

Attorney at.Law

- 1525 Mathieson Building

_ Baltimore 2, Maryland —

Dear Mr. Lipsitz: . |

In compliance with your letter of June . 16th, and per our.

telephone conversation, this morning, I am enclosing here-

‘ with a copy of.the “Petition for Writ of CePtiorari. to the

Criminal Court of Baltimore” {filed March 92nd, 1958) in’ -

the matter of Aaron D. Frank vs, State of Maryland, ani. °

also a copy’of the Answer to .said petition (filed April .

17th, 1958), together with a copy of our aur to you dated

: April PetB. =

You will note the Court's denial on the copy of the peti-

. tion itself. .

There .were no Socket entries aes in this Const and

the Court did not file an opinion in this matter.

1 truly yours, ee Less

| : a Signed) J. Lloyd Young, Clerk.

JLY/OJR

vemaspsnaiig |

/ Clerk’s Certificate to for rregoing papér (omitted in print-

Ing). .

[fol. 176] Clerk’ s Certificate to foregoing transcript (oniit-

‘ted i in printing). | ite: *

[fol.177} _ :

eee oa! SuprREME Court OF THE UNITED STATES

| No. 278, October Term, 1958

AARON D. Frank, Appellant,

, ee

~ Strate or MaryLANp.

Orper Notinc PROBABLE J URISDICTION—October 20, 1958

Appeal from the ‘Criminal Court @f Baltimore, State of

Mage yland.

The statement of jurisdiction in this case having been

submitted. and ‘considered by the Court, probable jurisdic-

tion is: noted. | | . mv, ele;

October 20, 1958

; 5 4 sy ys °

-@¢@ if . \

Ps \ s

“BALTIMORE CITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT

CITY HEALTH CODE |

ARTICLE 12 |

eee |

| BALTIMORE ’CITY CODE OF 1950

(1952

. a es : r &

yr ‘ . sis : 53

PREFACE ; 4

Toward the close of 1951 the Baltimore City Code of 1950 was

published. This latest codification by Dr. Horace E: Flack, Director

of the Department of Legislative Reference, contains the general —

ordinances of the Mayor and City Council in force in Baltimore

on May 21, 1951. It is a stout gray volume of 1,594 pages and

replaced ‘a similar earlier volume, also codified by Dr. Flack,- the

Ba timore City Code of 1927, which ee the my ordinances

= force on May 21, 1928. :

In the City Code of 1927, Article 16 constituted. the ae Health :

Code. .In the 1950 edition, ‘the Health Code has been renumbered

_.as Article 12, It is here republished and, includes a number of im-

| _ portant new health ordinances that were passed during the period *

1928-1951. The Baltimore City Health Department wélcomed the .

. opportunity of ‘assisting Dr. Flack-in preparing for the considera-

tion-efthe City Council a series of revisions of the- earlier Code,

_. designed.for the purpose of providing an. up-to- ante nem. ¢ of local -

‘ health legislation. 7 i

It should be remembered that for Baltimore City important

eleméfits in the public health law. are also to be found in Para-

_ graph. 11 of Section 6,.and particularly i in Section 81 of the Balti-

more City Charter of 1949; and in, addition in Article 43 of The

Annotated: Code of the Public General. Laws of Maryland where

the compulsory vaccination law of 1864 and other.specialized items

are to be found. These two ‘elements ‘in the City: Charter and the

State Health Law, together with the City Health Code of 1950,

constitute the framework of the public health law for Baltimore

City.

- Of -particular significance is ‘the provision in Section 82 of the .

Baltimore City Charter of 1949 that the Commissioner of Health

of the city shall be an ex officio member of the City Advisory Wel-

fare Committee. This thas been in the City Charter since 1934.

Another similar provision which has been a part of the State Health

Law since 1880 specifies that the Commissioner of Health of Balti-

" more City shall be an ex officio. member of the State Board of

Health of Maryland. A like requirement in the State Post Mortem

' . Examiners Law of 1939 places the Commissioner of Health on the

Commission that directs the work of the Chief Medical Examiner

of Maryland. These important provisioris are designed to insure

the adrriftistrative integration that is essential for health liaison

and teamwork, :

_ The history of ciablic health legislation in. Balitinore City and_

in Maryland’is long and complicated. There were enactments dur-

ing the colonial period. Following this, perhaps the earliest im-

portant Taw for the Baltimore area was Chapter 56 of the Maryland

are ; io ae

? oa

State Laws of 1793 which panes: the appointment of ‘a health

"officer and the erection of a quarantine hospital for the port of |

- Baltimore. The City Health Department had its re cog in the.

» great yellow fever ap areay which ravaged Philadelp

in that

year; and it was built into the newly established ‘city at the time

of its incorporation on January 1, 1797. From that time until the’

present, public- health. legislation in Baltimore has been in large

_ measure an extension of the two- major health ordinances, Ordi- ©

nance No. 11 and Ordinance No. 15 of 1797.. The former dealt

_ particularly with the control of pestilential diseases and. the latter

with the control of ‘nuisances and other matters of general sani-

crx a Wits, NP

: Compiiciiney of H ealth

_ tation.

‘November - 1, 1952.

——_

——

oh HEALTH

B ____—GOMMISSIONER QF HEALTH

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 2. 1879, art. 23, sec. 5.

1893, art. 23, sec. 5. Ord. 555 (1946-47), ae Se

1. It shall be the duty of the Commissioner of Health, from _

tirne to time, to. make a circuit of observation to the several parts =

of the city and its environs, which, from their location, or from any

collateral circumstances, may be deemed the cause of disease, and ~

_ in all cases where he may discover. the existence of any agent, the

presence of which will prove dangerous to the health of the inhabi-

tants of the city, he shall cause any ordinance in existence for its,

correction to be enforced, or if there’ be no ordinance competent

to the correction of the evil, he shall make a Tull report of all the

attending circumstances to the Mayor, accompanied with his.opin-

ion of the necessity of extraordinary or particular action. It shall

be his duty also to make diligent inquiry and investigation into. all

cases or reports of cases of communicable diséases which may occur _

-or come to his attention, and cause ‘such: immediate measures to be

’ taken as are. practicable to arrest their progress, and generally to

notice all things that relate to the preservation of the health of the

inhabitants of the City.

It shall be’ the duty of the Commissioner of Health to give to the’

Mayor and other City authorities all such professional advice and

information'as they may require, with a view to the preservation °

‘of the health of the inhabitants of the city; to inquire into the ,

health of the inhabitants of the city, and to-report in writing-to the

_ Mayor every circumstance likely to endanger the health of the

ite inhabitants of the city; and it shall be the duty of each practicing

| physician’in the city, at all convenient times, to: give information

of the state of the health of the inhabitants of the city to the Com-

_missioner of Health, and assist and aid him with his counsel and

advice, in all matters that relate to the preservation of the health of

the inhabitants of the city and to the. prevention of conmmquaucabte

diseases. hg Sega”

‘ wr < he sates nee ‘

a ile Code (1927), art: 16; s sec. 12. 1879, art. 23, sec. 6.

< _.» 1893, art. 23, sec. 15. Ord. 556 (1946-47). ,

| . It stig be the duty of the Assistant Commissioner of Health

‘to /assist the Commissioner of Health-in the performance .of his

_ duties, to discharge the duty of seeing that a faithful record is kept

_’ of all reports and‘other matters relating to the Health Department;

- and in case of sickness or-absence of the Commissioner of Health; he

Ta shall perform all the duties herein assigned to a site Commis-

sioner of Health. .

' Dollars-for every day that such neglect or refusal shall continue.

“Offense, be liable to’ a fine of not more than Twenty-five

A wy: . 7 of <* .

City Code (1927), art.. 16, secs. 14, 15, 16. Ord. 64 (1900-01). :

Ord. 118 (1911- 12).. Ord. 557 (1946-47)... >

3. All officers and employees of the Commissioner of Health;

when on duty, shall wear or carry, and whenever called upon; dis-

_ play.a.badge or official identifying paper denoting the character

- of the office of said officer or employee.

- Said badge or official identifying paper shall bear a ui

Sites of the Battle Monument: (lettered City of Baltimore, date.

employet, and the words “Health Department”.

Any person who shall. ‘improperly or without authority use said

= badge or. official identifying paper shall, upon conviction ‘of said

offense, be liable to 4 fine of not-more than Twenty-five Dollars .*

($25.00). | . : eres. | :

a. Vacant.

si . City, Code (1927), art. 16, 6, fee. 17... ‘1879, art. 23, sec. 8. .

ei haee. 1893, art...23, sec. 17.

_ 1797) with a caduceus on each-side with the title of the officer or. .

.4.° It shall be the duty of the police officers to execute all orders

_ City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 20. 1879, art. 23, sec. 11.

1893, art. 23, sec. 20.. >

6. If any person s shall knowingly obstruct or resist the Commis-

‘of the Commissioner of Health, so far as they may relate to the .

. preservation of the health of the city. :

sioner of Health, or-any person by him appointed, in the execution

of the powers to them given, or in the performance of the duties.

~ enjoined on them by this or any other ordinance in relation. to the

the). -

‘public health, such persons shall forfeit and Bey a sum 1 not exceed-

ing Two Hundred ‘Dollars.

City Code» (1927), art. 16, sec. 21. 1879, art. 23, sec. 12.

| 1893, art. 23, sec. 21.

7. If any person or persons shall refuse or. neglect to comply

with any order or notice of the Commissioner of Health, authorized «.. °

by any section of this ‘Article, and no other penalty jis herein’ pro-

‘vided for such neglect or refusal, such person or persons shall. for-

feit and pay the sum of Twenty Dollars for each offense, and Five

_ COWS AND DAIRIES ©

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 28. Ord. 56 (1901-02), sec. 1.

Ord. 558: (1946-47).

8. It shall not be lawful for any. person or persons to keep or

possess within the corporate limits-of Baltimore (/i:y any. cow or-_

cows, either’for the conduct of the dairy business pr for his'or her -

+ pers@hal use, unless a permit shall have first been btained from the

Commissioner of Health permitting such cow or cows to be located

within the city limits, which permit. must designate upon its face

specifically the location for the keeping of such cow or cows, :

Any person violating this section shall,-upon coriviction \o ie said

ollars

¢ «.

toes " °°

Mine , 7

/ . .

: }

| (925), and a further finé of One Dollar ($1) for each day that the

| violation i is continued after notice is given to discontinue.) !

City ‘Code (1927), art.. 16, sec. 49, Ord. 65. (1895-96), sec. 14. »

‘9. It shall be the duty of any person having charge or control °

of any premises upon which milk or cream is produced, handled,

- stored or distributed ‘to: notify the Commissioner of Health immedi-

ately upon the discovery ‘of any case of Asiatic cholera, croup, .

diphtheria, measles, scarlet fever, small-pox, typhoid fever, typhus __ 3

fever, or any other contagious or infectious disease upon such ©

‘premises. No milk or cream shall be sold, exchanged, given away, ~~

or in any other manner distributed from such infectet premises

until all danger of spread of disease has been removed, and the »

Commissioner of Health certifies to that effect. .No person who at-

- tends cows or milks them, or who has the: care or handling of

vessels for the sale, storage or distribution of milk or cream, shall

enter any place or premises whefein exists any of the diseases men-

tioned herein, nor shall any such person have any communication,

. direct or indirect, with any person who resides in or is an occupant

of such infected place. : su ‘

—? DAY NURSERIES

Ord. 270 (1932-33), sec. 1. : e

10.-A Day Nursery _ is defined to be any institution, “eataleh:

ment, or place, in which are received at one time two (2): or more

children not of common parentage, for temporary guardianship

and nursery’ care, apart from their parents or guardians, whether

for compensation, reward, or-otherwise, during that portion of the

day or night in which their parents or guardians are engaged in

other pursuits and occupations than versie en to and caring, for °

such children. 7 are

_ Ord. 270 (1932- 83), sec.. 2:

ll. No person or persons or corporation shall sendeans: main-

_ tain of operate, in Baltimore City, either 2s owner, lessee or agent,

any Day Nursery without having first obtained a license therefor

_ from the Commissioner of Health, authorizing him, them or it to

do so. All such licenses shall be for the period of one year, and

the charge of such license ‘issued to any such -institution shall be

One Dollar ($1.00) and for the renewal of said license from ‘time

to time the: charge shall be.One Dollar ( $1.00) per annum.

ahtcy er Ord. 270 (1932-33), sec. 3.

