Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-07-20
THE oLEOMARGARINE QUESTION

The Oleomargarine bill is up in the
Senate, and from the first tusslc with its
oleaginous merits, it bids fair TO have n
warmer time than in the House. The
House passed u bill taxing this product
5 cents per pound in favor OF the dairy
men who claim to sell pure butter
churned from cream. 1t was passed only
As protection to the pure butter in
terest. From u cursory examination OF
the possible butter product as shown by
the number OF milch cows in the country,
three cities, viz, San Francisco, Chicago
and New York, use more than can be
produced in the country, and but for the
great extent to which adulteration is car
ried, the poor people Of the country could
not obtain butter at all. Oleomargarine
IL scientific compound OF the an
i imal fats, colored and favored in such a
manner that none but an epicure can
tell it from the real butter. II is cheap
and in no sense hurtful to the human or
ganism. 1t is in daily use on one-half
the tables in the country, and no fault is
found, only by the dealers in so-called
pure butter, who wish to have larger
market for their adulterated products,
that are harmful. They have good
case, for they claim they sell pure butter,
but unless Congressional hotels and
boarding houses differ materially from
those patronized by common people, the
august solons have been eating melted
bull fat for the past five years and did not
know it. These fats are taken into the
stomach every day as roast beef
and boiled beef and but for the
fats they would not be palata
BILE. Where is the difference il
} eating beef fat chemically prepared, anc
eating it in nauseous doses of sickening
gravy2 The advocates Of oleomargarine
, prove that the interest enhances the
value OF every beef animal 80 OH &C
count OF the fat it contains, theI
why is not the bill as proposed, blow Il
l the interests OF cattle men? We hav
: stated before in these columns that il
: countries where the population is settle,
, in dense numbers, the majority OF then
: are poor, and cannot pay for pure pro
G ducts, and it has been found wise pol
< icy to furnish good substitutes, rs in tn
/ case with the French people, who tax
s kindly to uidnde dc cheudl because the
9 cannot purchase beef. When it sha
Q come that the American people, b
d reason OF their great numbers, cannc
. raise beef sufficient for all, they, too
s will have to come down to a sirloin {
s horse, and it will occasion no great trou
s BILE. II is Il well-known fact that enougl
g OF pure butter cannot be made to suppl
IS the demand, and therefore some substi
J. tute is necessary Ii we do not have tn
e substitute, knowing it to be so, we ar
1t sure to have the aduteratcd articl,
: palmcd off on us under the name OF pun
Y butter The question for the Senate i
e which OF the two cases is the best for til
Is people, without reference to the interest
It of the makers of either, and solely in til
interests OF consumers? This point Sc
tied, production will soon accommodat
itself to the wants OF the people, and a
will be well. We believe the wants
the people should receive the first col
- sideration, and in the Senate they al
d, very likely to just now, in this case.