642 OLEOMARGARINE. 



their circulars that by insinuations they would have people believe they represent 

 some official authority. The Internal Revenue Department looks after their own 

 business and the State after theirs, and should this so-called Dairy Union interfere 

 with your business in the way of prosecution as to the State laws, we hereby guaran- 

 tee you protection to the extent of paying all tines, costs, etc., until the color law is 

 decided unconstitutional in the supreme court of the State of Illinois. 



That was put in there for the pupose of squaring things on the sur- 

 face, as if they were protecting them, and endeavoring to protect them, 

 against an anticolor law, whereas at that time the anticolor law was 

 not an issue. 



The CHAIRMAN. Of course you wrote your letter and sent it out to 

 the people in good faith, and you now undertake to say that these 

 people wrote their letters and sent them out to their customers, and 

 that it was not done by them in good faith; they say in their letter 

 that it was in reference to the judgment which was decided unconstitu- 

 tional by the judges in Cook County. 



Mr. KNIGHT. They endeavored to make their letters so to read, but 

 we had quit trying to enforce the anticolor law, and threatened now to 

 prosecute them for selling butterine for butter. They thought their 

 business was going to smash, and they found it was impossible to get 

 around and see 1,000 or 1,500 people in time to save their business, so 

 this letter was written, and so worded as to throw people off from the 

 real point in the case at that time. If you can find any instance where 

 we have sent out any letter threatening to prosecute people for selling 

 oleomargarine colored, you have got me. We never did that. 



The CHAIRMAN. Then they did not say anything in that letter to the 

 effect that they would protect them from prosecution? 



Mr. KNIGHT. Certainly they did. Let me read further: 



And will further, on receiving complaint, take such action for damages as will 

 make it unpleasant for some of those who are attempting to interfere with your and 

 our own legitimate business. 



Mr. NEVILLE. Your letter had been directed to the individuals, 

 threatening prosecutions for selling colored butteriue for butter? 



Mr. KNIGHT. No; not colored butterine. 



Mr. NEVILLE. Not colored butterine, but butteriue altogether t 



Mr. KNIGHT. Yes, sir. 



Mr. NEVILLE. Now, what is your State law? 



Mr. KNIGHT. The State law provides a penalty of $250 fine for 

 people who sell butterine to a customer without at the same time 

 informing him that it is butterine. 



Mr. NEVILLE. Any reference to color? 



Mr. KNIGHT. No, sir; no reference to color whatever. 



Mr. NEVILLE. Have you any law relating to color? 



Mr. KNIGHT. Yes; and that law was tied up in the courts. These 

 laws we speak of in this last letter are not tied up in the courts. We 

 said so. We wanted to make it plain and clear that we were not doing 

 anything under the anticolor laws, because they were tied up in the 

 courts. Now, taking this letter of the manufacturers to the dealers, 

 they worded it so that it might be supposed we were threatening prose- 

 cution under the two laws that were tied up, and without putting the 

 two letters together you would not understand it. They go on in the 

 last paragraph : 



We strongly recommend you to pay no attention to those circulars. We have 

 always been in a position to protect our customers from injustice and blackmailers 



That was us, of course. 



and will be ever at your service should you require our aid. 



(*60) 