12: The Commissioner of Health is hereby authorized and em-

powered to make, adopt and enforce rules ‘and regulations for the |

- operation and conduct of said Day Nurseries and said Commis-

~ sioner of Health shall, from time to time, inspect said Day Nurseries

‘and: require. them to. be saints in a proper [sanitary condition.

Ord. 270 (1932- 33), sec. 4.

13. Any person violating this sub-title -or ‘any. order or regu-

_ lation made. and seeped by the. Commissioner of .Health, in pur-

. He.

LD 1. -

suance heii, shall be guilty of a ict imeuiins shall ie subject to

a fine of not exceeding One Hundred _ Dollars ($100. 00) for each

’. offense, and, in addition thereto, the Commissioner of Health may

revoke the license of’ such Day Nuisery.*

FOOD PRODUCTS. f°

fa le ns eee ’

City Code (1997), art. 16, sec. 52. Ord. 103 (1907-08), .

"Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec.°55A. Ord. 747 (1941-42),-sec. 52.

14. - (a) Every person or corporation desiring to bottle or handle

for sale, or to offer or expose for sale, or to sell, dispose of, exchange ~

or deliver-milk or cream {the words ‘ ‘milk or cream” as herein:

‘used being intended to mean milk, cream, skimmed milk, ‘butter-

_ milk or other fermented milk) or to manufacture for sale ice cream

- “or butter, in the City of Baltimore, shall make application to the.

» . Commissioner of Health for a permit so to do. Such application

’ shall be made on a printed form to be furnished by the Commis- |

sioner of Health upon demand, and the applicant, if an individual,

shall state therein his full name and residence, and if a corporation, - *

shall state therein the name ‘of such corporation and the full name’ _

and residerice of each of its officers.. Such application shall also’

state the location of the place at which it is proposed to carry on:

the business, and whether the applicant. desires to pasteurize or

bottle milk or. cream, to sell milk or cream. in the original’ unbroken

package, or to manufacture for sale ice. cream. or butter.. Such

application shall also contain a statement ‘of the Aumber and :char-

- acter of. wagons or other vehicles, if any, to be used by the applicant

in, or about his business; also the number of cows, if any, owned’*

or controlled by the applicant, and such other data concerning the

conduct of-such business as the Commissioner of Health may. re-

quire. The Commissioner of Health, upon receipt of such applica-

tion, shall cause to be investigated the place of business, described .

in such application, and the wagons and other vehicles, ‘if any, -

intended to be used by such applicant. If such places of business

and such wagons and other vehicles are found upon such investiga- |

tion to be in a sanitary condition and fit for the uses and purposes’

to which they are intended to be put, said Commissioner of Health

shall forthwith register said applicant i in a proper record to be kept

for the purpose, and issue a permit authorizing such applicant to

@carry on, engage in and conduct the business applied for in Balti-

more City at the place designated in such application. Such per-

mits shall specify the kind dr kinds of business to. be conducted.

-The Commissioner of Health may refuse any applicant a permit

to pasteurize, bottle, sell, offer for sale, distribute or otherwise dis-

pose of milk, cream or. milk products where in the opinion of the

Commissioner of Health, the equipment, ‘personnel or managerial

control of the geo ay is inadequate to assure physical or working

conditions which would render such milk, cream or milk products

1Sec. 5,:Ord. 270 (1932-33), aoe all Sedinmaces inconsistent

- therewith.

me yee

3% is : ae © ere .

qo. iy

- suitable for setanpantion. as human food and where a permit, after

a hearing in accordance with the “provisions: ofthis section; i, SS re A

_ been. revoked for violations at the place of. business described _ eet |

the application. OF for violations for which, the applicant was Treé-:

sponsible i : y

‘as eS,

: (b) All vedaiie granted pursuant to this. section may ‘at any .

time be revoked: by the Commissioner of Health for the persistent,

repeated or willful violation of any law or ordinancé, or of any § *_

- regulation of the. Commissioner of Health, ‘governing the handling” .”

or sale of -milk or Cream;.or the manufacture for sale of ice cream’. >

or butter in Baltimore City; provided, however, that no“such per-.

mit shall, at any time, be revoked by the Commissioner of Health |

unless he shall first have given the holder of the same not less than, -

ten days’ ‘notice in writing of his intention to revoke such permit,

and an opportunity to be heard by him as to why’such should riot .

. be done, this proviso not-to be taken’ to apply to cases where the» ~~~

sale of milk: or-cream or the manufacture for sale of ice cream or -

butter may be temporarily -prohibited ‘by the Commissioner of.

Health because of disease, temporary insanitary condition or similar

causes. Such permits. ‘shall be non-transferable, and. no. permit

issued hereunder shall entitle or authorize the, holder thereof to

carry on, engage ‘in or Rint the business in-any-place or ish

other than that described’ and set out in such permit.

( c). If any. person or corporation having a permit, as sleltenid. ae

‘shall change the location of his or its place of business, notice of |

such proposed change ‘shall ‘be given to sai Commissionér of ©

‘Health,.and his consent in writing received to-tonduct such busi-

~ ness at such-“fiew location; and no business shall be. conducted or

‘ carried on at such new location until such new consent has been

received. : ees aS ates

(d) Any person or persons or any corporation, or officer: agent -

or servant thereof, who shall bottle or-otherwise handle for sale, or

offer or expose for sale, or sell, dispose of, exchange or deliver, or

‘who shall cause to be bottled or otherwise, -handled. for sale or

-offered or exposed for sale or sold, disposed of, exchanged or de-

livered (or with intent so to do shall have in his, its or their pos-

session, care, custody, or control in Baltimore City) milk orscream,

or’ who: shall manufacture for sale ice cream or butter, in Balti-

more City; without’ having: a’ proper permit so to do, as herein

‘ required, shall be fined not less than Five Dollars ( $5. 00) nor

more than. One Hundred Dollars ($100. 00) for each offense. :

‘(e) The provisions of this section shal} not be construed to ‘apply

to milk or cream which has been denatured in a manner satisfactory

to the Commissioner of ‘Health and which is not atendless for .

human food. .

Ord; 262 (1917-18) held stisatibatincn’ te Creaghan v. - Balto., 132 Md. |

442: See also Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473. ee, ‘i

a ee

Q Pie.

Ord. 607 (1933- 34).

15. No permit to pasteurize milk, cream, ice crear or other.

; “dairy products for sale in Baltimore City shall be granted to. any

person, firm or corporation whose plant shall be located beyond the

corporate limits of. Baltimore City. Nothing hcrein contained shall

construed desk the rights of holders of permits on-May 14,

e to hold or to renew the same ek. Eade

1934, to conti

City Code (1927), art. 16,- sec. 53. Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec. 55B.

16. Every vendor of milk having a permit as aforesaid, shall;

_ whenever so required, furnish the Commissioner of Health a state-

ment of all changes in the data and information provided for in .

Section 14, and shall also, whenever so required, furnish him -

a list of all persons from whom he of it recéives- milk or ‘cream

for use in his said business, whether said shipments be from within

or outside’the City of Baltimore, and said Commissioner of Health

* shall -have, power by regulations. to require that changes or addi-

Bons} in said lists of shippers shall bé furnished him from. time, to

timé as they occur; said Commissioner of Health shall keep a record

of such shippers, when furmshed as aforesaid, for. the use of his

office, but the same shall not.be open to the inspection of other

persons. Any P

‘officer of a corporation failing to furnish —

lists, data or..information—aq-aforesaid, when so required by the ~~

Commissioner of Health, shal} be fined not, more than Fifty Dollars

‘for each offense. . oes.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 54. Ord. 103 (1907- 08), sec. 55C.

17, “lhe permit to engage in the vending of milk hereinbefore |

feferred ‘to shall be posted conspicuously in the applicant’s place

of business at a- point to be designated by the Commissi6ner of

Health or health inspector. Each vendor of milk shall, before en-

gaging in the’sale of milk or créam, cause-his name’or the name

of the dairy and: the permit number, the former in letters of a read-

able size and the permit number in figurés not less: than threé inches

_in height, to be placed and remain on each outer side of. all wagons

or other vehicles used by such venders. in the conveyance or sale of’

‘milk or cream. Any person or corporation failing to so display said.»

permit, or to’ cause the lettering aforesaid to be displayed on apy

wagon. or other: Vehicle used as aforesaid, .as in.-this section _pro-

“vided, shall: be fined not less than Ten Dollars nor more than One

Hundred Dollars for each offense; and each and every day on which

said persoh, or corporation shall fail to'‘display such permit as

herein provided, or shall drive or operate or cause to be pti ah or’

+ operated any such wagon or other vehicle i in violation of the

: visions of this scetion shall constitute a separate, and distinct: offense.

Q ‘City Code (1927), art..16, sec. 55.. Ord. 103 -(1907- 08), sec. “55D.

18.- The Commissioner of Health: shall have power to adopt

--such- Eo peated as he may. deem proper and necessary to insure 7

} sais transported, stored, kept, distributed, ‘retailed =

~ aN

k and cream intended for consumption in - ‘Baltimore City *

: delivered under —. “rendering them sibeebile for consump-

tion as human food, and to-compel perfect ‘hygienic and sanitary- -

conditions of all cow stables, crearneries and dairies from. which

milk and cream so. intended. for consumption in Baltimore City

are produced; such regulations not to be inconsistent with existing -

laws or ordinanées, and copies of the same to be ‘printed and kept.

for free distribution to the public; and said Commissioner of Health

shall have power to prohibit the sale within the.corporate limits of ©

_ Baltimore City of milk or cream produced, ‘transported, stored,

‘ kept, distributed, retailed or delivered contrary to such regulations, —

whether. said milk or cream be produted: within or outside the

corporate limits of the City of Baltimore; and’ ‘t® the end that

said regulations may be' enforced in the case of milk or cream pro-

duced outside the corporate limits of. the City of Baltimore, but in-

@ tended for consumption therein, said Commissioner of Health may .

require such of the city milk inspectors as he -may designate. for the,

purpose to make inspections at such intervals and times as he may

‘deem expedient of’ all dairy farms, stables and other places outside

_ the City of Baltimore from which milk or cream are shipped for

consumption in Baltimore City. In case full access to such permises

or a full opportunity to investigate all the conditions under which

milk is there produced or-kept shall be denied said inspectors, or

in case upon such inspection the conditions are found such as in

the opinion of said Commissioner of Health,render such milk or

cream unsuitable or unsafe for human food’ and warrant the -ex-

clusion .of said’ milk or créam from sale in -Baltimore City, said -

Commissioner of Health shall have power to absolutely prohibit

the sale thereof _at“any place in Baltimore City until such time’ as

the reason for their exclusion shall in his opinion have ceased, and

he shall adopt.such means of ‘identifying such milk and cream as. «

_ to him may seem proper and expedient: In case of the exclusion of _

any milk or cream as aforesaid from sale within Baltimore City, said.

