244 OLEOMARGARINE. 



Mr. TILLINGHAST. Will the gentleman permit a question? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Certainly. 



Mr. TILLINGHAST. Do you say that we could sell colored oleomar- 

 garine in the State of Pennsylvania by paying the 10 cents extra tax, 

 if we so desired ? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Not under our present law; no, you could not. 



Mr. DRENNAN. You would have as much profit as the butter man 

 has. 



Mr. TILLINGHAST. But we would have no right to sell colored oleo- 

 margarine in your State, in any event. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. No, sir; and we do not propose that you shall have 

 the right to sell it there, either, as colored oleomargarine. But that 

 is not the question. There are States where you can sell it. 



Now, let me call your attention to the question of desire to obey the 

 law. According to the statement made by somebody here this morn- 

 ing, 107,000,000 of pounds of oleomargarine are manufactured annu- 

 ally in the United States. Where is it sold? Why, it is on the stands 

 everywhere. It is sold where? Largely in the States prohibiting or 

 restricting the sale of oleomargarine. How is that ? Simply because 

 the men who sell this stuff are law-defying and not law-obeying men; 

 that is all. These manuf acturors, these dealers, know that it has been 

 against the law to sell oleomargarine in the State of Pennsylvania in 

 years gone by, because of the prohibitory law. They know that it is 

 against the law to sell oleomargarine now in the State of Pennsylvania, 

 and yet they defy the law. Would law-abiding men do that ? 



Mr. SPRINGER. Will the gentleman allow me a question right there ? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Certainly. 



Mr. SPRINGER. I think he ought to take into consideration the fact 

 that in the State of Pennsylvania, up to the passage of the present law 

 in May, 1899, the lawyers and the courts disputed the question as to 

 whether this legislation was constitutional or not, and the sellers of 

 oleomargarine were advised on the one hand that it was not a valid 

 law; and those who took that position were finally sustained by the 

 Supreme Court of the United States, in the Shallenberger case, which 

 decision declared that that law was invalid. Then the legislature passed 

 another law. So that those people who you say were violators of the 

 law up to the act of May, 1899, were not violating any law at all, as 

 the Supreme Court has since held. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Well, sir, I must correct you. You are simply 

 misinformed about the decision. Let me say that in the State of Penn- 

 sylvania, under the law of May 21, 1885, the situation was this and 

 I had the honor to carry the fight all the way up to the higher courts : 

 The supreme court of Pennsylvania and the Supreme Court of the 

 United States held that the law was perfectly constitutional in so far 

 as it related to the retail dealers of the State of Pennsylvania, but that it 

 was only unconstitutional in so far as it related to the original packages 

 manufactured in another State and coming into the State of Penns} T l- 

 vania. It only affected the wholesalers not the retailers. I argued 

 the question before our State courts; and pur supreme court affirmed 

 the constitutionality of the act also in relation to the wholesale dealers. 

 But there never has been a time, since the passage of that law of 1885, 

 when, so far as the retail dealers were concerned, it was legal for oleo- 

 margarine to be sold. 



