214 AGRICULTURE OF MAINE. 



product to be in imitation of yellow butter, it must follow that 

 this police regulation respecting the manufacture and sale 

 relates, not to the public health, but to the public safety, that is, 

 to the prevention of frauds or imposition. The statute must be 

 construed accordingly." 



While these principles were set forth in the opinion of the 

 Court, the case was reversed and sent back for a new trial on 

 the ground that the judge, in charging the jury, had erroneously 

 charged as to the law. 



On December i6^ I9i3» the Court of Appeals of the State of 

 New York handed down a decision in the case of the People 

 V. Guiton, 2IO N. Y. i, in an oleomargarine case in which the 

 Court held : 



"While oleomargarine may be manufactured and sold under 

 regulative restrictions and requirements to take the place of 

 butter, the legislature may enact laws to prevent fraud and 

 deception, to suppress false pretenses and promote honesty and 

 disclosure in relation to its production and sale. 



"Imitation of butter may be effected in either of two ways, 

 at least; the one, the use of artificial coloring matter which is 

 not an essential ingredient but serves the sole purpose of 

 achieving the imitated color; the other, the selection of the in- 

 gredients as to color and proportions, or both, with the pre- 

 determination and purpose of producing the imitated color. 

 The purpose of section 38 was to forbid the use of either of 

 these two ways, or any other analogous way, of causing oleo- 

 margarine to be in imitation or semblance of butter. 



"Where oleomargarine was in a package within the maximum 

 size, sealed, wrapped and labeled in all respects as prescribed by 

 the Agricultural law, and sold as and for oleomargarine, and 

 there was no deception or attempt to deceive in the sale, and it 

 is found that the resemblance to natural butter 'was a resem- 

 blance in inherent qualities common to both butter and oleo- 

 margarine, and was not the result of any artificial means or 

 selection employed in the manufacture of said oleomargarfne,' 

 there is no violation of the statute." 



In this case the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of 

 the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court which held that 

 the defendant had violated the statute in selling oleomargarine 



