OLEOMARGARINE. 447 



your summons does, it places me in a very difficult position. I earnestly desire to 

 assist in the passage of the Grout bill, and believe that the story I can tell of the 

 situation in Michigan might do something to secure the end. Further, I feel that 

 the consuming public, as well as the dairymen of Michigan, have a right to expect 

 me to at least reveal conditions when important legislation like this is pending. 



The principal reason why I can not leave Michigan is the fact that I am about to 

 turn over the dairy and food department to my successor just in the midst of a bit- 

 ter milk fight here in Detroit. 



Very sincerely, yours, ELLIOT O. GROSVENOR, Commissioner. 



I have also the following letter: 



STATE OF IOWA, 

 OFFICE OF DAIRY COMMISSIONER, 



Cresco, loiva, December 29, 1900. 

 Hon. H. C. ADAMS, Madison, Wis. 



DEAR SIR: * * * Will you not kindly express for me my strong indorsement 

 of the bill in its present form. The undersigned has yet to find a single man who 

 objects to the bill when he understands its provisions and its purpose, unless his 

 personal interests are along the line of selling oleomargarine under present condi- 

 tions. I am firmly convinced of the necessity of this law, and know only too well 

 the futility of our present State anticolor laws. The 100,000 creamery patrons of 

 Iowa are anxiously awaiting the passage of this bill, and it has the indorsement of 

 almost all our farmers, whether interested in dairying or not. 

 Respectfully, 



B. P. NORTON, Dairy Commissioner. 



I have a letter here from J. B. Noble, dairy commissioner of the State 

 of Connecticut: 



STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DAIRY COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, 



Hartford, January 3, 1901. 

 Hon. H. C. ADAMS, 



'Dairy Commissioner, Madison, Wis. 



DEAR SIR : * * This is one of the most important measures connected with 

 the dairy interests which has been before Congress for a long time. The dairymen 

 all over the country are recognizing its importance and are extremely anxious for 

 the passage of this bill. 



Important matters in regard to our own business in Connecticut will keep me 

 here for the present. I have two oleo cases which must be attended to this week, 

 and I can not leave them, and other business connected with the office, to go to 

 Washington now. * * * 



Yours, respectfully, J. B. NOBLE. 



Here is a telegram from the Commission Merchants' League, Cleve- 

 land, Ohio: 



Convention has just passed resolution indorsing the Grout bill, and wired Proctor 

 at Washington. 



CHARLES T. MATTHEWS. 



Now, then, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, we sub- 

 mit here as testimony in behalf of this bill the experience of the dairy 

 commissioners, who are brought directly into contact with this business 

 and have the facilities which few men can have of knowing the char- 

 acter of that traffic. We come here to Congress and ask for its pas- 

 sage, because we believe it is a proper exercise of Congressional power 

 to place a tax which is substantially prohibitory, in our judgment, upon 

 oleomargarine colored in imitation of butter. We have behind us not 

 only the statements of the commissioners, but we have also behind us 

 the expression of 62,000,000 of people who have legislated in behalf of 

 absolute prohibition in their several States. 



If you will excuse me a moment, I wish to made reference to certain 

 cases which I have not taken the time to read : 



In McAllister v. State (7*J Md., 390), the court of appeals of Maryland 

 sustained the validity of a statute of that State declaring ifc unlawful 

 to ofl'er for sale as an article of food in imitation and semblance of nat- 



