2 4 THE BUTTER INDUSTRY IN UNITED STATES [464 



principles and legal technicalities. In most cases opinions 

 deal with fraud, public health, public policy, and the rela- 

 tion of the oleomargarine law to the interstate commerce 

 clause. However, in the case of Plumley v. Mass., 155 U. 

 S., 475, the economic interests behind the movement are 

 plainly visible. In this case Justice Harlan quotes from 

 the opinion in People v. Arenburg, 105 N. Y., 123, in lan- 

 guage as follows : 



Assuming, as is claimed, that butter made from animal fat 

 or oil is as wholesome, nutritious, and suitable for food as 

 dairy butter ; that it is composed of the same elements and is 

 essentially the same article, except as regards its origin, and 

 that it is cheaper ; and that it would be a violation of the con- 

 stitutional rights and liberties of the people to prohibit them 

 from manufacturing or dealing in it, for the mere purpose of 

 protecting the producers of dairy butter against competition, 

 yet it cannot be claimed that the producers of butter, made 

 from animal fat, or oils, have any constitutional right to resort 

 to devices for the purpose of making their product resemble 

 in appearance the more expensive article known as dairy 

 butter, or that it is beyond the power of the legislature to enact 

 such laws as they may deem necessary to prevent the simulated 

 article being put upon the market in such a form and manner 

 as to be calculated to deceive. 



There is much justification for the dairy laws that have 

 been enacted. Fraud must be prevented. The consumer 

 must be enabled to choose between butter and oleomar- 

 garine. The public health must be protected. The use of 

 all deleterious ingredients in the manufacture of oleomar- 

 garine must be prohibited. Oleomargarine must be sold 

 upon its merits, and to this extent the dairy interests of 

 the country have every right to demand and to receive pro- 

 tection. 