Commissioner of Health shall immediately make a record of such

‘fact in a properly indexed book kept for that Purpose; said book

‘to be open to the inspection of all vendors of milk who may: desire

to inspect the same.” Any person or corporation or officer, agent or

ae servant thereof, who: shall sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, dis-

pose of, exchange or deliver, or with intent so to do as aforesaid,

have in his,.its or their possession, care, custody or control, any

‘milk or cream which said Commissioner ‘of Health. shall so record

as excluded from sale in Baltimore.City, shall, upon conviction, be

fined not less than sae nor more. than.One Hundred Dollars. for

éach offense.

. City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 56. Ord. 262 (1917-1 18), sec. | 55E.

19. Every permit heretofore issued under the provisions of Sec-

“tion 14 of this Article shall expire. five. months after June [, 1917,

unless an application for renewal thereof be made on or ‘before

that date, in which event such permit shall remain in force until

- the Commissioner .of ‘Health’ acts upon the application for re:

newal . and notifies the applicant in t WERE ena a renewal has

‘

. oe

Re ~ —e Sia) cs aaa Ae ona eens = eo ee i ne

been granted or refbaed. Permits hereafter ee and vee

hereafter renewed shall expire one year after the date on which

_ they are granted or renewed; but if an application for renewal"

be made any time within thirty. days prior to such time of ex-

piration, such permit shall jremain in force until the Commis-

‘sioner of Health’ notifies the applicant in writing that a renewal -

has been granted or refused. An inspection fee of Ten Dollars

($10.00). shall be paid to the Commissioner. of. Health. by .each ~

, itera for a permit to pasteurize or bottle milk or cream, and

a fee of Two Dollars ($2.00) by each applicant for a permit to sell .

milk or cream in the original unbroken package or to manufacture

‘ice cream or butter; said fees to be paid at the time of the making

of the application, whether it be for an original permit or for a re-

newal thereof. Only one inspection fee_is:to be paid where the

application is for a permit to pasteurize or bottle milk or cream,

and also to sell milk or cream or to mianufacture ice cream or butter

upon the same premises, and in such cases, the’ fee shall be Ten

Dollars ($10. 00)? All such inspection fees paid shall. be promptly

_ accounted for by the Commissioner of. Health, and immediately -

paid over by him to the Comptroller for the use’ of the City of

Baltimore. : :

Creaghan Vv. Balto., 152 Md. 442; Balto. v. Gamble,. 132 Md. 473,

City Code ' (1927), art. 16, sec: 57. 1879, dit. 23, sec. 48.

.1893, art: 23, sec. 70.

20. It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to adulterate |

milk offered for sale or sold w ithin.the limits of. the City of Balti-.

more, by mixing therewith water, chalk or any drug or other articles:

whatsoever, under-a penalty of not less than Twenty Dollars for

each and every-offens¢; and any person or persons who shall sell

_or offer: for sale any milk of a diseased cow, within the limits of

the city, shall pay a fine of. Twenty Dollars for each and every

off ense. 2

Deems v. Mayor and City. Council of. Balto., 80 Md. 164.

' State v. Broadbelt, 89 Md. 565.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 58. Ord. 103 (1907- a8), sec. 56A.

"Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 56A.

a. All consumers who receive milk-or cream from a in

cans, bottles, vessels or other containers, which are to-be. returned

"+ to said vendors, shall immediately after.emptying the same and be-

fore their return as aforesaid, cause such cans, bottles, vessels -or

other containers to be washed: ‘and thoroughly cleansed. All dealers

- in milk or cream receiving such milk or cream in egps, vessels, or

‘ other containers which are to be returned to the person shipping

or delivering . the same to such dealers shall immediately after ~

emptying the same before’ their return as aforesaid cause such cans,.

bottles, vessels or other containers to be cleansed and sterilized

with boiling water or ‘otherwise subjected. to a moist heat at a

temperature of 200 degrees Fahrenheit,or sterilized by other method

approved by the Commissioner of. Health, and all dealers in milk |

or cream retailing the same in cans, bottles, vessels, containers or

.#) )

receptacles of any kind ‘shall thoroughly cleanse per wean in she

manner above set forth all such cans, bottles, vessels, receptacles

and containers before such milk or cream is placed therein for de-

livery to customers.’ Any violation of or failure to comply with any

of the provisions of this section shall be punishable by a fine of

not less than Five Dollars = me? nor more than Fifty Dollars

($50.00) -

s salient v. Balto., 132 Mad. 442; Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473.

City Code (1927), art. 16; sec. 59. Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec. 56B.

Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 56B.

“tp: No person shall transfer milk or cream from one. receptacle,

can, bottle, or vessel of any kind to another vessel of the same or |

other kind on “wharves, railroad depots, on streets’ or in wagons,

except for the purpose of salvage of milk, when the milk~can is

damaged. Any violation of or failure to comply with any of the

provisions of this section shall be punishable by a fine of not less

than Five Dollars ($5.00) nor more than One Hundred Dollars

($100.00).

———— v. Balto., 132 Md. 442; ‘hidie v. Gamble, 139 Md. 473.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec.. 60. Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec. 56C.

23. , It shall. be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation

engaged in the business of bottling or vending milk or cream to

. have on his, their or its premises, or in any wagon used in the

delivery of milk or cream, any acid, drug, chemical substance or

compound to be used for coloring; adulterating, sophisticating or

preserving milk or-cream, and no such person, firm gr corporation |

shall: have any such acid, drug, chemical substance or compound

_ which can be used for ‘coloring, adulterating, sbphisticating or pre-

_serving milk or cream, ‘unless. such person, firm or corporation shall

have a written permit from the Commissioner of Health in Balti- ~

“more City, to keep the same for experimental or other purposes. not

connected with Sr related to the coloring, adulterating, sophisticat- -

' ing or preserving of milk or cream as such.. Any violation of this |

section shall be punished by.a fine of not less than Five Dollars rior

more than One Hundred. Dollars for each offense. .

City, Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 61. ' Ord. 87 (1893-94).

Ord. 62 ( ¥903-04).°

24. It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to sell, offer

for sale, expose for sale,. barter, deliver or bring to another, or

have on his, her or their premises, store, stall, stand or vehicle, or.

.In.or upon the premises of any other person or persons ‘whaisoever,

from or in which milk or any other. food products are sold or de-

livered, any impure, adulterated, sophisticat d or unwholesome milk

or other food products, or any tainted, unsound, rotten or partly

decomposed fish, fruit or vegetables or meat, or any food product

that is kept fresh by ns dees or boracic a rid or. any other aii

’ servative.

Ee f Ss

e e

———$— eee : :

1 4 ‘i RT ae ae =. ae

¢ , : ; :

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 62. Ord. 62 (1903-04), s sec. 1A.

. 25.: It- shall not be lawful for any person or persons ‘to secrete

or: remove, or assist in secreting or removing, any impure or un- -

sound food products as above specified, after the same shall have:

been condemned as unsound by or by the authority of the Com-

missioner of Health, or in any way to impede or hinder the action

- of said: Commissioner of Health, his servants or agents, in confis-

cating and destroying the aforesaid i impure food products so gon-

demned as suck; but nothing herein contained shall.be taken as im--

sing when! the said Commissioner of Health; his servants or —

agents, the duty or expense of removing the aforesaid J impure food

. products so. condemned as such. —

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 63.. Ord. 87 (1898-94), sec. 2.

Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec. 59. Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 59.

26. ‘Only pure, unadulterated, unsophisticated, and wholesome

milk shall be sold or offered for sale-in Baltimore City, and such

articles shall be understood to be the natural product of healthy

cows, which has not'been deprived of any part of its cream, and’

to which no additional liquid or solid or preservative has been

added, and which at a temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit. shall

have a specific. gravity of not less than 1.029 and contain not less.

than 12 per cent. of total solids; of which not-less than 34% per

cent. shall be milk fats, and of which not less than 8 VY per cent.

shall be solids other than milk fats. No milk sold, received, kept,

offered for sale, or delivered in the City of Baltimore, shali in any .

particular be under the standard herein ‘described without" being

considered impure, adulterated, sophisticated or unwholesome.

Nothing in this section of this Article shall be construed to prevent

the sale of skim milk, buttermilk, sour milk, milk prepared by

fermentation or other processes, milk powder, condensed milk, or

of modified milk prepared under the prescription of a physician,

provided they be sold and plainly marked or labeled as such; and

‘nothing in this section shall be construed-to prevent the Commis-

sioner of Health from permitting what is known as the standardiza-

tion or adjustment of milk under such regulations as the Commis-

sioner of Health may determine.

Only pure, unadulterated, unsophisticated and wholesome cream

shall be sold or offered for sale in Baltimore City, and ‘such article

shall be understood to be the product of healthy .cows which is

free from all.constituents foreign to normal milk; and which con-

tains not less than 18 per cent. of milk fat. Nothing i in. this sec-.

tion shall be construed to prevent the sale of cream containing less

than 18 per cent. milk fat, provided the percentage of total solids

and of milk fat of such cream does not fall below the requirements

_of. milk as above defined and provided the container of such cream

be plainly labeled with the percentage of milk fat of such cream.

' 1The word “upon” evidently intended.

ce oa og

Boneh rege eerie | Any violation or failure ‘to Cini with any of the provisions of

ea ee this section shall-be-punishable by a fine of not less than Twenty °

Meare sh facet 2 3 Dollars ($20.00), nor more than One Hundred Dollars: “($100.00)”

; 3 Deems v. Balto., 80 Md. 164; Creaghan v. Balto., 132 Md. 442; Balto. v.

So Gamble, 132 Md. "473.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 64. Ord. 262. (1917-18), sec. 59A. Beh

27. Milk and cream produced and handled in conformity with .

the requirements of this section and such additional regulations as

may ‘be prescribed by the Commissioner of Health shall be known ..

as “Standard Milk Pasteurized” and “Standard ne Pasteurized”

erpectiel

The Commissioner of Health i is suthopioed to prohibit the sale

or use in Baltimore City of any’ice cream or butter or other milk

product. which is made from milk or cream which is below the

requirements for Standard Milk Pasteurized or Standard Cream

Pasteurized, or any ice cream, butter or other milk product which

for any other reason is unfit for human food, and no person shall

sell, offer: for sale, sell or deliver for consumption in the City of

Baltimore any ice cream. or butter of other milk product the sale -

or use of which shall have been so prohibited by the Commissioner |

of Health.

All milk,. skimmed milk, or cream held, nar offered for sale,

sold or delivered for consumption in the City of Baltimore or used

for the manufacture of ice cream or butter, buttermilk, or other

fermented milks,.whey or curd, in the City of Baltimore, shall be

produced, pasteurized and handled in the manner set forth in the o

_ following rules and definitions, and in conformity with such addi-

| tional regulations as may be prescribed by the Commissioner of

_' Health, except as otherwise provided in Sections 28, = 31 and 32 —

‘ of this Article.

Rule 1. Standard Milk: Pasteurized and Standard Creda’ Pas

teurized shall be produced on dairy farms having dairy farm per-

| mits issued pursuant to the provisions of Section 34 of this Article.

Rule 2. Standard Milk Pasteurized: shall not contain more than

100,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter: after pasteurization and

prior to delivery.

Rule 3. Standard Milk Seseacetion shall not: contain moré than |

1 200,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter before pasteurization.’

