744 OLEOMABGABINE. 



Mr. DAHLE. Very well. 



Mr. HAKE. Here is a letter from the feeding station of the Standard 

 Cattle Company. It is as follows : 



STANDARD BATTLE COMPANY, 

 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, 



Ames, Nebr., April ll t 2900. 

 Mr. J. A. HAKE, 



Union Stock Yards, South Omaha, Nebr. 



DEAR SIR: Answering yours of the 17th instant, we have fed about 65,000 cattle 

 here the last fourteen years and are largely interested in the cattle business, as you 

 know. We do not attempt a very large business in hogs. We generally have about 

 2,500 on hand; less than this now because of cholera last year. 



1 certainly do not approve of the bill to tax oleomargarine products 10 cents per 

 pound and think it to be an unjustifiable thing to do. I think they should be sold 

 as oleomargarine products and a heavy penalty exacted, for noncompliance of the 

 law, and the only doubt I have in the matter is whether it is practicable or not to 

 detect their being placed on sale as butter. 



Yours, truly, R. M. ALLEN, General Manager. 



Mr. Allen is the manager of the Standard Cattle Company, and he 

 has four or five thousand cattle a year. They used to feed 3,000, but 

 have increased their feeding very much lately. 



Here is another letter: 



GRAND ISLAND, NEBR., April 10, 1900. 

 J. A. HAKE, Esq., 



President South Omaha Live Stock Exchange, South Omaha, Nebr. 



DEAR SIR : In answer to your letter regarding the House roll No. 6 my views agree 

 with those of the Live Stock Exchange. 



As long as the manufactured butter is a healthy product, and not being prohibited 

 by our Government to be put in the market, it surely is a wrongful move of Congress 

 to the stock men of United States to put a tax on this product, decreasing the value 

 of their stock. 



It looks to me that if Congress passed such a law they would be making a class 

 legislation of it, favoring their citizens engaged in the creamery business and dam- 

 aging their citizens engaged in the stock business. As we are all citizens of United 

 States, it surely is wrong to tax one to protect the other. 



I therefore herewith express my sincere hope that your committee will be suc- 

 cessful in defeating such law. 



Very respectfully, JOHN REIMERS. 



Here is a letter from Mr. N. L. Anderson, of Sacramento: 



SACRAMENTO, NEBR., April 7, 1900. 



DEAR SIR : I desire to enter an earnest protest against the passage of a bill now 

 pending in Congress which seeks to tax the manufacture of oleomargarine so high 

 as to prohibit its manufacture. As you know, I am a large feeder of cattle in 

 Nebraska (running from 500 to 1,000 head every year). My beef cattle bring $2 

 more per head than they would if the oleomargarine product in them could not be 

 used for butter. 



I am reliably informed that butter so manufactured is equal in every respect to 

 dairy butter and sells for considerably less money in the market. I also think that 

 the passage of such a law would be class legislation and against the best interests 

 of the producers of beef cattle and the consumers of butter. 

 Yours, truly, 



N. L. ANDERSON. 

 The NEBRASKA REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS. 



Mr. Anderson owns about a section and a half of land, on which he 

 raises corn largely and feeds the products to cattle. 



The letter I am about to read here I presume you have something 

 of this kind, but this is a little extravagant, gentlemen, I will admit, 

 but I read it: 



SIDNEY, NEBR., April 9, 1900* 

 The NEBRASKA DELEGATION IN CONGRESS. 



GENTLEMEN : A resident of Nebraska for nearly thirty years, I have noted, as you 

 have, its rapid development in wealth. My observation and experience has con- 

 vinced me the greatest factor in creating its wealth has been its live-stock industry. 



(162) 



