OLEOMARGARINE. 869 



extremely difficult to enforce any such laws as these. And, gentle- 

 men, the Grout bill can't deprive a man of the right to trial by jury. 



Their charges against the revenue agents have been pronounced 

 false by the agents themselves and their superiors in office. They 

 claim that the revenue department will not enforce a law unless the 

 collection of revenue be the incentive. While that cowardly charge 

 against the revenue department is not to be considered, yet the Wads- 

 worth substitute bill offers this additional incentive to the revenue 

 collector to enforce retail regulations. 



This, gentlemen, we ta^ e #3 be a fair analysis of the alleged strong 

 points of the case attempted *;be made in favor of the Grout bill. Now, 

 we beg to call your attentioi l y*)riefly to what we term the weak points of 

 the bill, or some of the reaftns why not only the bill, but its friends, 

 should hear the voice of condemnation, and that in no uncertain terms, 

 from the members of the committee. I refer to the utter and abso- 

 lute dishonesty of the measure itself, to the dishonest attitude that 

 has been taken before this committee regarding the bill and its true 

 purport, and to the fact that although attempting to conceal the full 

 iniquity of their purpose they have yet had the audacity and unpar- 

 alleled insolence to ask this committee to be a party to an act of dis- 

 honesty so base that it would make a black stain on the darkest walls 

 of perdition. 



Gentlemen, they have not been fair and open with you in this matter. 

 They come here under the alleged authority of millions of producers 

 and consumers, and with the false battle cry of "fraud." On demand 

 they fail to produce even a forged power of attorney from more than 

 30,000 people. Their alleged constituency wilted away like a blighted 

 flower, but they still strained their utmost efforts to keep the alleged 

 fraud in the foreground, and directly and persistently evaded the 

 questions asked by members of this and the House committee in an 

 effort to get at their real motives and purposes. (See an example in 

 Senator Soney's efforts, pp. 488, et seq.) 



At the bottom of page 2 of the House hearings Governor Hoard says: 



That with the tax of 10 cents per pound on the counterfeit substitute we believe 

 the temptation for unjust profits, deceptive sale, dishonorable and dangerous con- 

 spiring against law, and fraudulent competition with an honest industry will be 

 greatly modified. 



At page 10 of the House Hearings Mr. Knight says: 



All we ask is that the people be protected in the right to choose between the two 

 articles. 



In the Senate hearings, at page 6, Senator Allen asks Mr. Grout: 

 "Suppose that it is apparent on the face of this bill that the motive 

 for imposing this tax is to destroy the thing taxed ? " Mr. Grout: u We 

 deny this. We say that is not the motive." And at the bottom of the 

 page General Grout savs further: 



But let me say it is not the purpose here to tax it out of existence. The object of 

 this second section is to prevent the sale of oleomargarine as butter, to prevent a 

 fraud. No; instead of destroying, it encourages the manufacture of the 



honest article. All that it seeks to destroy is the fraud that is perpetrated when it 

 is colored like butter. 



At page 179 of the House hearings Representative Haugen, a friend 

 of the bill, says to Commissioner Wilson: 



Yes; but under the bill the paying of the 10-cent tax would permit the manu- 

 facturers to color their product and make it an imitation of butter, and then it would 

 cost only 18 cents per pound. * * * 



