The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-02-10
TEE LARD INQUIRY.


Arguments For and Againat the Bill Propos-
ID ing che Lsvying of Tax.
WASHINGTON. Feb 9.-The hearing before the
Senate committee agriculture on the bill to
impose a tax on lard containing anything except
pure hog fat was resumed this morning. Judge
Wilson, attorney for John P. Squire & Co., of
Boston, read petitions signed by large number
of manufacturers and dealers in pure lard. urg-
ing the passage of the BILL also several letters
together with statements signed by the chair
man of the Liverpool Produce Exchange. repre-
senting that there was want of confidence in
the purity of American lard. and that conse-
qnently they often refrained from buying it;
also. letters from two cracker manufacturers of
Sc Louis and Omaha, stating that crackers. in
which was used lard composed in part of cotton
seed oil would become rancid in a few days;
also clipping from tho New York Journal of
Commerce. in which it is stated that the exports
of lard from the port of New York had fallen off
Sc 900, 600 pounds in the year 1887, as compared
with the year 1885,
Mr.. Cromwell, attorney for the refined lard
|. manufacturers. said he had petition from over
900 persons, stating that refined" lard was not
AN Injurious article. He said it not claimed
that cotton-seed oil could be used for every pur-
pose and he would admit it was not ft for
crackers. In behalf of the rsfinsd-lard industry
and the cotton-seed oil people, representing in
all $50. 000 900 of invested capital he desired to
protest against the passage of the bill, which
was designed to place refined lard in degrad-
ing position commercially. Mr. Kimball. who
was the chief witness for the proponents of the
hill, had, he said, made the following vital ad-
missions: First. that refined lard, as made by
the well-known manufacturers, IL not deleter-
ious to health; second, that they could no: JUS
the placing OF the word compound" or ire
+ fined lard" the packages; and third. that they
would mot contend that cotton-seed oil is injur-
ious to health.
l1ai4Mr Cromwell then devoted himself to the de-
Tense of the word refined as used by his
aclients, contendng that it was used BY no other
branch of the lara industry. and that name
had been built up for refined" lard among deal
ers and consumers by twenty-five years OF hard
work. 1t was Islander to call such lard ''adul-
terated lard" To adulterate means to dehase
and the lard in which cotton-seed oil was mixed
was superior article. The whole complaint
was instigated by man who was not as enter
eprising his rivals and wanted Congress to aid
him in keeping his trade from them. AS to the
failing off IL the export trade via New York,
he said the explanation was that Baltimore and
Montreal captured the trade New York lost. Mr..
Cromwell said that the cotton-seed oil industry
was of the greatest possible advantage to The
Southern country. He was against all such pro-
loposed legislation; . legislative stamp would be a
blsmish. In answer to questions from members
sof the committee. Mr.. Cromwell said thatt hey
would be forced to bow to any general legisla-
|ytion. but that it would be perncious and I'M
b warranted course on the part of Congress.
b. Judge Clapp of Memphis, spoke in behalf of
the cotton seed interests. This industry was yet
IN its infancy, and no action should be taken
/ that would tend to suppress it.
DR. Amss addressed the committee against
the proposed bill. He represented the cattle in
loterests and said that if the bill became law
Isit would mean loss of 80 cents on each head of
CATTLE
r. sMr Richard Arnold also spoke against the
lbbill His company had invested million and q
d0uarter dollars in cotton seed mills in the South.
| ieihe bill would cut off his companys market
d A statement was read. signed by Armour 81
Co, of Chicago, protesting against the bill.
= MIR Caruth, of Arkansas, argued against tho
passage of the bill, and especially against the
tax The people Of this country were getting
very tired of internal taxation IF this went on,
sugar men would want profession against
glucose and with every other industry Tho
bill would work great injustice to the cotton seed
industry of the South. He concluded: 1.-THE
/ cstton. seed oil business is chief industry.
We have not got much and for Gods sake don't
take away that little.
Mr. j. A. Sperry, of New Haven. said that he
had no objections to lard of which cotton seed
oil was an ingredient but that it was fraud to
sell it as lard made from hogs. At present the
retailer bought the compound lard cheaper than
he could buy the real lard and made an extra
profit by selling it as hog lard Let the hog,
the steer and the cotton seed oil stand on their
own merits.
The further hearing was postponed for sever-
al