- Rule 4. Pasteurized Milk shall be milk which has been‘ uni-

formly heated to:a ‘temperature betwen 142 degrees Fahrenheit

_and 150 degrees Fahrenheit and maintained at that .temperature

for not less than 30 minutes, and cooled immediately to a tempera-

ture of 45 degrees Fahrenheit or less; provided, however, that

nothing in this sub-title shall be construed to prevent the Commis- |

sioner of Health from permitting the heating of milk to tempera--

tures higher than 150 degrees: Fahrenheit, if, in the opinion of said

. Commissioner of Health such on temperatures are desirable.

16 ot of) \ 66

Pasteuriaed milk or paELSS milk which is used for the manu-

facture: of any milk products, or pasteurized cream shall be milk |

-or cream which has been uniformly heated to a temperature of

142 degrees Fahrenheit, or higher, and maintained at their temper-

_ ature for not less than 30 minutes. But the period of holding. may

. be reduced one minute for each additional degree of uniform tem--

perature of heating of such milk or skimmed milk to be used for the

manufacture of milk products or cream, with a minimum period ._

of holding of five minutes. Such milk or cream shall be cooled im-

mediately after pasteurization to a temperature of 45 degrees

Fahrenheit or less, unless the same is to be used for buttermilk or

other ripened milk products.

Rule 5. Milk or’ cream, while in the chin where it was pas-

teurized or where it is held, kept or stored, shall be maintained at

a temperature below 50 degrees F ahrenheit, and pasteurized milk -

or cream shall be maintained at all times, prior to delivery, at a ©

temperature below 60 degrees F ahrenheit,’ ‘unless otherwise, per-

mitted -by the Commissioner of Health. 3

- Rule 6. Pasteurized milk shall not be repasteurized sna sold as.

milk, except by authorization of, and under regulations, prescribed

by the Commissioner of Health.

_ Rule 7. Pasteurized’ milk shall not’ be sold, delivered: or aifeced

_ for sale after 36 hours from. the fay’ of pasteurization. °

—

~ Rule 8. No _pasteurizing apparatus | or appliances’ shall be sel

for the pasteurization of milk or cream for sale or for use.in the

manufacture of milk products in the City of Baltimore, until and

unless such apparatus -and appliances are approved wd the Com-

missioner of Health, or his subordinates. —

Rule 9. No building, or any part of any building intended for

‘the pasteurization, bottling, storage or handling of milk or cream |

shall be erected, altered or enlarged in the City of Baltimore with-

out a-permit from the Commissioner of Health. All applications

for such permits shall be made to the Commissioner. of Health and °

shall be accompanied with plans and full details of the contemplated

erection, alteration or enlargement. Plans shall be submitted in

duplicate. One copy shall be retained by the Commissioner and

the other returned. to the applicant. This requirement is in addi-

tion to any building permit required by law or ordinance.

Rule 10. All apparatus and- appliances in a plant where milk-or —

cream~is~ pasteurized _ shall be so constructed that ‘they can be

readily. cleansed and sterilized. All such apparatus and appliances

shall be thoroughly sterilized immediately prior to every time they:

are used, and shall be thoroughly cleansed immediately following

every use thereof. All bottles and other containers of milk or

cream, °shall have been thoroughly cleansed and sterilized with

Sine boiling water or otherwise subjected to a moist lieat at a tempera-

_ ture ‘of 200 degrees F ahrenheit or sterilized by ater method ap-

—.

mw Noy ngacd

| ‘jail by ‘the Commissioner of Health, before being filled with

milk or cream. : . 3

Rule 11. An automatic temperature recording apparatus ap-.

proved by the Commissioner of Health; or his duly authorized sub- |

ordinates, shall-be installed on pasteurizing appliances, and shall

‘be so maintairied that it will accurately record the temperature-to_,

which the milk or cream has been raised, and so far as possible

the duration of time the milk or cream is maintained : at the recorded

temperature; and also-record the temperature to which pasteurized .

milk or cream is cooled. All records and charts shall be dated and

filed at the pasteurizing plant and subject at all times to the in-

ordinate of the Commissioner of xeeasm, or his duly appa sub-

ordinates.

Rule 12. Pasteurized. mill, or cream. shall not - be bottled or

‘placed in other receptacles in any place other than in the plant

where ‘it has beert pasteurized. No person or dealer in milk shall

offer for sale, sell or deliver any milk or cream in quantities of ‘less

than one gallon unless the same be kept, offered for sale, exposed’

for sale, sold. or delivered in sanitary glass bottles or such. other

receptacles or in such other manner as may be approved by the |

Commissioner of Health.

~ Rule 13... No person shall sell, or with intenit so to do, have in his |

possession, care, custody or control any pasteurized milk or cream —

“witiless such-milk or cream is contained in and jis sold in a tightly

closed container in which it was pasteurized or placed immediately

aftér pasteurization and then closed:and kept continuously closed

until after sale. All milk or cream shall be placed in bottles or

’ other receptacles and capped or tightly closed in. such a manner:

as to prevent the contact of the person of the operator with the

milk or cream. The filling or capping of bottles by hand is oa

hibited.

Creaghan v. Balto.; 132’ Md. 442; Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473.

Selected Raw Milk. and Selected Raw Gran

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 65. Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 59B.

28. Milk and cream produced and handled in conformity with

the proyisions of this. section shall be known as “Selected Raw

Milk” and “Selected Raw Cream”, respectively. Any person or

corporation desiring to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, dispose of

or exchange milk or cream which has not been pasteurized shall, |

in addition to securing a permit for: the sale of milk and cream as .

required by Section 14 of this Article, also make application to*the

. Commissioner of Health for a permit to‘sell raw milk or cream.

Such application shall contain the full name and residence of the

applicant, and if a corporation the name and residencé of each of

its officers. ‘Such application shall also state the location of all

_premises upon which the milk or cream is to be produced, handled —

- or stored. The Commissioner of Health, upon receipt of such

application, shall —— the applicant with a set of rules —_ —

68 -

18 3 ra! |

; lations governing - the handling and distribution of : raw milk, and

shall cause to be investigated-the premises described in such appli- |

cation; and shall also cause to be inspected all equipment upon the

‘premises. If such premises and such equipment are found upon

such investigation to be in a sanitary condition, and suitable for

the uses and purposes of handling milk intended for consumption *

____in its raw state, the said Commissioner of, Health shall forthwith

pose,-and shall issue a permit authorizing such applicant to carry

on, engage in, and conduct the business of vendor of raw milk and

cream in Baltimore City at the place designated in the application.

’ The. applicant for a permit to sell-milk or cream that has not been

pasteurized shall secure from the Commissioner of Health a form

of application for a permit for each producer from whom he pro-

poses to procure such milk or cream, and when these applications

__ shall have been properly filled out and filed the Commissioner: of |

Health shall furnish the applicant for each of the producers a set.

of rules and regulations governing the production. of Selected Raw

Milk, and shall in each-casé cause a careful investigation to be .

made of the condition of the herd, the farm and. its equipment,

and if found satisfactory the Commissioner of Health shall register —

_the said producer in a proper record to be kept for the purpose, and

shall issue a “Raw Milk Farm Permit” authorizing said producer

to ship milk or cream to the City of Baltimore, for sale or distribu-

tion, without pasteurization. All ‘permits granted pursuant to t is

sub-title may, at any time, be revoked by the Commissioner of —

Health for failure to comply with the rules and regulations which -

the Commissioner of Health shall have issued in accordance with

+ the power conferred upon him by.any ordinance.

Selected raw milk and cream shall be: produced, handled, sold

and. distributed in accordance with all the requirements of Section

‘27 of this Artiele;-except those relating to pasteurization, and in

addition in conformity with the following rules and such other

requirements as may be prescribed by regulation of the Commis

sioner of Health in pursuance of: this sub-title.

Rule 1.° “This milk shall be produced on dairy farms having

Raw. Milk Dairy Farm Permits, issued pursuant to this section of |

this Article.. This cream shall be cream from such milk. These

permits shall be issued only to such farms as in their character and

equipment meet.the requirements of the rules and regulations of the

Commissioner of Health for the production of raw milk. These

farms shall be inspected and scored at least quarterly.

Rule 2. This milk shall be solely from cows annually subjected

to the tuberculin test; and certified to be free from disease by a -

veterinarian designated . or approved by the Commissioner of

‘Health. The tuberculin test shall have been applied in accordance .

with rules and regulations approved by the Commissioner of

Health. All reactors shall be immediately removed from possible

contact with the dairy herd, and the premises disinfected in ac-

cordance with the - rules and regulations of the United States —

Bureau of Animal Industry. _. Examination | of the cattle and

a eee

: a : Lamers ee

premises shall be made as often as may be required by the Com-

missioner of Health, and all animals found to be pot le shall be. -

immediately removed from: ‘possible contact with the dairy herd;

and if the nature of the disease is such as to ‘justify it, the owner

may be required to disinfect the premises. in accordance: ‘with the

rules and regulations of the United States Bureau of Animal In-

dustry. ie . oe

- Rule 3. All persons employed in or about the barns or ‘milk —

house, or who in any manner come in contact with the milk on the~

farms on which such milk or cream is produced, or in any place

where such milk ‘or cream is exposed or placed in any containers, _

shall have passed medical examination satisfactory to the Commis-

_ sioner of Health, indicating that such employees are free from com-

‘ =

tions shall be made by a physician approved by the ommissioner

municable diseases and are not carriers of disease producing

organisms. All such persons shall be examined as often as may be

required by the Commissioner of Health. Any communicable ill-

hess of such persons, or of any members of the household in which

they live,’ shall immediately ‘exclude such persons ‘from possible

contact with the milk, and the: nature ‘of the illness shall be im- ;

mediately reported’ to the Commissioner of Health, and to the

of Health, and at the expense of the producer, :

Rule 4. .Selected Raw Milk shall not contain more ‘than 50,000

bacteria per cubic centimeter prior to delivery and shall be de-

livered to the consumer within forty-eight hours after production.

‘Creaghan v. Balto., 132 Md. 442; Bala. v. Gamble, ~ Md. 473.

Labeling

City Code (1927), art. f6, sec. 66. Ord. 262 (1917-18), see. 59C.

29. All containers in which milk.or cream is offered for sale,

sold or delivered in the City of Baltimore shall be Raa: labeled

as follows, namely: |

All containers of milk or cream which confoom to ‘the require-

ments_.of ‘Standard Milk Pasteurized or Standard Cream Pasteur-

ized/ @s defined by' Section 27 hereof, shali be %plainly labeled

“Standard Milk Pasteurized”, if the contents of the container be _

milk, and “Standard Cream Pasteurized”, if the contents be cream,

respectively, except :in cases of such containers which are properly - -

labeled in conformity with the provisioris of Section 31 hereof; and

all containers of milk or cream, which conform to the requirements

of Selected Raw Milk or Selected Raw Cream, as defined .by Sec-

otion 28 hereof, shall be plainly labeled “Selected Raw Milk”, if the

contents of the container be milk, and “Selected Raw Cream”) if

‘ the contents be cream, respectively, except in cases of such _con-

tainers which are properly labeled.in conformity with the provisions \

of Section 30 hereof; and all containers of milk. or cream which is

below the requirements for the Standard’“Milk Pasteurized and

_, Standard Cream Pasteurized, shall be plainily labeled “Below Stand-

ard. Milk”, if the contents of the container. be milk, and _Beow

; ‘ .

_ 20 eget Peat

Standard Cream”, if the contents of the container be ,cream, re-

spectively, or With such other mark or marks~as the Commissioner

of Health may require én the. exercise of Pe conferred |

. . All containers of cream which contain less 18 per cent. of

milk fat, shall be plainly labeled. with the percentage of: milk fat

which such cream . -contains,, and containers of lhe cream, the

milk fat content of which is as much as or more th3m 18 per cent.

