Thirty-fourth Annual Convention. ^^"^ 



getting better for the dairymen, in that particular at least. Dur- 

 ing the first ten years that law was enacted quite a number of 

 efforts were made to enforce it. The department, however, was 

 never able to win a single case in Court against a dealer for sell- 

 ing colored oleomargarine. The law on which we depended 

 for protection had been declared unconstitutional by three judges 

 in Chicago. Cases of disagreement with juries, etc., had become 

 so numerous that the department had become discouraged and 

 for a number of years nothing was done. 



When I entered the department, I looked the matter up, 

 had a few consultations about the law with certain lawyers, and 

 satisfied myself that the law was good and I determined to test 

 that law a little further and see if we could not make it hold. 

 We brought forty cases against as many dealers in Chicago for 

 the unlawful sale of oleomargarine. The cases were brought 

 last January, about a year ago. The counsel for the opposing 

 side secured various stays until finally in April we came to trial 

 with one of the cases. Our attorney and the state's attorney 

 had been taunted a good deal about coming into court with a 

 dead horse, that the law was no good and they would knock it 

 out in a hurry. Well a jury was selected in the city of Chicago 

 and they convicted that man for keeping colored oleomargarine 

 for sale, and such a crest fallen lot as those fellows around that 

 court room that day I certainly never beheld before and I do not 

 think I will again because they are not going to allow themselves 

 to be so disappointed in the future. However, we won the case, 

 the first case under a law at that time ten years old. The court 

 upheld the law, the jury convicted the defendant, and there was 

 nothing more to be done except pay the fine and carry the case 

 to the Supreme Court to test the constitutionality of the law, 

 which they agreed to do. Under condition that they carry the 

 case up in good faith, as is customary in court practice, compara- 

 tively little activity was shown by our office for a while, pending 

 a settlement of the issue in the Supreme Court. We found, 

 however, that they never intended to carry it to the Supreme 

 Court, they had no notion of testing that law and they let it be 

 known themselves a little while afterwards by saying, "Guess 

 we will not carry that law up because if the law was knocked 

 out you would only get one that would hold." I told them I 

 thought that was right and they might as well save trouble and 



