ALBERT C. RITCHIE, GOVERNOR.               1447

the canners of the State in order that the products they buy
from the farmers may enable them to meet the requirements
imposed by the Act of Congress known as the Mapes Law.

The bill was originally introduced as Senate 257. It passed
the Senate, and a few days before the Legislature adjourned
it was reported unfavorably by the Judiciary Committee of
the House, and this report was adopted by a large majority.
On the last day of the session an effort was made to adopt a
compromise measure, and this, measure was drafted. It was
too late for the new draft to be properly studied, and the op-
ponents of Senate Bill 257 agreed to it very largely on their
understanding secured from others as to its exact provisions.

It was then too late to introduce a new bill, and too late
also to reconsider the- adoption of the unfavorable report on
Senate 257. There was, however, a bill relating to motor vehi-
cles, Senate 211, which had passed the Senate and was in the
Judiciary Committee of the House, and which the committee
had decided not to report. By an agreement between both
sides this bill was reported out, substituting the compromise
measure as an amendment in place of the provisions of Senate
211. As thus amended the bill passed the House and was con-
curred in by the Senate.

Afterwards it was discovered that the compromise measure
as drawn did not carry out the understanding of both parties.
They had thought that the bill would not provide for an in-
spection until after the produce had been both sold and deliv-
ered to the canners. In fact, the bill provided for inspection
after the sale had been made, but before the produce had been
delivered.

I feel that there are some very desirable features about the
bill in its present form, but I have decided not to approve it
because of the misunderstanding which has arisen. Probably
the compromise should not have been attempted at so late an
hour. There was too much confusion and haste at the time.
In any event, I do not feel that the bill should become a law
when it clearly does not conform to the understanding of both
sides. The situation is evidence that the practice now and then
indulged in at the close of a Legislative session of adding an
entirely new bill on a bill which is dead sometimes leads to
unfortunate results.

For these reasons, the bill will be vetoed.