_ may, at the option of the dealer, be labeled with the percentage

— of milk fat of such cream.

All such containers shall be plainly labeled with the name of the »

person or corporation selling the milk or cream, and if the milk

_ or cream’ is pasteurized, the container shall be plainly labeled with

the location of the plant in which the milk or cream has been

pasteurized and the day of the week on which'such milk or cream

was pasteurized unless the Commissioner of Health. shall, otherwise

direct. :

No person or persons shall hold, keep, offer for tele or deliver

- for.consumption in the City of Baltimore any milk or cream bearing a

any label other than that- hereinbefore provided -for, unless eek ;

other label be approved by the,.Commissioner of Health, ‘and any

labeling contrary to the provisions hereof, or failure. to Jabel in |

accordance with the requirements hereof or any other violation of

- the provisions ‘hereof, shall be a misdemeanor, punishable under

. the provisions of Section 37 of this’ Article. 2

Tf, at any time hereafter, lettering or other’ designation of milk

or cream fulfilling the requirements of this sub-title shall come into’

such general . use that, in the judgment of the Commissioner ,of: |

Health, it would be desirable, in the interest of uniformity of desi; - cous

nation, to substitute such: lettering or other designation for the i he:

labeling herein required, hé is authorized hereby to do so... ~ | /

- Creaghan v. Balto., 132 :Md. 442; Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473, . [.

_ City Code (1927), art. 16, sel 67. Ord. .262: (1917-18); sec. 59D. eT;

30.. The Commissioner of Health. may permit the sale in the:

City of Baltimore of raw milk or raw cream, bearing the label “Cer-

tified Milk” or “Certified, Cream”, provided that, such milk or

cream shall conform to and shall be handled in-accordance with all.

the requirements of Section 28 of this Article, and in addition to

these requirements shall conform to the requirements for Certified

Milk and Certified Cream as provided in Section 27 of Article 58 of

the Annotated Code of Maryland (1939 Edition). as the same was

re-enacted by Chaptér 337 of. the Acts of the General Assembly of

Maryland ‘of 1916, or which may be provided. | in any amendment

thereof which may hereafter be made. —_-

en Vv. Balto., 13% Md. 442; Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473.

oar "Selected Milk Pasteurized and Selected ‘oe Pasteurized

City Code (1927), art 16, sec. 68. Ord. 262 (1917- 18), sec. 59E.

31. The Commissioner. of Health may permit. the sale. i the |

City of Baltimore of pasteurized milk or pasteurized cream, b aring.

ek qt:

the label, ‘ ‘dass ‘Milk Pasteurized”. or “Selected Cais Pasteur-

ized”, provided such’ milk or: cream conforms with and is handled

in accordance with all the requirements of Section 27 of this-Article, |

. and in addition conforms with and ‘is handled in ‘accordance with *-

- the following rules for “Selected Milk Pasteurized” or “Selected.

Cream Pasteurized”, and, ‘further, conforms with such additional

rules: and regulations as the Commissioner of Health may. 9 blish.

Rule 1. This milk shall be milk solely from cows ,

amined and subjected to the tuberculin test and certified to be free

from disease by a veterinarian designated or approved by the Com-

missioner of Health. ‘The tuberculin test shall have been, applied

in accordance with rules and regulations approved by the Commis-

sioner of Health. All reactors shalt be removed immediately from

possible contact with the ‘dairy herd and the premises disinfected

-in accordance with the rules and regulations of the United’ States

‘Bureau of Animal Industry. The tuberculin testing of herds pro-—

ducing Selected. Milk .Pasteurized or Selected Cream Pasteurized

‘shall not be required prior to January 1, 1919, but such herds shall -

“be regularly subjected to physical examination for tuberculosis prior

to that date. -Examination of the cattle and premises shall be made

as often as may be required by the Commissioner of Health, and

at least semi-annually; and all animals found to be diseased shall be

immediately removed from possible tontact with the dairy herd,

and if the nature of the disease is such as to justify it, the owner’

may be required to disinfect the’ premises in accordgnce with the

Pan and regulations: of the United State Bureau of Animal In-

_ dustry. - 3 | |

Rule 2. All ‘persons employed i in or ious the barns, ‘or milk’

‘house. or who, in any manner, come in contact with the milk | on -

the farms on which such milk ‘or cream is produced, or in any

place where such milk or cream is exposed or placed in any con-

_tainers, shall be examined for communicable diseases as often as @

may be required by the Commissioner of Health. |

Rule 3. This milk shall contain not more than 200, 000 batiesin 9”

per cubic centimeter before pasteurization, nor more than 30,000

bacteria per cubic centimeter after pasteurization, prior to delivery.

Rule 4. This milk and cream shall be distributed only by a per- »

"son, firm or corporation having a permit issued by the Commis- ,

sioner of Health for the. sale of Selected Milk Pasteurized and

Selected Cream Pasteurized.

‘Rule 5. - The building arid the pasteurizing ‘and Solitier appa-

ratus and appliances used for the pasteurizing, handling, storing or

bottling of Selected Milk Pasteurized or Selected Cream Pasteurized~

shall not be used for the pasteurizing, handling, storing or bottling

of any milk or cream not conforming to all requirements for the .

sale of Selected Milk Pasteurized and Selected Cream Pasteurized,

provided, however, that the Commissioner of Health may permit.

the pasteurization, handling; bottling and storage in the same build-

.. ing and with the same apparatus and appliances, of Selected Milk

‘

22 . au eee er yee

) ‘ . i °

oe ; . ps ‘ %, 6. . - . rl

y 4 ‘a . on .

° 3 ° ‘ ,

a es : : : '

: : ‘ ; 3

; : ee e on. oe”

| .

° . e

. .

Paateurived .and. Selected Cream Pasteutised: wie ‘Standard Milk

Pasteurized and Standard Cream Pasteurized and Below Standard -

- Milk or Cream when, in his opinion, the complete and continued,

separation of the different classes of milk and. cream is assured.

a Vv. Balto., 132 -Md. 442; Balto. Vv. Gamble, 132 Mid. 473.

' Below Standard Milk and Cream ;

City Code (1929), art. 16, sec. 69. Ord. 262 (1917- 18), sec. 59F.

32... Milk or cream which’ for any reason is below the require-

ments for Standard Milk Pasteurized. or Standard Cream ‘Pasteur- |

ized, shall be known as Below Standard Milk or Cream, and such

_ milk or cream may be kept, . offered: for sale, sold, delivered ‘or -

used in the City of Baltimore only -by authority of the Commis-

‘sioner of. Health® and only for such purposes and in accordance

with such restrictions and regulations as may be prescribed by him.

“FY If. the Commissioner of Health shall «authorizé, any such ‘milk or

sam ‘to be kept, sold, delivered or used for human food or for

_ the manufacture of food products, the same shall be pasteurized

- and handled ‘in the manner set forth in Section 27 hereof, and the -

Commissioner \of Health may.require that such milk ‘or creamshall -

‘be heated, in the process of pasteurization, to such temperature,

_ higher than that required by said Section 27, as he may prescribe.

If the Commissioner of Health shall authorize any. such milk or

“\. cream to be kept, sold, delivered or used for any purpose other

EE human food, or‘the manufacutre of food products, he gall

. man

r as he may prescribe, to\the end that the sale,or use thereof

for-human ‘food or in the manufacture of: food products ‘may be

- prevented. ae Bei

_ , Containers of: such milk or cream shall be labeled Below Stendaid

Milk § or Below Standard Crearh, as required by Section 29 hereof,

‘or with such other mark. or marks as the soi sneone gid of Health

may require. | = “9

’ Provided -that the Commissioner of Health shall net permit the

- sale of milk ‘or cream below the requirements ‘for standard milk

pasteurized or standard cream pasteurized for, ordinary domestic

,. Consumption except under general regulations applicable to all: milk,

“ , coming under the standard prescribed in such regulations.”

*-. Creaghan v. Balto., 132 Md. 442; (i

Balto. v. Gamble, 132 Md. 473.

Gity Code .(1927), art. 16, sec. 70. Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 59G.

33. The bacterial counts required in this sub-title or which may _

* be required in any regulation of the Commissioner of Health issued

in pursuance of this sub-title shall be determined by the taking of

not less than five consecutive bacterial counts taken over a period

_ of not less. than one week nor‘more than one month and the result

of at least 80 per cent. of.such tests agreeing’ in conformity. or lack

_ of conformity with the requirements of this sub-title or of such

regulation of the Commissioner of Health shall determine the rating ~

. orgrade of the milk or cream respectively as to the matters so’tested

of the dairy, dairy farm or milk“ plant from which such samples |

~ ‘ : : ; : a : be

oF ©

come ‘en of the milk. and cream at handled, or sold therein

ae or therefrom. |

Ste : ———* Balto., 132 Md. 442; ‘Balto. v: Gamble; 132 Md. 473.

estar Dairy Farm Permits

City Code’ (1927), art. 16, sec. 71. Ord. 262 (1917- 18), sec. 59H.

ie 34. No person shall bring or ‘send into, the City of Baltimore for

ae -.* + gale any ‘milk or cream without aidairy farm permit from the Com-

missiorier Of Health so to do,’ Application for said permit shall be

made in writing upon a form prescribed by said Commissioner and

shall be accompanied by such detailed description of the dairy farm_

. or dairy .where said milk or cream is produced or stored as said

‘Commissioner may require. The. filing of- the application for a

dairy farm. permit shall be sufficient authority for the shipment of

milk or creani until such .time as the Commissioner of Health shall |

—~have had the dairy herd and premises of the applicant inspected |

and shall have issued a,dairy farm permit to such applicant, or

«shall have notified the applicant that such permit will not be issued,

_ 4° ‘after,which the applicant shall cease to send milk or cream into the

| ) City of- Baltimore. The dairy farm permit may be revoked at any

time by the Commissioner of Health for failure to comply with the |

ety requirements of this sub-title or with any rules or regulations that

Yh may be issued by the Commissioner “of Health in accordance with

“power. conferred upon him by law or ordinance. Dairy farm per- -

mits shall expire one year fyom the date of issue. No dealer, per-.

“son or corporation shall role; sell, offer for sale, expose for sale,

/ dispose of or exchange in the ity of Baltimore without the written .

permission of the Commissioner. of Health milk or cream which

_ . has been produced on any premises for which a dairy farm/permit |

* -. has not been issued or applied for.

Creaghan v. Balto., ane Md. 442; Balto. v. ‘Gamble, 132, Md. 473.

ae “Gity Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 72. Ord. 262 (1917-18), sec. 59-I:.

Pte | 35. No person ‘shall offer for sale, ‘sell, give, furnish, exchange ~

| . or deliver in the City of Baltimore any milk or milk product from

‘any cow or cows fed either in whole or in part upon swill, wet

_ distillery waste, starch waste, or any substance or, mixture to which

swill, wét distillery waste, or starch waste has been added, or upon

any cannery refuse, ‘unless the feeding of said cannery refuse shall

be specifically permitted by the written permit of the Health Com-. —

missioner of Baltimore City, which said permit shall be good only.

for the season when issued and which said permit may he revoked.

in the discretion of the said Commissioner; provided however, that

y nothing herein contained shall be’ construed as affecting, ‘nor as

>prohibiting, nor authorizing the prohibition of, the offering for

f- sale, selling, giving, furnishing,.exchanging or delivering i in the City

of Baltimore any milk or milk product, ‘because the same is a

‘product from any cow or cows fed _— what i is commonly known

as brewers spent grain. ae

. | on ent v. Balto., 132 Md. 449. Balto. v.. -Gamble, 132 Mad. 473.

