850 OLEOMARGARINE. 



Mr. KNIGHT. Do they make chemical analyses of the oleomargarine right along? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. Yes, sir; the Bureau of Chemistry of the Agricultural Department 

 does that for them. 



Mr. KNIGHT. How many factories are there in the United States? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. I think about twenty-five or thirty. 



Mr. KNIGHT. And about how many inspections do they make of the products you 

 turn out? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. I can not state for other manufacturers, but perhaps they come to 

 us five or six times a year. They do not only require samples from the factories for 

 the inspection; they go all over the United States, or States where our product or 

 any other manufactured product is sold, and take up samples unknown to us. 



Mr. KNIGHT. Do they analyze them? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. Yes. 



Mr. KNIGHT. That is done among the retailers? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. Yes; I presume so, and among wholesalers as well. 



Mr. KNIGHT. There are about 10,000 retailers in the country, according to the last 

 report. 



Mr. PIRRUNG. I do not know. You are better posted on that than I am. 



Mr. KNIGHT. What is the penalty if anything is found hi your product that is not 

 wholesome? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. I have always understood the Government would be compelled 

 to close up our factory. 



Mr. KNIGHT. You are not acquainted with the law very well, then, are you? 



Mr. PIRRUNG. I thought I was. 



Mr. CLARK. They would not only close it up, but would confiscate it. 



Mr. KNIGHT. They would confiscate the goods that they find. 



Mr. PIRRUNG. They will close up our factory. If you will read the law, you will 

 post yourself. 



On page 493 will be found the following statement made before the 

 committee by your orator: 



Now let me show you another case. These people have said a good deal to your 

 committee down here about the inspection of the Internal-Revenue Department, and 

 about how they are compelled to report every ingredient, and that they are compelled 

 to do this that, and the other. 



As a matter of fact, the present oleomargarine law can not compel them to do any- 

 thing that they do not want to do. All that they need to do is to hide behind their 

 constitutional right and claim that the evidence called for will incriminate them. 



Here is a case which is entitled u ln re Kinney, collector of internal revenue." 

 The heading is ' ' Examination of books. ' ' 



"W. F. Kinney, collector of internal revenue, district of Connecticut, issued a sum- 

 mons, under section 3173, Revised Statutes, against the Oakdale Manufacturing 

 Company, a corporation engaged in the manufacture of oleomargarine. The parties 

 refused to comply with the summons, and the collector petitioned the United States 

 district judge for an attachment against F. M. Mathewson, president of the company, 

 directed to the United States marshal of the district, commanding him to arrest said 

 Frank M. Mathewson and bring him before the judge to show cause why he should 

 not be adjudged in contempt and punished according to law, as provided by section 

 3175, Revised Statutes." 



In t!; Is connection it may be said that this talk about these people being compelled 

 to make a return of the materials and products is all bosh. They can not be made 

 to do it if they do not want to. They make the return if they wish, and if they do 

 not wish they will not do it, and they do not have to, according to this decision. 



The decision of the judge was adverse to the collector. He held that 



"The provisions of Revised Statutes, section 3173, authorizing a collector of internal 

 revenue to summon before him for examination any person charged by the law with 

 the duty of making returns of objects subject to tax, do not apply to persons required 

 under the oleomargarine law to make returns of materials and products. Such pro- 

 visions relate only to objects of taxation upon which the tax is collected by the 

 method of return and assessment, and not to those upon which the tax is required to 

 be paid by a stamp; and a collector has no power under section 3173 to compel a 

 person to appear and testify to the correctness of the returns made under the oleo- 

 margarine law." (102 Fed. Rep., 468.) 



It will be noted that the above is the concern represented by Mr. 

 Gardner. 

 Your committee can hardly believe men engaged in a business in 



