OLEOMARGARINE. 67 



City approximately 3,000,000 hogs, producing about 24,000,000 pounds 

 of leaf fat, worth for oleomargarine purposes, at 8 cents per pound, 

 $2,040,000. The demand for this product as an oleomargarine ingre- 

 dient removed, it would have been sold for lard at 6 cents per pound, 

 or $1,440,000, a difference of $600,000, or 20 cents per head for each 

 hog slaughtered. 



Had it not been possible to use these two products for oleomarga- 

 rine purposes instead of tallow and lard, it would have cost the farm- 

 ers marketing their stock at Kansas City this year $2,600,000. The 

 same is true at all the principal live-stock markets in proportion to 

 their receipts. The rive large Western markets Chicago, Kansas 

 City, St. Louis, Omaha, and St. Joseph have handled since January 

 1, 1900, to date, 6,500,000 cattle and 16,300,000 hogs. Of that number 

 at least 75 per cent of the cattle, or 4,875,000, were slaughtered, and 

 practically all of the hogs. A difference of $2 per head on the cattle 

 and 20 cents per head on the hogs would mean a loss to the Western 

 farmers on their marketing of cattle and hogs for the year 1900 of 

 $13,000,000. But, gentlemen, carry the reasoning still further. The 

 Government report shows that on January 1, 1900, there were in the 

 United States 27,610,000 cattle other than milch cows, or cattle avail- 

 able sooner or later for beef. A depreciation of $2 per head on them 

 would mean $55,220,000. The same authority gives the number of 

 hogs in the United States on January 1, 1899, approximately, 38,650,000. 



The CHAIRMAN. Would it reduce the value of the milch cow to have 

 the manufacture of oleomargarine stopped? I thought you included 

 all the cattle. 



Mr. McCoY. No, sir; I included only the cattle other than milch cows. 

 The Government makes a distinction. It would reduce the value of 

 the milch cow, because the ultimate destination of all cattle is the block. 

 Milch cows are used for a long time for milk purposes, but unless they 

 should happen to die of old age, which the farmer generally sees is not 

 the case, the ultimate destination of the milch cow is the block. 



Senator WARREN. You have entered into a calculation as to the 

 price of cattle other than cows. W e assume, without your stating it, 

 that when a cow comes to the block she brings relatively that much 

 more, whether $2 or $1. Now, on the other side of the question, 1 

 want to get your opinion as to what the effect is liable to be upon the 

 price of cows if the manufacture of oleomargarine is continued or if 

 it is discontinued. Would the discontinuance of the manufacture of 

 oleomargarine raise the price of cows; and if so, how much? Would 

 the continuance of the present amount manufactured, or double the 

 amount, we will say, reduce the price of cows, and how much, in your 

 opinion 2 



Mr. McCor. In my opinion it would reduce the value of the milch 

 cow at the same time that it reduced the value of the beef steer. 



Senator WARREN. No; you misunderstand me. I want to know 

 whether the manufacture of oleomargarine reduces the price of the cow. 



Mr. McCoY. No, sir. 



Senator WARREN. In other words, do you consider that through the 

 manufacture of oleomargarine you are reducing the price of butter on 

 the market to a point that will reduce the price of the cows that pro- 

 duce the butter? 



Mr. McCoY. I think I can answer that question, if the Senator will 

 allow me, by a statement on that line that 1 made before the House 

 committee. 