} 74

24 3

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 73.. Ord. 262 (1917- 18),. sec. 59J.

« 36. The Commissioner of Health shall have power to adopt.

‘such regulations as he may deem proper and necessary -to insure

that all condensed milk, .condensed.cream, evaporated milk, evapo--

_ rated’cream, or other milk or cream products in Baltimore ‘City be

prodiiced, stored, kept, distributed, retailed and delivered under |

conditions rendering them suitable for.consumption as human food —

-and rendering impossible the sale of any such products ‘as fresh

_milk or cream. : /

* Creaghan v. Balto., 132 Md. 440; Balto. v. Gamble, 132, Md. 473. -

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 74. Ord. 262. (1917- 18), : sec. 59K:

_ 37." Any person or persons who violate, disobey, neglect, or {e-

- fuse to comply with any of the provisions of Sections 26 to 36, in- -

clusive, of this Article“shall be fined not less than Twenty Dollars =

($20.00), nor more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), for each

offense, and the milk or food products in the possession of any per-

son.or persons so violating, disobeying, refusing or neglecting to

comply with the provisions of this sub-title may be confiscated,

‘destroyed or denatured by the ‘Commissioner of Health-or any

inspector or other representative of the Health Department of the

_ City of Baltimore who. examines the same. :

¥ . Gity Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 75.. “Ord. 87 (1893-94), sec. 3.

38. It shall be the duty of the Commissioner of Health to carry

out the provisions of this sub-title, and to make or cause to be made -

inspections of: milk, meats, vegetables; fruits and fish; wherever.

such articles are sold, kept, or offered for sale in thé City of Balti-

more, and to obtain samples of milk and all other food products

whose qualities are“to be determined by chemical or microscopical

examination. . It ‘shall also be the duty of the Commissioner of

‘Health to make such rules and regulations as may be required

under this sub-title for the better: protection of the health of the

city.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 76.. Ord. 87 (1893-94), sec. 4. >

\ 39. In order to provide for the additional duties imposed by this

sub-title ypon the Commissioner of Health, there shall. be ap-

pointed, as other city officers are appointed, a competent analytical

chemist and three inspectors of food, who shall. be wnder the direc-

residents and registered voters of Baltimore City; the chemist shall .

be a practical analyst and skilled in the chemical and microscopic

examination of milk and other food products; he shall not be a

member of or intérested in any trust, corporation or company deal-.

ing in food products; he shall make such chemical and microscopi-

= examinations as will be required under this sub-title, and will _

rt the result of all such examinations to the Commissioner of _.

wherein he has made an examination. His salary shall be Fifteen

Hundred Dollars per annum. bias specific duties of aaiea food

‘ts

inspector + shail be determined by the Caines of: Health; the

salary of each food ae aera shall be One ? Thpasaa. Dollars per

annum. 7

25)

- City Code (1927) art. 16: seer17.. Ord. 103 (1907-08), as

40. The Commissioner of Health and all other officers of the

by the Commissioner of Health shall have the right and power to

enter and haye full access to any: building, structure or premises _

where any milk or cream, or either of them, is stored or kept for

sale, and ‘shall have the right of access to all. wagons, railroad cars

or other vehicles of any’kind used for the conyeyance or delivery of

milk and cream, or either of them,:and to any building, structure

or premises where he believes or has reason to believe milk and

cream, or either of them, is stored or kept for sale; and shall have

the right to take samples of milk and cream therefrom (such

samples not to exceed one quart): for, the purpose. of inspecting,

- testing or analyzing the same. Any person or corporation refusing

to allow such right of entry or access, or refusing to allow such

‘samples of milk and cream to be taken, or hindering orsobstructing

-any officer named herein in carrying out the power conferred by.

this section, shall be.fined not less than Five Dollars nor more than

| ‘One Hundred Dollars for each ve

‘City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 78. Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec..61B.

41.. Every sample of milk. delivered to any officer of the Health

Department. or inspector shall- have a label attached to the vessel,

containing such sample, which shall have written thereon, at the

_ time of the delivery of such sample, the number of the dealer’s

permit, the number of the sample, the date of colléction and the

name of the inspector or officer taking the same; and a memoran- |

dum shall be made by the officer or inspector collecting such .

sample, of the number of the sample, and. the;name of the owner -

-- and driver from whom collected; and no conviction shall be had. - .

of any person for selling or having in his possession adulterate

milk as ‘in this sub-title defined, unless at ‘the time of taking the

sample upon the evidence of which a conviction is asked, a dupli-

cate sample properly sealed and marked for identification, shall —

have been’ delivered to the person from whose - ‘possession such

original sample was taken. Na paking samples, the milk in the re-

ceptacle from which the same is taken, shall be so agitated as to

3 insure a fair mixture of t contents.

’ City Code (1927), art. \6, sec. 79. Ord. 87 (1893- 94), sec. 5.

42. The term food’ protluct, as used in this sub-title, shall be

construed to mean any . natural or artificial product, ‘that with or

without admixture, preparation or cooking, is intended to be taken ~

into the human stomach by way of food and not as a medicine;

provided that alcoholic or fermented drinks shall not be classed as

food products; also, that the term adulteration shall be construed

. to mean any artificial addition to normal constituents; and the

term sophistication shall be construed to mean the substitution of

one product for another, or any abstraction of or artificial change

in the normal constituents, .provided that goods. canned according

- to the rules of the Canned Goods Exchange of Baltimore shall not

be considered sophisticated; and the term unwholesome shall be

-construed to mean deleterious to health, or liable to introduce,

_ Cause or increase ‘sickness, or impairment or derangement of func-

tions of the human body by the temporary or continuous use of the

unwholesome product; and the term impure shall bé construed to

mean natural change or decomposition of normal constituents, or

absorption of or commingling with. deleterious gases, liquids or

solids; provided, that in a warrant, indictment, or legal paper or

proceeding, the term.impure as applied to a food product shall be

a good and sufficient description to the. térm adulterated, sophisti-

- cated, unwholesome, unsound, tainted, rotten, partly decomposed,

or impure, as used i in this sub- title, or of two or more of these terms.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec;-80. Ord. 87 (1898-94), sec. 6.

~ Ord. 130°(1893-94). . Ord. 62 (1903-04), sec.

43. Any person or persons who violate, disobey, es or re-

fuse to comply with any of the provisions of Sections 38-42, shall °

be subject to a penalty of not less than Twenty Dollars ($20). nor

more'than One Hundred Dollars ($100) for each offense; said fine

to be collected as other fines and forfeitures are collected. |

. . : ad

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 81. Ord. 103 (1907-08), sec. 203A.°

44. No prosecution of any person. or corporation, on a charge

of violating any law, ordinance or regulation relating to or govern-

ing the sale of milk or cream in Baltimore City shall be had or |

‘maintained unless, at the initial stage thereof, such prosecution

shall have been authorized and directed by the written order of the °

Commissioner of Health, signed by him or: by-an Assistant ,Com-

missioner of Health, such wricten order to-be filed with the ae

in the proceeding. —

MEAT INSPECTION!

City Code (1927), art. 16; sec. 82. Ord. 431 (1925- 26), sec. 1.

“Ord. 492 (1928-29), -sec. 1.

45, | There shall be in the Department of Health of Raliiiore

City, a Bureau: designated as “Bureau of Meat Inspection”, and

for the proper conduct of said Bureau: and for the purposes hereini-

after set forth, the Commissioner of Health shall °appoint such

number of inspectors at such salaries as shall be authorized by the

‘ Board of Estimates of Baltimore City. The Chief of said Bureau

shall be a veterinarian; licensed by the State-of Maryland, who has -

had practical experience in the Bureau of Animal Industry, in the

‘Department of Agriculture of the United States, or an equivalent

slaughtered for human consumption, and in supervising the process

1Sections 45-59 (Ord. 431 of 1925- 26) held constitutional in Balto..v.

Bloecher and Schaaf, *149 Md. 648. Affirmed by U. S. Supreme’ Court . ”

. 48 Sup. Ct. ics 33. ve Feit

- of manufacturing food peodiscsi thereof. The Chief em, and

all other employees of the said Bureau shall perform such duties

in said. Bureau or elsewhere in the Department of Health as may

be assigned to. them from time to time by - the Commissioner of

Health or by his duly authorized Deputy.

Gity Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 83. Ord. 431% 1925-26), sec. 2.

Ord. 466 (1933- 34), Ord. 741 (1938-39), sec. 83.

46. No person shall sell, have, keep or expose for sale for human

food, or have in possession, the flesh, meat and products, or meat

food products. of any cattle, calves, sheep, swine or goats unless the

-same shall have been slaughtered or prepared under the super-

vision of the Bureau of Animal Industry, U. S. Department of Agri-

culture or under the supervision of the Commissioner of Health in|

accordance with the provisions of this sub-title, or the same shall

bear the‘inspection legend or other official mark of identification

_ of a Board of Health whose meat inspection standard is equal to .

that. of and tecognized by the Commissioner of Health.

Any#person, firm“or corporation establishing, maintaining or |

operating any business as herein classified shall procure a license

from the GCommissigner of Health and pay therefor an annual. fee, |

‘in advance, in accordance with the following schedule:

: Class A—Slau ghterers

“Sleagitien shall be construed to include any person, firm or

corporation engaged in the business of slaughtering of food animals, .

such as:cattle, calves, swine, sheep, lambs or goats, and also includ- |

ae fe ny person, firm or corporation having*any of the above

‘entmerated’ animals slaughtered. for him, them or it in any plant

. maintaining or operating a slaughtering business; including the

ight of processing of meat and meat food products: including the

ight. of furnishing cold storage and refrigeration’ on premises;

anufacturing meat food products, packing for market; rendering.

of edible fats'and inedible by-products; handling: and selling of |

-, such products at wholesale and/or retail upon the premises where

slaughtered and prepared, or at the place of business of any

_ “person, firm or corporatién. sending the above-named animals to be

slaughtered. ,

‘The annual license. fee under this class shall be heen ‘on the

‘maximum fee’ for any one species slaughtered in each such estab- _

- . lishment, said maximum fee to be the only fee. collectible for each

such establishment, as follows:

Cattle— | | Hy ree

_ Not exceeding ............... 200 head per annum........$ 60

Not exceeding «.........:.:.. 1,000 head per annum........ 120

NOt CXCCOCING ......<0:.:... 2, ‘000 head per annum........ 180

Not exceeding .............. 4.000. head per annum........ ‘240

Exceeding ae 4,000 head per annum........ 300°

Calves, iheep or lambs, swine and goats— 3

Not exceeding .............. 2,000 head per annum........$-60°

Not exceeding .............. 6,000 head per annum........ 120

Not exceeding .............. 10,000 head per annum....... 180 -

Not exceeding ..........2.. 15,000 head per annum........ 210:

