OLEOMAEGARINE. 245 



Mr. GROUT. It was the interstate commerce point that the case was 

 decided on. 



Mr. KATJFFMAN. That is all. 



Mr. SPRINGER. Every pound of oleomargarine that was sold from 

 1885 to 1899 in the original package was legally sold. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. It was legally sold, yes, except that our State 

 supreme court had decided otherwise. I argued the question before 

 the supreme court, and they decided my way; but that decision was 

 reversed in the United States Supreme Court. Still, the retail sale 

 was always and has always been regarded as illegal; and even the 

 Supreme Court of the United States, in that decision in the case of 

 the Commonwealth v. Shallenberger, affirmed the fact' that the law was 

 constitutional as far as the retail dealers were concerned. 



Mr. KNIGHT. Will you pardon an interruption ? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Certainly. 



Mr. KNIGHT. Did you ever know of any kind of an oleomargarine 

 law being passed the constitutionality of which was not questioned 

 by the oleomargarine dealers? 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Not one. 



Mr. SPRINGER. They have a right to question it, too. 



Mr. KNIGHT. Well, have they the right to go on and do business 

 while questioning it? 



Mr. SPRINGER. They have a right to go into the courts and ask for 

 the decisions of the courts, and abide by them. 



Mr. KAUFFMAN. Yes; but they have not any right, as it seems to 

 me, when a law is enacted, to keep on defying the law until the law is 

 passed upon. A man has not any right to carry on a manifestly illegal 

 business when it is prohibited by law. It is his business to stop car- 

 rying on that business until the courts decide the disputed question. 



Now, then, Mr. Chairman, this act, the Grout bill, particularly 

 remedies this original-package feature. Mark you, the Wadsworth 

 bill distinctly makes the 1-pound and the 2-pound packages original 

 packages. If that provision w ere to pass and that is the viciousness of 

 the Wadsworth bill it would absolutely and positively prevent any 

 State from passing any law in relation to oleomargarine, because the 

 packages are cut down to 1 and 2 pound packages, and under the inter- 

 state law nothing whatsoever could be done in the States to restrict 

 their sale. Where would we be then ? What is the effect of oleomar- 

 garine upon these butter dealers and these farmers? Let me tell you. 



As I said a little while ago, in February of 1899 the butter trade at 

 Philadelphia was absolutely paralyzed. The dealers here will testify 

 to that fact. We began to enforce the law which we had. Now, what 

 was the result? We have advanced the price of butter in the city of 

 Philadelphia, in the wholesale market, on an average of 5 cents a 

 pound over what it was two years ago, before we began to enforce 

 this law, simply because we have driven out the illegal sale of oleo- 

 margarine. More than that, the price of cows in the State of Penn- 

 sylvania, because of the driving out of this illegal competition of 

 oleomargarine, has advanced from 25 to 40 per cent. If oleo had 

 been permitted to remain in the market, being sold illegally as and for 

 butter, the price of farms would have kept on going downward, the 

 price of cows would have kept on going downward, and the price of 

 butter would have been going downward. Now, I am going to say, 



