OLEOMARGARINE. 287 



merican juror rises up in his might and says, "Gentlemen, that law 

 will not be enforced." And the testimony of the Ohio commissioner here 

 the other day (you did not hear it, Mr. Chairman) was to the effect that 

 he had practically no trouble in enforcing the law which provides that 

 oleomargarine must be sold for what it is, and not for butter, but that 

 he did have trouble in convicting on his color laws. 



Now, another reason is that if the oleomargarine people were to 

 attempt to combine to fight these laws which are brought up from time 

 to time in different States, they would have to increase the profits of 

 their business to such an extent that the price of oleomargarine would 

 be raised to the extent that it would no longer be a boon to the labor- 

 ing man. They also would be compelled to array class against class to 

 an extent that would disturb the harmony of the nation. 



The ACTING CHAIRMAN. Have these State laws, as a rule, been 

 declared constitutional by the supreme courts of the States which have 

 enacted them ? 



Mr. SCHELL. The decisions are conflicting. I have not the statistics 

 before me, but I know in a general way 



Mr. ADAMS. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a question 1 ? 



The ACTING CHAIRMAN. I would like to have this question answered 

 first, if you please. 



Mr. SCHELL. My recollection is, in a general way, that some of them 

 have been declared constitutional, and some unconstitutional. Take 

 the State of Michigan, for instance. There the law has been declared 

 invalid. The Supreme Court of the United States held in the Collins 

 case in Vermont that the pink law was unconstitutional; but I want to 

 make just a brief reference to that later on. 



Here is another question which Mr. Knight asked in the House 

 hearing, referring to our general scouudrelism, etc. He does not put 

 it in just those words; but he says (p. 46) : 



Can a member of Congress afford to be influenced by a citizen who has no respect 

 for the laws of his State? 



Gentlemen, we do not ask you to be influenced by a citizen. This is 

 not a question of numbers; it is not a question of the moral standing 

 of our citizens, or what we want. It is a question of what is right. If 

 1 can produce an argument that is good, no matter how bad I am, that 

 argument ought to have its effect. 



But, to pass on rapidly : 



Both Mr. Knight' and Governor Hoard have placed themselves on 

 record as serving in their respective offices without compensation. 

 They do not say what they are getting for appearing here; but it is 

 presumed they are merely acting in their usual capacity. Mr. Knight 

 speaks of having collected 50 cents apiece from 24,600 farmers- 

 Mr. KNIGHT. Is not that a pretty good indication of the interest the 

 farmer takes in this matter? 



Mr. SCHELL. Yes; but it does not establish Governor Hoard's state- 

 ment that he represents 5,000,000 farmers, and it is not an illustration 

 of the interest of the farmer, either. 



The ACTING CHAIRMAN. I do not regard it as material to go into 

 that matter, Mr. Schell. 



Mr. SCHELL. I think not. Yet it is their main reliance. The rest of 

 them do not say anything. We will concede that 24,600 of them are 

 actually represented by Mr. Knight. That is all right. 



Senator DOLLIVER. We can save you the trouble of going into that 

 question. The various members of the Senate have facilities for know- 

 ing the feelings of the farmers, outside of Mr. Knight. 