Not exceeding ......... es 20,000 head per annum........ 240

IE oiseeisssssnasohin 20, 000 head. per annum........ 300

Class B-—Pracessors and Manufacturers’ Soa

For persons, firms and corporations engaged in the processing

of nreat products, manufacturing meat food products, packing

them for market, rendering of edible fats; and to engage in the

. handling and selling of such products at wholesale and for retail, -

a license fee of Sixty Dollars ($60) shall be charged for each estab-

lishment so engaged. ~ ef

- The, term “manufacturing” as used in this section: shall be con-

strued to mean subjecting fresh meat, prepared meat or a’ mixture

of fresh meat: and prepared, with one or more of the following:

herbs, spices, cereals, common salt, sodium’ hitrate, sodium nitrite, -

potassium nitrate, sugar, a syrup, water and vinegar. 3

C lass C—County

No license or permit for handling meat or: ‘meat-food: wiaducte

intended for use or sale in Baltimore City, shall hereafter be granted

under the provisions of this section to any person, firm or corpora- |

‘tion coming under Class A—Slaughterers, or Class B—Processors

’ and Manufacturers, whose’ plant or- place of: business shall be

located beyond the corporate limits ef. Baltimore City; provided, |

_ however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to affect -

the rights of holders of such licenses or permits at the. time of the

passage of this ordinance to continue to hold or to renéw the same

annually; but such holders shall, in addition to the payment of a»

license fee, pay to the Commissioner of Health, annually, in ad-

vance, the sum of Fifty Dollars ($50.00) fer transportation service

for plants. located within ten (10) miles of the City limits and One

Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for plants located more than ten (10).

miles beyond the -City limits. — :

—

\ fos Class. D—Wholesaters

1. The. term “wholesale” ‘as used in this section shall_be-con-

strued to mean the making of sales to the wholesale and retail trade

in the City of Baltimore, including suctr sales by brokers, commis-- _

_ sion merchants, jobbers, packers’ agents , and itinerant vendors,. and

shall also include sales in quantities or on a large scale to hotels,

restaurants, institutions, commissaries, manufacturers and the sup-

plying of branch or chain establishments: from a central depot or

store. :

2.- For persons, rie and corporations engaged in the sale or.

distribution of meat and meat food products which have their Origin

a 29

outside the corporate limits of the state and who shall iis sich’

products into the City of Baltimore by means of steamship lines,

railroads or motor vehicle, or by maintaining a distributing: station, .

place or warehouse within the City of Baltimore, or by means of

_ vehicles operated upon the streets of the city, or who shall have

"an office in the city but. do not distribute meat and meat food

products by valli, 6 a license fee of. One Hundred Dollars ($100)

_ shall be charged.

3. For persons, firms and peiapiaiibiain engaged in the selling of

~, meat and meat food products at wholesale to the retail trade, a

license fee, of Thirty-fivé Dollars ($35) shall be ar for. each

such store, stand, stalPor vehicle so engaged. : ae

Class E—Retailers of Meat and Meat Food Products

' 1. The term “retail sale of meat and meat. food products” Be

used in this sub-title shall be construed to mean where any pe

firm or corporation use, operate or maintain any building, i

stand, enclosure, place or establishment, for the purpose of selling,

offering’ for sale or keeping with the intention of selling or dis-

tributing at retail, any article of food in which meat and meat food -

products ‘ (fresh, cooked or smoked} ) is an ingredient and is of a

definite and considerable portion of, or is used for or is mixed with

or enters into the composition of any food wed: or intended for

human —_— 2 ihe.

2. Cured Meat: Subjecting fresh meat to a solution of common

salt with or without one or more. of the following: sodium nitrate,

~ sodium nitrite, potassium nitrate, sugar, a syrup, honey, spice.

3. Cooked Meat: Subjecting fresh meat, meat food products, .

meat by-preducts and/or cured meat to the direct action of heat,

_ such. as ‘roasting and /or boiling.

4. . ‘Smoked Meat: - Subjecting fresh meat, dried meat, or cured

meat to the direct action of the smoke either of — wood or of

° similar. or other ‘burning material. : .

5. For persons, firms and corporations engaged i in n the selling

of meats and meat food products at retail, a license fee ‘shall be bs

charged for each such place so engaged, as follows:

(a) Retail sale of meats and meat food products, includ-

ing the right of curing of meat products.................... . $1.00 -

(b) Retail sale of ‘meats and meat food products, includ-° —

ing the right of ‘curing and. cooking meat and meat

Re I hncieeccircrstirenstivinnntjaneroctnneniscienienssimnentavebsin 10.00

ing the right of curing, cooking and smoking meat

and meat .food product.........::ceeinnte, 15.00

_ Class F- Route Veocke—Retait |

. For persons, firms and corporations engaged in the sale of meats

and meat food products at retail from any vehicle along or upon

"the streets ‘i the City of Baltimore, a license: fee of Fifteen Dollars

~ ($15). shall be om for each such vehicle so engaged.

Class G-Storage Warehouses ;

For persons, firms and corporations engaged in the business of

public cold storage ‘and/or: refrigeration of meat and/or meat.

food products a license fee of Fifty Dollars ($50) shall be cr

for each such place or warehouse so engaged. ag

Class H—Renderers and Collectors of | Animal Substances

Shall include the business of rendering and reduction of dead

carcasses and animal substances, and the gathering or transferring

of butcher’s eetc fats, bones, "grease or: any animal matter what-

soever.

a For persons, firms and corporations engaged in the render-.

ing or reduction of dead animals and animal substances, collected |

or gathered or brought into an establishment from outside-of the

_ premises, a license fee of Twenty-five Dollars ($25) shall be_

charged for each establishment so engaged.

_(b) For persons, firms and corporations engaged in the collect-

ing, gathering of butcher’s offals, bones, fats, grease.or any anjmal

matter whatsoever; a license fee of Ten Dollars ($10) shall be x | s aaa

charged for each such vehicle so engaged.

Permits

_ Permits: ‘shall be non-transferable and no permit issued hereunder

shall authorize the holder theréof to carry on, engage in or conduct

the business in any place or places other than described and ect °

out in such permit.

‘The Commissioner of Health may refuse to grant ath permit

and refuse inspection if the person making application for, or to

whom the permit was issued, does not/comply with the meat in-

- spection law and regulations now in forte or that may hereafter be

adopted. by the Commissioner of Health in controlling the slaught-

ering and inspection’of animals and the perperenen and sale of |

meat products and meat food products. aie .

City. Code: (1927), art. 16, sec. 84. Ord. 431 (1925- 26), sec. 35,

_ 47, To prevent the sale and use in the City of Baltimore of

meat .and meat food products which are diseased, unsound, un-

healthful, unwholesome or otherwise unfit’ for human food, the

Commissioner. of Health, at his discretion, may cause to be made

_ by inspectors provided for in this sub-title, an examination and

inspection of all cattle, sheep, swine and goats before they shall be

allowed to enter into any slaughtering, packing, meat canning,

rendering or other similar establishment in which they are to be

_ Slaughtered, and all cattle, sheep, swine and goats found on such ’

/ inspection to. show symptoms of disease shall be set apart and

— separately f from all other cattle, sheep, s swine and goats,

81:

ee v | st : 31

and when so slaughtered the carcasses of said cattle, sheep, swine

_ tion and all such ‘found to be‘unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome

or unfit for human food or food’ products ‘shall be condemned and

destroyed for food purposes by the establishment in the presence

of an inspector, and all such condemned cattle shall be delivered

‘toa licenséd rendering plant; and. any establishment failing to.

destroy and. remove ‘such condemned ‘carcasses, or parts thereof,

_ shall be subjected to a revocation of the license ‘granted under the

provisions .of. this sub-title and the inspectors may be removed

therefrom by the Commissioner of Health. |

City ‘Code (1927), art.°16, sec. 85. Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec. 4.

: Ag. The Commissioner. of Health shall cause to be made,

through inspectors provided for in this sub-title, a post-mortem

_-examination and inspection -of the carcasses, and parts thereof, of

-.'all cattle, sheep, swine and goats to be prepared at any slaughter-

ing, meat canning, salting, packing, rendering or similar establish-

ment in Baltimore City and .intended for’ human consumption

_ therein, and the carcasses, and parts thereof, of all sich animals

found to be sound, healthful, wholesome and fit for human food

shall be marked, stamped, tagged or labeled “inspected and

passed”, and said inspector shall label, mark, stamp and: tag as

“inspected and condemned” all carcasses, and parts thereof, of ani-

mals found to be unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome or otherwise

unfit for human. food; and all carcasses, and parts thereof, thus in-

_ spected and condemned shall be destroyed for food purposes by the

establishment in the presence of an inspector, and all such con-

-. demned cattle shall be delivered to a licensed rendering plant; and

any establishment failing to destroy and remove-such condemned

carcasses, or parts thereof, shall be subjected to a revocation, of the

license granted under the provisions of this sub-title, and the in-

spectors’ may be removed therefrom by the Commissioner ‘ of

Health. Whenever they. may deem it necessary, after the first in-

“ spection, the inspectors miay re-inspect said carcasses, or parts

. thereof, to determine whether since the first inspection thé same

_ have become unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome or in any way

unfit for human. food, and if any such upon re-examination and

re-inspection be found to be unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome

_/or in any way unfit for human food, the same shall be condemned

and delivered to a licensed rendering establishment. The pro-_

visions of this section shall apply to carcasses, or parts thereof, of

the animals mentioned or the meat or meat products thereof, |

which may be brought into any such establishment mentioned, and-

examination. and inspection shall be made before the carcasses, or

parts thereof, shall be allowed to enter into any department

wherein the same are ‘to be treated or prepared fox meat food —

products, and shall likewise apply to such products which, .after .

having been issued from such establishment shall be . returned

thereto or any similar establishment where inspection is main-

tained.

39 \ ee a oe le oes ths me

~ City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 86. Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec: 5: |

_49.-Fhe ‘Commissioner of Health. shall cause to be made, —

“through inspectors provided for in this sub-title, an examination

and inspection of -all meat food. products prepared for sale: and

human consumption in, Baltimore City in any slaughtering, meat |

canning, salti , packing, rendering or similar establishment, and |

ay inspectors he rein provided for shall ‘stamp, tag: or label. -

“inspected and\ passed’’. All such sit found to be sound,

healthful and wholesome and which contain no dyes, chemicals,

preservatives or ingredients. which render such meat food products

unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome or unfit for human food; and

said inspectors shall la 1, mark, stamp or tag: as “inspected and

condemned” all such products found to be unsound, unhealthful

and unwholesome, or which, contain dyes, chemicals, preservatives

or ingredients which render such meat food products ‘unsound, un-

healthful, unwholesome or unfit for human food, and all such con-

demned meat food products shall be destroyed for iood purposes by

the establishment in the presence\of an inspector; and any estab:

lishment failing to destroy and remove such condemned ‘meat food

products shall be subjected to a revocation of the license granted

under the provisions of this sub-title,\and the inspectors may be |

-removed therefrom by the Commissionet of Health. eens

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 87. Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec. 6:

50. When any meat or‘meat food products prepared. for sale

or human consumption: in Baltimore City and\ marked “Inspected

and Passed” shall be placed or packed in’ any can, pot, tin, canvas

. or other receptacle or _covering in any establishment where i inspec-

tion under the‘provisions of this sub-title is required, the person,

firm or corporation preparing said products shall cause a label to be

-attached to said can,.pot, tin, canvas or other receptadle or cover-*

ing under the supervision of an inspect r, which label ‘shall state

that the contents thereof have been “Jfspected and Passéd” under

.the provisions of this sub-title; but no\inspection and examination

. of meat or meat food products: deposited or enclosed in cans, tins, .

pots, canvas or other receptacles or coverings in any establishment

. where inspection, urider this subtitle is maintained, shall be deemed

to be complete until such meat or meat food products have been

sealed or enclosed in said can, tin, pot, canvas or, other receptacle’.

or covering under the supervision of an inspector,.and no such .

_meat or meat food products shall be sold or offered for sale in -

Baltimore City under any false or deceptive name; but established

tradé-name or names, which are usual to such products, and which

are not false or deceptive, shall be permitted when se saan with

and approved by the Commissiéner of Health.

