OLEOMARGARINE AND OTHER IMITATION DAIRY PRODUCTS. XXV 



known as laborers, not in the common acceptance of the term, but as a class of peo- 

 ple following a variety of pursuits at small salaries, and in most cases, owing to their 

 dependencies and meager earnings, compelled to go without the luxuries of life. 



It is this class of people whose interests need careful consideration, whose claims 

 upon you as their representatives are invariably backed by justice, who are always 

 the greatest sufferers by and the most sensitive to inimical legislation, who always are 

 the first to respond to and cheerfully comply with all just and reasonable laws. 



As the representative of the National Live Stock Exchange, I also plead for a con- 

 sideration of the rights of this class of our citizens, who, from the nature of their sur- 

 roundings and conditions, are unable to appear before you in their own behalf. 



They, who are the principal consumers of butterine, are not asking for any legisla- 

 tion. The producers and raisers of fat cattle are not asking you for any legislation in 

 this respect. 



Why should it be any more unlawful to put into butterine, the product of the 

 beef steer, the same coloring matter as is put into butter, the similar product of his 

 sister, the dairy cow? 



Is there any equity or justice in such denial? Is it made necessary by the condi- 

 tions? Is it warranted upon any grounds? If it is, I am at a loss to comprehend it. 



This kind of legislation is most assuredly the worst and most vicious kind of class 

 legislation, because it is inaugurated solely for the purpose of destroying a competi- 

 tive industry equally as important and equally as deserving of legislative support 

 and protection. 



The Grout bill represents an attempt on the part of Congress to tax one legitimate 

 industry out of existence for the benefit of another industry. The ostensible pur- 

 pose is protection to the consumers against "imitation butter;" but the public has 

 never asked for such protection. It does not even object to the coloring of butterine 

 the same as butter, so long as the butterine is properly labeled and sold on its merits. 

 As a matter of fact, the consumers of butterine prefer to have it colored, so long as 

 the coloring material used is harmless. They like butterine because of its cheapness 

 and because they are satisfied with its purity and wholesomeness. 



The enactment of this bill will not only deprive the consumer of a healthy and 

 nutritious article of food, but immediately it becomes a law will depreciate the value 

 of the beef cattle and take from the producers of this ^country upward of forty-five 

 millions of dollars. 



The following is not part of the hearing before the committee, but 

 is vouched for as the true resolution passed by the convention. 



At the Fourth Annual Convention of the National Live Stock Asso- 

 ciation, held at Salt Lake City, Utah, January 15, 16, IT, and 18, 1901, 

 at which 1,412 delegates were represented and 5,000 visitors were pres- 

 ent, from nearly every State and Territory in the Union, the following 

 memorial to the Senate of the United States was adopted: 



To the honorable the Senate of the United States: 



Your orator, the National Live Stock Association, respectfully represent unto 

 your honorable body that it is an association composed of 126 live-stock and kindred 

 organizations, all directly interested in the production, marketing, and disposing of 

 live stock, and whose holdings thereof represent an investment of over $600,000,000. 



Your orator, in annual session assembled at Salt Lake City, Utah, desires to enter 

 its emphatic protest against the enactment of what is commonly known as the Grout 

 bill (House bill 3717), and in behalf of its protest desires to record a few of the 

 many reasons in support of its contention. 



This measure is a species of class legislation of the most iniquitous and dangerous 

 kind, calculated to build up one industry at the expense of another equally as 

 important. 



It seeks to impose an unjust, uncalled-for, and unwarranted burden upon one of 

 the principal commercial industries of the country for the purpose of prohibiting its 

 manufacture, thereby destroying competition, as the manufacturers can not assume 

 the additional burdens sought to be imposed by this measure and sell their product 

 in competition with butter. 



"The passage of this law would destroy the demand, except for export, for that 

 product of the beef of animals, oil of oleo, of which 24,000,OCK) pounds was used in 

 the year 1899 in the manufacture of oleomargarine, and also would seriously injure 

 the hog industry by a similar destruction of the demand, except for export, of neutral 

 lard, 31, 000, 000 pounds of which was used in the year 1899 in the manufacture of 

 this food product, and by thus eliminating the demand for these legitimate articles 



S. Rep. 2043 in 



