OLEOMARGARINE. 855 



Your orator will briefly call attention to his statement on pages 471 

 and 472, wherein it is shown that organized labor in Chicago, in 1897, 

 severely condemned the yellow oleomargarine fraud. The following 

 is a portion of that statement: 



In 1897 we had before the legislature of the State of Illinois a law which sought to 

 prohibit the coloring of oleomargarine in the semblance of butter, known as the 

 Fuller bill, which I was looking after at the time, and which passed the legislature 

 finally. I went to the Federation of Labor of the city of Chicago and called on its 

 legislative committee. I called those gentlemen together and I told them the con- 

 dition of things in Chicago. I showed them what we were attempting to accomplish, 

 and asked their cooperation in the matter. I asked them if they could not give the 

 indorsement of the Federation of Labor. They said they did not think there was 

 any doubt but what they could. I now want to read you from the Chicago Federa- 

 tionist, a labor paper, of the date of April 9, 1897: 



WORKINGMEN INDORSE IT ANTICOLOR BILL APPROVED BY THE CHICAGO FEDERATION 

 OF LABOR COLORED OLEOMARGARINE CONDEMNED AS A FRAUD A RESOLUTION PASSED 



AT LAST SUNDAY'S MEETING INDORSING THE FULLER BILL is UNANIMOUS LABOR is 



AGAINST THE FRAUD. 



The defenders of the colored oleomargarine fraud have had their last prop knocked 

 from under arguments. 



For years they have pleaded for protection of oleomargarine "in behalf of the 

 workingman." Oleomargarine was christened "the poor man's butter" by those 

 who were aiding manufacturers in making millions off the same " poor man." 



The anticolor bill was brought before the Chicago Federation of Labor by the 

 legislative committee of that body Sunday, April 4, by Chairman Williams, who hag 

 claimed that large quantities of oleomargarine were being dealt out in the city by 

 retailers to those who called for butter and paid for butter. This fraud was made 

 possible, he stated, because of the fact that the substitute was made in perfect sem- 

 blance of butter, and the workingman was the chief victim. He explained that the 

 only remedy for this fraud was the enactment of a law which would make it possible 

 for buyer and consumer to distinguish the compound whenever he saw it. 



Only one delegate in the entire body objected to the indorsement of the measure, 

 and after he thoroughly understood the question he moved to make the vote for its 

 adoption unanimous, which was done. 



The sentiment expressed by the different delegates to the Federation at the close of 

 the meeting was that, should a petition be circulated among the army of workingmen 

 of Chicago calling for the passage of the Fuller anticolor law, it would meet with no 

 opposition. 



Then the resolution which was passed at that time, and which I have in my pos- 

 session, in the city of Chicago reads as follows: 



CHICAGO, April 4, 1897. 

 CHARLES Y. KNIGHT, 



Secretary Dairy Union. 



DEAR SIR: At a meeting of the Chicago Federation, held on the 4th instant, that 

 body unanimously indorsed the Fuller bill, and requested all subordinate bodies to 

 use their utmost to secure its passage. 



Very truly, VICTOR B. WILLIAMS, 



Chairman Legislative Committee, Chicago Federation of Labor. 



The fact that not a single delegate in that meeting cared enough 

 about the color in oleomargarine or oleomargarine itself to oppose the 

 passage of the resolution we consider pretty good evidence that few 

 workingmen know when they are buying oleomargarine if they con- 

 sume it, and do not care for the color if they do buy it. 



That there is no great demand for oleomargarine, and as evidence 

 that it is forced upon the public instead of being demanded by the peo- 

 ple, we submit the following from the evidence of Isaac W. Cleaver, 



