This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
That suspicion of improper interference on the part of the federal government, when through its power over interstate commerce it has sought to exercise authority in even an advisory manner over public health matters, is still a bogey with the extreme advocates of a state's rights policy. This fear of unwarrantable meddlesomeness with the affairs of a state will always hinder a salutary national administration of affairs pertaining to public health of the United States.
This distrust of federal supervision in public health affairs is seemingly not confined to any particular part of the country. At one time it was thought that the states lying south of Mason and Dixon's line were peculiarly sensitive in regard to federal interference; but it is apparent to-day that Massachusetts, Ohio and Illinois and other northern states are much more jealous of the prerogatives of state sovereignty in sanitary matters
PORTER JY. HOW AN ENLARGED AND MORE UNIFORM NATIONAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION MAY BE SECURED. JAMA. 1910;LIV(9):695-697. doi:10.1001/jama.1910.92550350001001f