818 OLEOMARGARINE. 



The constitutionality of such laws, forbidding the manufacture and 

 sale of oleomargarine made in semblance of butter, has been upheld in 

 every supreme court the matter has ever been brought before, includ- 

 ing Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Ma^land, Ohio, Missouri, 

 and the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Plumley v. 

 Commonwealth, handed down December 10, 1894, and reported in 

 United States, 155. The State cases are: New York, People v. Aren- 

 burg, 105 N. Y., 123, 129, 130; supreme court of Maryland, McAllis- 

 ter v. State, 72 Maryland, 390; supreme court of Mainland, Pierce v. 

 State, 63 Maryland, 596; supreme court of New Jersey, Waterbury 

 v. Newton, 21 Vroom (50 N. J. Law), 534-537; supreme court of Mis- 

 souri, decision handed down in 1897, and Ohio case in April, 1900. 



Yet despite the strong support these laws receive in the upper courts, 

 during the fiscal year ended July 1, 1899, the Treasury Department fig- 

 ures show that 62,825,000 of the 83,000,000 pounds of colored oleomar- 

 garine made were sold in violation of the laws of these States (House 

 evidence, p. 20), and that of the 9,068 retail dealers doing business in 

 the United States for the year ending July 1 last, 7,073 were violating 

 the various anticolor laws of the United States and only 1,995 were 

 doing business as permitted by the laws. Of the 107,000,000 pounds of 

 oleomargarine produced in the United States for the year ending July 

 1, 1900, 66,820,196 pounds were produced in States which prohibit 

 the manufacture and sale of colored oleomargarine, and 40,240,859 

 pounds were produced in those States which permit such production. 

 (Senate evidence, p. 463.) 



FRAUD AND LAWLESSNESS. 



The most important testimony in connection with the measure now 

 before the committee, however, we believe to be that which goes to 

 show that the same condition exists to-day that existed when the dairy- 

 men came before Congress in 1886 and asked for national legislation 

 to stop the sale of oleomargarine as butter, securing what at the time 

 was thought to be permanent relief. 



The original basis of a demand for national legislation was that oleo- 

 margarine was being sold to the public as butter, to the prejudice of 

 the public and the financial loss of those who produce and deal in the 

 pure article of butter. We believe that the evidence which we have 

 presented before this committee, although only an infinitesimal part of 

 what could easily have been adduced, has proven that the same condi- 

 tions exist to-day. 



In reviewing this evidence, we shall begin with the city of Chicago, 

 because it is at this point, as shown in the statement of the writer, on 

 page 463, 2,691 of the 9,068 retail dealers in oleomargarine of this 

 country were doing business at the end of the last fiscal year, June 30, 

 1900, and the Government reports show that in that State was sold 

 almost 25 per cent of all oleomargarine produced in the United States 

 the year previous. It is in the city of Chicago that 46,500,000 of the 

 107,000,000 pounds of oleomargarine made in the United States were 

 manufactured last year. It is here where two leading firms make from 

 25 to 33 per cent of all the oleomargarine produced in this country. 



On page 461 will be found the following as the opening of my state- 

 ment before your honorable body : 



Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I want to open this matter by reading a statement 

 which is a copy of a letter which I received from a retail grocer's clerk in the city of 