City Code (1927), art. 16; sec. 88. Ord. 431 -(1925-26), sec. 2

31... The Commissioner of Health shall cause to be made from.

time to time by experts in sanitation, and by other competent in-

spectors, such inspection of all slaughtering, meat canning, salting,

packing, rendering or similar establishments in which cattle, sheep,

swine and goats are slaughtered and the meat and meat food

products thereof are prepared for sale, offered ~ sale, or sold in

the City of Baltimore, as may be necessary to inform himself con-

cerning the sanitary condition df the same, and where the sanitary

conditions of any establishment are such that the meat or meat

food products are rendered unclean, unsound, unhealthful, un-

wholesome or otherwise unfit for human food, the Commissioner of

- . Health shall refuse to allow said meat or meat food products to be

labeled, ‘marked, stamped and tagged “Inspected and. Passed”.

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 89. Ord. 431 (1925-26), “ ..

52. Before any establishment, subject to the provision’ of ~

sub-title, shall slaughter any cattle, sheep, swine or goats, the pr

prietor théreof shall notify the Commissioner of Health so that

inspectors may be present at the time of slaughtering to examine,

inspect, stamp or label the carcasses as herein provided, and ‘all

such slaughtering shall be done between the hours: of Five A.M.

and: Seven P. M.; unless in emergency, other hours shall be desig-

nated by the Commissioner of Health. If in _any case it shall be

- impossible for the Commissioner: of Health to have inspectors

present at the time of slaughtering, an inspection service shall be

provided by the establishment under | digs

Commissioner of Health as a substitute for municipal inspection,

and such inspection shall in alk respects conform to the inspection

provided for in this sub-title; and for the effectual enforcement of

all the provisions of this sub- title, the inspectors herein provided

for shall have access at all times, by day or night, whether the,

establishment be operated or not, to every part of the establish- if

ment. ae

_ City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 90. ‘Ord. 431: (1925-26), sec. 9.

53. No-person, firm or corporation, or officer, agent or em- .

ployee thereof, shall forge, counterfeit, simulate or falsely represent,

or shall; without proper authority, use or detach, or shall know-

ingly or wrongfully alter, deface or destroy. any of the. marks,

stamps, tags, labels or other identification provided to be used

hereunder by the Commissioner of Health on any carcasses, parts

of carcasses, or the food products or containers thereof, or any

certificate i in relation thereto, authorized by: this ‘sub- title, :

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 91: Ord. 431 (1925- 26), sec. 10.

54. The Commissioner of Health shall cause the inspectors |

_hereit, provided for to make examination and inspection of all

“cattle, sheep, swine and ‘goats, the inspection of which is herein-

before provided for, and of all carcasses and parts thereof and of |

all meats and meat food products thereof and of the sanitary condi-

tion of all establishments in which such meat or meat food products

ritten authority of the .

hereinbefore described are prepared, subject to the provisions of _

this sub-title, and the said inspectors shall refuse, to. stamp, mark,

tag or label any carcass or part thereof, or any meat food products

therefrom prepared or offéred for sale or sold in any establishment

hereinbefore mentioned until the same shall have been actually |

inspected and found to be sound. healthful, wholesome and fit for .

human 060 and contain no “dyes, chemicals, preservatives or in-' .

gredients which render’ such meat and meat food products unsound,

unhealthful, unwholesome, unfit for human food, or so altered in

appearance as to simulate a fresh, ‘sound product, and have been |

prepared under proper sanitary conditions as hereinbefore provided

an for, and said inspectors shall perform such other duties as are pro- ~

’ e

| vided for by this sub-title and as ey be i Wy the Com-

_ missioner of Health.

‘City Code (1927), 2 art. 16,°scc. 92. Ord. 431 (1925- 26), sec. “11. |

35. Any person, firm or corporation, or officer, agent or em-—

ployee of any person, firm or corporation, who shall give, pay or

offer, directly or indirectly, to any inspectof any money or other

thing of value ‘with intent to influence said inspector in the dis-

charge of any duty herein provided for, shall be deemed guilty of-

a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be subjected to.

. & fine of not more than Five Hundfed Dollars ($500.00) and to

.im nment in the Baltimore City Jail for not more than one

_ * (1); year; and-any inspector who shall accept any money, gift or

other thing .of value from any person, firm or gral Neng or officer,

ent or employee thereof with intent to influence his official

action, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon con-

~Yiction. shall. be sectiern tes to the _ ope in this section ae

a | | y |

. City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 93: Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec. 12.

oe 56. Befofe the Commissioner of Health shall revoke any Boetiae’

issued underithe provisions of this sub-title for any violation thereof,

the said-commissioner shall notify the applicant of the alleged viala-

-- tion and that an opportunity. will be given him to show cause why

the license should not be revoked, and said hearing shall be had

on a day not less than three (3) nor more than five (5) days after

_-. the date of the notice of the alleged violation, and ‘sugh notice of

. the violation and of the hearing ‘shall be served by an inspector on

the proprictor, or his or. its agent in charge of the establishment,

and at the hearing the Commissioner shall decide the matter, and *

. if he shall be of opinion that, a violation has, been proved, he shall. _

‘forthwith revoke. the license and ‘such revocation shall be for such

riod of time as he shall stipulate,-but in no event for more than,

one (1) ‘year. In the event the applicant’ shall fiot appear at the

time set for hearing, and the Commissioner shall’ be satisfied that *”

there has been a violation of. the provisions, of this sub-title, he

shall pass an order in the case and notify the licensee forthwith of

his action. From any adverse action of the Commissioner, there

shall be an appeal to the Baltimore City Court, to be taken’ within

twenty (20) days from the date of said action, by filing a petition

of appeal to the Baltimore City Court praying said court to review —

‘ the same, whereupon the said court shall pass an order setting such

appeal for hearing and requiring the Commissioner to peopenten|

court all papers relating to the action taken, from which an appe o\

is prayed. The jurisdiction of the Baltimore City Court on appeal

shall be limited to the auestion of the legality of the’ order, decision, .

——

48 Sup. Ct. = 33,

;. action or. determination complained of. Provided, that. periding

. the hearing of appeal, no order of revocation shall be stayed.

"City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 94. Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec. 13.

57. Any person, firm or corporation, or any officer, or agent of

such person, firm or corporation, who shall violate any of the pro-

. visions of this sub-title, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon.

conviction shall be puriished by a fine 6 not less than’ Twenty-five —

Dollars ($25.00) nor more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500. 00),

or by imprisonment in the Baltimore City Jail for not more than

twelve months, or to both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion

of .the court; provided, however, that operation without a license

aftex-revocation or suspension thereof shall subject the offender to :

a fine of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for each day of such

operation subsequent to said revocation or suspension, or to im-

prisonment in the Baltimore City Jail for sixty (60) days, in the

discretion of the court. eee

_ City Code (1927), < art. 16, sec. 95; Ord. 431 (1925- 26), sec. 14,

Ord. 492 (1928- 29), sec. 14,°

38. In order to avoid duplication‘of inspection at. etiablidancnts

- subject to inspection by the Bureau of Animal Industry of the.

United States Department of Agriculture, all carcasses inspected by

the said Bureau within Baltimore City shall be exempt from the

provisions of this sub-title, respecting’ inspection of carcasses at _

the time of slaughter, and the disposal of diseased carcasses and .. °

organs andthe tanking: thereof, so long as the inspection of such

carcasses and the disposal thereof, as aforesaid, is subject to Federal ..

_. regulations and restrictions the same or substantially the same as

‘ herein provided; provided, that the Commissioner of Health and

- his subordinates shall have access at all times to such establishments

as are under Federal inspection to the same. extent as to other .

establishments subject to the: provisions of this sub-title; and pro-

viding ‘further that should’ inspection by the Bureau of Animal

’ Industry..be withdrawn from any such establishments, they ‘shall

become. subject to all the provisions of the said sub-title. \

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 96. Ord. 431 (1925-26), sec. 15.

59. Swine produced and slaughtered or any swine products pre-

pared for market on the farm where said swine are produced by a

bona fide farmer may be delivered for sale to any dealer in or

consumer of such products in the City of Baltimore, and such swine

or swine. products shall only be subject to such regulations for in-

spection as shall be made by the Commissioner of Health to govern

_ thé slaughter and preparation for market and sale of such. swine:

or-swine products.

Balto. v. Bloecher & Schaaf, 149 Ma, 648; Bloecher &. Schaaf v. Balto.,

Ord. 791 (1929-30), sec. -96A.

60. The Commissioner of Health of Baltimore City shall have

“full power and authority to make, adopt and promulgate, from .

Wing ask ; a

. . e 7

Sn ed oe

36°

time to time, such rules and aiiidens not inconsistent. with the -

provisions: of the aforegoing Sections 46 to 59, inclusive,. of this

. Article, as may be necessary for the efficient execution of the pro-

' visions of said sections. All rules and regulations formulated and

. issued by the said Commissioner of Health in pursuance of the

les hereby conferred, shall have the force and effect of laws, and

all violations of such rules and regulations shall be deemed mis-

demeanors and shall be subjected to provinons of Section 37 of

' this Article. -_

GAS APPLIANCES?

Registration: of Appliances |

City Code (1927), art. 16, sec. 97. Ord. 436 ee eg Ord. 1063 -

(1926-27). Ord. 361 (1927-28), sec. 1. Ord. 1154

(1949-50), sec. 1.

60A. (a) No tubing; appliance, appurtenance or device for use -°

with, by, or for the combustion of gas as distributed and/or sold in

the City of Baltimore shall be sold, offered for sale, connected or .

installed in the City of Baltimore, unless the type, sample or model ._.

*. of Baltimore Gity, the ae ap aed to be in the following

manner:

(b) Application shall be wade. to the Building Inspection Engi-

neer of Baltimore City and the applicant shall furnish such infor- °

—mgrion and certificates and cause such tests to be‘ conducted as may

required by the Building Inspection Engineer to secure proper

‘registration and identification of any such tubing, appliance, ap-_

purtenance} device, sample or model thereof; and before such

application shall be approved by the Building Inspection Engineer,

he shall determine whether said tubing, appliance, appurtenance,

- device, sample, or model thereof described therein conforms to the |

rules, regulations and specifications hereinafter provided for in.

Section 60H hereof. And in connection with such application, the _

applicant shall file evidence satisfactory to the Building Inspection

Engineer that such gas appliance, sample or model thereof has

been examined and tested and found to comply with the rules,

regulations, specifications and. requirements as provided for: in

Section 60H. The Building Inspection Engineer shall not. register

the tubing, appliance, appurtenance, device, sample or model

thereof described in said application, unless it ‘shall appear that it. ~

conforms to said rules,’ regulations and specifications, and meets

such tests as the Building Inspection Enginelr may prescribe.

"ing, appliance, appurtenance or “device described in any such appli-

cation for registration does not conform to said ‘rules, regulations.

and specifications, or if he is not satisfied with the application, he

shall notify ‘the applicant forthwith, stating his reasons therefor.

(d) All tubing, appliances, appurtenances or devices shall bear '

an identification number or: cpaten which. may be the manu-

————__—

1 Secs. 97- 108 (1927 Ed.). on same subject held valid. Stove & Range

Go. v. Balto., 156 Ma. 246; 144 A 358.

__, ~facturer’s regular trade name and model number, and when applied

for by such manufacturer, it shall be stated in the application for

' registration, provided that nothing contained in this ordinance shall.

be construed to apply to tubing, appliances, appurtenances or de-

vices used. for s

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.