OLEOMAEGAKIJSTE. 47 



The CHAIRMAN. No; that is not decided. 



The motion was agreed to; and (at 12 o'clock and 5 minutes p. m.) 

 the committee adjourned until to-morrow, Friday, December 21, 1900, 

 at 10. 30 a. in. 



FRIDAY, December 81, 1900. 



The committee met at 10.30 a. m. 



Present: Senators Proctor (chairman), Hansbrough, Warren, Bate, 

 Money, and Heitfeld. Also Hon. William M. Springer, of Spring- 

 field, 111., representing the National Live Stock Association; Frank W. 

 Tillinghast, representing the Vermont Manufacturing Company, of 

 Providence, R. I. ; Charles E. Schell, representing the Ohio Butter- 

 ine Company, of Cincinnati, Ohio; W. E. Miller, representing the 

 Armour Packing Company, of Kansas City, Mo. ; John C. McCoy, of 

 Kansas City, Mo. ; G. M. Walden, President of the Kansas City Live 

 Stock Exchange; Philip E. Mullen, of Kansas City, Mo., representing 

 the Armour Packing Company; R. H. Armstrong, of Washington, 

 D. C., representing the Armour Packing Company, and others. 



The CHAIRMAN. Who wants to be heard this morning? 



Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, I represent the Armour Packing Com 

 pany, of Kansas City. 



Senator HANSBROUGH. As a manufacturer? 



Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 



The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Mr. Miller. 



STATEMENT OF W. E. MILLER. 



Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: Our 

 object in asking for a hearing before this honorable committee to-day 

 is to make a final appeal to you and members of the Senate not to kill 

 the butterine industry by passing the Grout bill. We shall endeavor 

 hot to reiterate anything given in our testimony before the Agricul- 

 tural Committee of the House, which we ask you to consider seriously, 

 together with what we present to-day. 



The butterine business is one of the valuable branches of our pack- 

 ing house, in which we have thousands of dollars invested, and have 

 spent years of valuable time in placing it where it is to-day. We 

 desire to impress upon this committee that manufacturers can not 

 exist under the Grout bill. In the first place, uncolored butterine is 

 practically unsalable. It is unsightly and does not appeal to the eye 

 of even the poor man. 



This product has a creamy appearance, and although the laws in 

 many States legalize its sale, yet when we endeavored to sell it in two 

 States, viz, Iowa and California, we had to defend our dealers in suits 

 brought by the dairy commissioner and prove that it was not artifi- 

 cially colored, the slight color coming from the materials. After hav- 

 ing won these cases in the lower courts, we were assured that such 

 persecution would continue as long as we offered uncolored butterine. 

 Therefore we gave up these States altogether. In our opinion, a large 

 number of States under the Grout bill would take similar action. The 

 intention of the dairyman is not to regulate the sale of this product, 

 but to kill the industry, both on colored and uncolored butterine. 



It is unreasonable to suppose that we could pay 8 cents additional 

 tax and sell this product. The main object which prompts a man to 



