Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-07-01
Well Grounded Vetces.

| In the message vctoing the act to repeal
an act authorizing clerks of markets to
weigh butter, the governor says:
The original law repealed by this bill
has been in force upwards of1OG years. 1t
was designed to prevent the sale of short
weight packages of butter, and by the act
| of 1877 was extended to sausa.es and lard
| exposed for sale in the markets Of Phila-
delpLia. Injustice in the cOntiscatiOn OF
! such articles exposed for sale and proved
to be deficient in weight by the market
clerk is provided against by the right of
| appeal to a magistrate. These acts arc
| wholesome and do not touch an honest
dealer. They are safeguards against petty
frauds in the weight OF necessary articles
of food, and might with propriety be ex-
tended to other articles sold in packages Of
specified weight.
"The wisest of men said, A false bal
ance is IN abomination to the Lord, bat Il
just weight is his delight
No sufficient reason can be assigned in
the interest of morality and justice for the
repeal of the acts. l therefore withhold
my approval of this repeating BILL
The O!eomarsarine lsiiI
In his veto of the oleomargarine bill
after citing the bill disapproved of by
number and title, he says "This bill
was intended to prohibit the importation
OF sale of the article known to commerce
as "leomargarinc, unless the package shall
be marked imitation buttcr,' or the use
thereof in hotels, restaurants or boarding
houses unless a sign conspicuously posted
containing the words, imitation but ter or
cheese served here
"The manufacture of oleomarSarne is
protected by letters patent issued by the
United States under that provision of the
constitution which gives Congress the
power to promote the progress of science
and the useful arts by securing, for lin
tied periods, to inventors ali exclusive right
to their discoveries. An inventor has an
undOubte(; right to use the name given by
himself to his invention, especially if it be
descriptive of the article and not calcu-
lated to deceive, aud there is grave doubt
whether the General Assembly has power
to compel a patentce to name or label his
invention by designation that would
tend to diminish its sale and his profit,
unless it he found dangerous to health or
morals.
"By the act of May %, 1878, venders of
the article covered by the act under consid-
Grafton must mark it Oleomarsarine, "
and it's sale without this designation is
made a penal offense. This name is suf-
ficiently descriptive of the article, so that
no one can be deceived. Its use is not un-
derstood to be dcletcrious to health or
against public morals, and therefore, to
arbitrarily brand it by a name calculated
to injure it's sale and which is not descrip-
tive of its character, could Lot be justified
as an exercise of police power. Its use is
a question of taste, and not of morals Or
health.
81 am, therefore, of the opinion that
this act ought not become law, on the
ground that it's operation would tend to
infringe the rights secured to patentees by
acts of Congress under the constitution of
the United States, and that any mischief
likely to arise from the sale of the article
known as oleomargarine is sufficiently pro.
vided against by the act of the General AS
sembly of Pennsylvania above quoted"