648 OLEOMARGARINE. 



what is wrong, and, incidentally, if you act as policemen, why that will 

 be to the benefit of the country, and particularly to these States we 

 represent here." It was thought at that time that if the internal- 

 revenue department did its duty, as it had always done we were 

 proud of what the internal-revenue department had done with respect 

 to other things, particularly tobacco ; no man could buy a carat of 

 tobacco and put out less than the carat would produce in cigars with- 

 out being liable to investigation and fine, so we were thinking here the 

 internal-revenue department of the United States would compel these 

 people to do what the States were powerless to do. That was to put a 

 label upon the article when they would sell it, so the people might be 

 apprised of what they were getting and buying. 



If you gentlemen will examine the law of 1886 you will find that there 

 were practically two or three revenue sections, and there are 21 sec- 

 tions, all told, in the bill. It has been our misfortune to note what Mr. 

 Knight told you a few moments ago, that the revenue officers unfortu- 

 nately did not attend to the police part of this law, which is the greater 

 part of the law. And I will tell you my experience in the State of 

 Maryland has been this : I hate to talk about myself, but I have been 

 largely instrumental in prosecuting offenders in both courts. I am 

 attorney at law in addition to all these others; I am a sort of Pooh Bah 

 of the butter trade; I have not only written laws for the State of 

 Maryland but prosecuted offenders under the laws of the State of 

 Maryland, and I have been also engaged in the prosecution of offenders 

 under the act of 1886 in the United States courts up to a certain time, 

 and all of the cases, I may say with two exceptions all cases coming 

 out of the district court of the United States for the district of Mary- 

 land in our city have been cases that have been furnished to the Gov- 

 ernment by the butter men, by the State officers, and it was my custom 

 and my pleasure to take those cases simultaneously into both courts, 

 and at that time offenders under the law were punished by both gov- 

 ernments, and that thing continued until the state of affairs that I am 

 now about to speak of, with regret, took place ; and as I told Secretary 

 Wilson the other day, it is a misfortune it is deplorable and a lament- 

 able fact that when the method of paying district attorneys changed 

 from the commission to salary, that minute prosecutions ceased and 

 there has not been one case brought into the court of the city of Balti- 

 more for the district of Maryland emanating and arising from the 

 Government. 



Mr. ALLEN. Who is the district attorney there now who has failed 

 to prosecute since the change of the law? 



Mr. HE WES. Not one prosecution has been had. Now, who are our 

 district attorneys is a matter of history. 



Mr. ALLEN. I mean the one who now holds that office. 



Mr. HEWES. It is Mr. Eose, Mr. John C. Rose is the present district 

 attorney in Baltimore. Prior to Mr. Rose's incumbency Mr. Marbury 

 was the district attorney, and prior to that 



Mr. ALLEN. It does not matter about that. 



Mr. HEWES. Now, I want to emphasize this fact, because this is 

 only incidental; it is only leading up to what I want to talk about why 

 we want this commerce clause of the Constitution limit as to oleo- 

 margarine but at the same time it is interesting. I will relate a con- 

 versation which occurred between myself and the district attorney for 

 the district of Maryland only a short time before, when he was inducted 

 into his office. I went over to him with a case and I stated to him, 

 "Mr. Rose, I want you to prosecute an offender under the act of 1886 



(*66) 



