230 OLEOMAEGARINE. 



Now, you can see that that is little enough. The actual cost of the 

 production of a pound of butter is about 16 or 18 cents; so that where 

 butter is compelled to compete with oleomargarine, which is made 

 at 10 or 11 and 12 cents a pound and sold at identically the same price, 

 the farmer has got to go out of business. 



Mr. TILLINGHAST. Was the price of butter any higher before oleo- 

 margarine was used? 



Mr. SHARPLESS. Yes, sir. I never thought anything of getting 50 

 cents a pound for butter. 



Mr. SPRINGER. When? 



Mr. SHARPLESS. When I first began; when I first entered into the 

 dairy business, twenty -five years ago. It was gradually cut down to 

 45 and 40, until it got down to 30 cents. 



Mr. SPRINGER. When the country got on a gold basis it went down 

 to 30 cents, I suppose ? 



Mr. SHARPLESS. When I got down to 30 cents, I thought 1 was 

 pretty near the bottom. Now, I do not want to take up your time, 

 gentlemen, but the only point I have in this matter is that I say it is 

 unjust and unfair that we farmers, who make an honest, fair article, 

 should be compelled to compete with a fraudulent article made in 

 imitation of our product. That is all I have to say about it. 



The ACTING CHAIRMAN. You have made your point very clearly, sir. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Now, Mr. Chairman, before I call the next speaker, 

 I desire to say about Mr. Sharpless, that the Sharpless butter is known 

 all over the United States. It is the highest brand of butter that is 

 known in the United States. 



The next speaker whom I want to introduce, Mr. Chairman, is the 

 president of the Produce Exchange of Philadelphaia, Mr. Isaac W. 

 Davis. 



STATEMENT OF ISAAC W. DAVIS, ESQ., PRESIDENT OF THE 

 PRODUCE EXCHANGE, PHILADELPHIA, PA, 



Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I do not know that I have anything at 

 all to add to what has already been said. I did not expect to be called 

 on, and I have very little to say. What I have to say is simply by way 

 of confirmation of what has already been stated. 



I believe that one of the reasons for our coming here is our belief 

 that the passage of the Grout bill will be the most effectual means of 

 correcting what has been very emphatically stated here as a fraud. 

 That is our belief, and it is mine. The history of the traffic has been 

 one of illegality, and all the legislation that has been enacted, so far as 

 I have known of it, has been necessarily of a restrictive character. 



The legitimate butter interests have been compelled, by way of 

 defense, to hedge about this thing, when, if it had been legitimate and 

 fair, as it has been claimed here that it is, there would not have been 

 the slightest necessity for that kind of legislation. And all the laws 

 that have been enacted have more or less failed. We think the Grout 

 bill will meet the case in every particular, for the reason that it will 

 compel the manufacturers of this product to compete fairly; that is, 

 they can not get away from it. It will compel them to sell their 

 product for what it is, and it will bring the article down to the con- 

 sumer. For instance, under the Wadsworth bill, if this product goes 



