New-York tribune., 1886-05-26
TIE BOGUS BUT1ER QUESTION:

The debate in the House on the bill to impose
fax on bogus butter has brought out a strk-
ing array of strong arguments IN justification
of the proposed measure, and there seems
ground for the belief that the bill has a major
ity for its passage. But it, advocates appear
hardly enough alive to the importance of so
legislating that the fraud which has hitherto
been as the breath of life to the bogus butter
trade shall be rendered impossible in the future.
This Is the only way to protect the public.
The popular ground of complaint against that
product is not so much that it may be made of
dangerous and nasty material, as that it can be
and is palmed of upon the purchaser for real
buffer. Now if Congress thinks it necessary
TO protect the dairy interest, threatened serl-
ously by the new industry. and to that end IN
poses tax upon the manufacture OF bogus
buttcr how much more is it bound to guard the
interests of the whole American people, endan-
gered by Il manufacture so initiative that II
cannot be distinguished from the genuine food
product for which 1t is sold.
The protective measure demanded under the
circumstances is II simple one, and sufficiently
obvipus. What is required is that oleomarga-
rine. buttcrlne, and all mutations of butter shall
be sold for what they are and that evasion of
the law shall be duly punished. TO prevent
evasion the methods already employed in the
revenue service offer themselves aS probably
the most effective. Let the law provide that
every package of bogus butter shall bear Gov
eminent stamp or brand as cigars and tobacco
do, for example. Put the matter in charge OF
the rcasury Department, and let the internal
revenue officers attend to it, Then the public
will have substantial guarantee against the
wholesale imposition which has given vitality
TO the manufacture and we should see how
capable It was of making hcadway upon H.
merits. If any one wishes to eat bogus butter
let them do so, but compel makers and venders
so TO pack it that there shall be no possible mis-
take as to its character, and so that all who buy
it n ust do so with their eyes open.
This course is the more necessary because 1t
must be expected that the imposition of a tax
upon the stuff will lead to the employment OF
still cheaper processes of manufacture than are
now in nsc. To recover the tax the manutact-
urer will economic in every possible way, and
he will be the more tempted to do 50 bccausc III
the preparation of bogus butter it is ross bic to
conceal the use of materials of the most dis
gusting and unwholesome character. If there
fore the tax is imposed without providing for
the sale of the stuff under its true colprs. the
last state of the public will be worse than tn"
first. There will be less scruple than ev'r
about employing cheap and nasty material III
the manufacture, and less opportunity than
ever for detecting the fraud. Brand every
package, however. and the public will obtain
protection. 1t is true that the patrons OF board
ing houses and restaurants would still be
exposed to imposition, but then they are sure
to be victnized by bad butter even when 1t
comes from dairy, and they would probably
not be worse off than formerly. Publicity Is
the one form of guarantee which Congress can
secure in this case, and no legislation which
does not provide for it will be adequate. We
hope that before the bill passes, if it does pass,
that this will be seen to, and then the country
can afford to let the bogus butter movement run
its course.