780 OLEOMARGARINE. 



attempted to sell uncolored butterine in a number of prohibitive States, 

 but it has proved a rank failure. 



I will say just here that in case this Grout bill is passed it will kill 

 the industry. The uncolored product will not sell. We have tried it 

 in a number of prohibitive States, and, as I say, it has proved a failure 

 in each instance. 



Why should color be prohibited from butterine and not from butter? 

 The same color is used in similar quantities in both articles. If it is 

 undesirable in one, why is it not undesirable in the other? 



Taxing butteriue is discrimination in favor of butter. Why would 

 it not be just as reasonable to place a ban on cable and electric cars, 

 because they displace the horse; or to say that gas and electricity 

 must be restricted, because they decrease the profits of the oil kings; 

 or that u nearsilk" should be heavily taxed, because it is an imitation 

 of the real article and answers the same purpose as silk? This is a 

 progressive age. Something valuable is given to the public each year 

 in the way of invention; and while it may interfere with the interests 

 of a few, yet it benefits thousands. Butterine is an up to-date product, 

 and possesses sufficient merit to sell successfully throughout the world 

 for just what it is. 



It has been represented to this committee that a large per cent of 

 the butterine manufactured is sold for butter. This is a mistake and 

 can not be proven by facts. Much publicity has been given to the sale 

 of a few packages of butterine for butter, the wrappers of which were 

 branded "oleomargarine," but this is not conclusive evidence that all 

 dealers in the United States are practicing the same deception. We 

 acknowledge that a small per cent of butterine is sold fraudulently, 

 but this is no reason why its sale should be prohibited altogether, sim- 

 ply because one unscrupulous dealer in a hundred may give it to a 

 purchaser when he calls for butter. It should be noted that no 

 purchaser has ever been heard to complain of being deceived and not 

 getting good value for his money. The complaint comes from the 

 National Dairy Association, who are posing as philanthropists, and 

 espousing the cause of these purchasers without even first getting their 

 permission. 



Much of the literature with which Congress has been flooded ema- 

 nated from one source. Postal cards and petitions were sent individu- 

 als throughout the United States, with the request that they sign and 

 mail them to members of Congress. It is easy to get the assistance of 

 the ignorant by telling them in a long editorial that butterine is 

 unwholesome, etc., but when these same individuals come before intel- 

 ligent men, .such as we have before us to-day, they dare not say one 

 word on this point. 



Eight here I will produce a copy of the Chicago Dairy Produce, 

 edited by Mr. Knight, in the back of which I notice copies of blank 

 applications which he has asked his readers to send into members of 

 Congress. I also understand that they have a printing establishment 

 in Chicago where most of this literature is printed; and here is a card 

 which was sent a certain party, dated March 15, 1900. 



[At this point Mr. Miller exhibited a printed postal card, which was 

 left with the committee.] 



I also see that here is a piece of literature which has been mailed 

 indiscriminately over ti*>* United States under the frank of Congress- 

 man Grout. 



Kepresentative BAILEI. What is that? 



Mr. MILLEB. It is an article on butterine. 



(*198) 



