On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:07:30 -0600, Steve Wertz
> wrote:

>On 10 Nov 2003 21:36:15 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote:
>
>>Christine Dabney > writes:
>>
>>>Hiya all,
>>>
>>>I got curious, and decided to google for the definition of a
>>>Smithfield ham.
>>>
>>>This supposedly is the official definition of a Smithfield ham, so I
>>>was correct after all, for the most part.
>>>
>>>"Genuine Smithfield hams [are those] cut from the carcasses of
>>>peanut-fed hogs, raised in the peanut-belt of the State of Virginia or
>>>the State of North Carolina, and which are cured, treated, smoked, and
>>>processed in the town of Smithfield, in the State of Virginia."
>>>1926 Statute passed by General Assembly of Virginia
>>
>>With absolutely no varifiable corroboration your definition amounts to
>>gibberish... also because what I believe you meant to write is "Smithfield
>>Ham", not "Smithfield ham". BIG difference.
>
>The key word there is "Genuine". A label not not bear the word
>"genuine" unless it's a dry-cured ham processed in Smithfield County.
>Smithfield, the *brand* name is free to use the word "Smithfield" on
>any of it's products regardless of how or where it was made. They
>just can't call it "Genuine" unless it's from their dry-cured line.
>
>I used to live literally 500 yards from the Smithfield county line and
>am more than familiar with the terminology regarding hams. Sheldon,
>OTOH, is just terminal.
>
>-sw

I also want to point out, that this is a VA Statute, which I don't
think is gibberish. How more official can you get?

I was trying to find the actual statute for corroboration,but I
haven't been lucky so far, in my search. However, I have only done
superficial searching so far.