254 THE BUTTER INDUSTRY IN UNITED STATES [478 



with the commerce clause, oleomargarine was considered 

 by the state legislature questionable as to its wholesome- 

 ness ; and that its appearance is so much like butter as 

 to deceive a great many people and actually defraud 

 them in causing them to buy a thing they do not want ; 

 and that the questions of danger to public health and the 

 preventive measures necessary are questions of fact and 

 public policy, the determination of which belongs to the 

 legislative department and not to the judiciary ; and that 

 the complete prohibition of oleomargarine, even though 

 it indirectly affected interstate commerce, was a proper 

 exercise of the police power of the state. 



The opinion of the court regarded oleomargarine as a 

 wholesome product and viewed the case almost entirely 

 in its relation to the interstate commerce clause. With 

 the Leisy case as a precedent, it could not do otherwise 

 but declare the prohibitory law of Pennsylvania uncon- 

 stitutional. On the other hand, the dissenting opinion 

 was more concerned with the social aspect of the case. 

 Even though oleomargarine is wholesome, the dissenters 

 believed that a wholesale fraud is perpetrated upon the 

 people when the article is sold. 



RE-ENACTMENT OF THE RESTRICTIVE PRINCIPLE IN 

 PENNSYLVANIA 



The Schollenberger case was decided May 23, 1898. 

 It did not take long for the Pennsylvania state legislature 

 to enact a law that would be held valid. A restrictive 

 law was passed on May 5, 1899. 1 The main provision of 

 this law was the same, in principle, as the law in effect 

 prior to 1885. The office of the dairy and food commis- 

 sioner had been established in 1893. The law of 1899 

 allowed the manufacture and sale of oleomargarine free 



1 Laws of Pennsylvania, 1899, p. 241. 



