OLEOMAKGAEINE. 237 



dreadfully drastic law. One would suppose that the retail dealers 

 would not dare to violate a law with such penalties, a fine and impris- 

 onment, with no discretion at all in the courts. But they did violate 

 it, and apparently with impunity, with utter defiance of the law; and 

 the consequence was that when I began, as the attorney for this asso- 

 ciation, to bring the prosecutions in the State courts, I also went to 

 the United States court. Now, I want to show what the operation of 

 the United States law was. 



Mr. SPRINGER. Excuse me were those the penalties of the State 

 law or of the national law ? 



Mr. KATJFFMAN. I said both. I am going to talk about the national 

 law now. 



Mr. SPRINGER. But were the penalties to which you refer those 

 under the national law? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. I refer to violators of both. When you violate the 

 State law, you also violate the United States Jaw. 



Mr. SPRINGER. But I refer to the severe penalties. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Oh, those are the penalties of the United States 

 law; yes, sir. Under the State law the penalty was fine or imprison- 

 ment, at the discretion of the court; whereas the present law of August 

 2, 1886, which is proposed to be amended, makes the penalty fine and 

 imprisonment. I refer to section 6. 



I went to the revenue authorities in 1891, and 1 called their atten- 

 tion to section 6 of that law. There never had been, in the eastern 

 district of Pennsylvania, any prosecution by the revenue authorities 

 for violation of that act, although it had been in existence for four 

 years. We presented a lot of evidence of violations of that United 

 States law to the revenue officers, and they absolutely refused to swear 

 out the warrants. I was compelled to come over to the Secretary of 

 the Treasury, at that time the Hon. Charles Foster, of Ohio; we had 

 to summon the Commissioner of Internal Revenue before us ; and we 

 compelled the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to issue orders to 

 the revenue agents in Philadelphia that evidence should be received 

 and the warrants sworn out. They did not do it until we did that very 

 thing. Then, when the evidence was submitted, the officers performed 

 their duty, and we convicted and sent to jail the men against whom we 

 brought the evidence; and that stopped the illegal traffic in the city of 

 Philadelphia. We drove the retailers out of the business. We cre- 

 ated the office of dairy and food commissioner of the State of Penn- 

 sylvania in 1893, and then that association, at that day, went out of 

 business, because this department had been created to accomplish the 

 same end- 

 Now, to show you how fraudulently this traffic is carried on, not 

 quite two years ago these gentlemen came to me, in February of 1899, 

 and said: " Our butter trade in the city of Philadelphia is absolutely 

 paralyzed. We can not sell our butter in midwinter. It is coming 

 into the market and going to the cold-storage warehouses, and we can 

 not sell it. Why? Because the oleomargarine dealers have come into 

 this market, and absolutely taken possession of the market, and are 

 selling oleomargarine as and for butter, and pure butter can not be 

 sold." Is not that true, gentlemen? 



Again we began to enforce the law ; and we put our detective force 

 to work, and I am going to show you the results of it here, the cases 

 that we found. 



