Wichita eagle., 1888-12-29
THE DRESSED BEEF PROBLEM.
To the Editor Of the EAGLE

To the Editor Of the EAGLE
The idea of the dressed beef problem
in the west is protection to a ''home
butcher" The idea Of protection is to
protect the industries of government
as an entierty. The federal constitution
prohibits the state from putting an en-
barge on the trade and commerce of the
various states between each other. Any
act of the legislature that attempts to
prevent the shipping in of dressed beef is
violative of the spirit, if not the letter of
the federal constitution.
To require animals to be slaughtered
within a city or state under the hollow
and fiimsy pretext that it is ''a sanitary
measure" "a police regulation for
the purpose of protecting the people
from being imposed on with diseased or
impure meat, savorS somewhat of estate
rights doctrine" and it is questionable If
the supreme court will not so look at it.
To enact law that all meats shall be
inspected by an officer before
offered for sale. would be harsh
and unreasonable, but is clearly consti-
tutional, because the inspection subjects
the ''home meat" to to the same rule as
foreign meat. No restriction can be
placed ON meat slaughtered in st. Louis
or Chicago or Kansas City, Mo-, that is
not also placed on Kansas meat.
The construction placed on the Federal
Constitution in the drummer cases,
the insurance cases. the ''Texas cattle
(AIissourD cases." and others of the same
kind, demonstrates that the regulation
of commerce belongs to congress: that
laws enacted to cripple the commerce of
other StateS-laws enacted to give the
citizens of one state advantages over the
citizens of other states violates the con-
stitution in other parts of it. We may
not desire to see local butcher run out
of the state and his business destroyed,
but we must give the foreign butcher
chance to compete in trade.
No one seriously contends that we are
in any danger of being poisoned by
buying meats shipped in refrig-
orator cars. This proposed embargo
on meats from other states is conceded
to be purely in the interest of the local
butcher and without any regard to the
quality of meats shipped in. In other
words, meats of other states are to be
adjudicated by the legislature to be foul,
diseased, impure, even if by some
legislative legerdemain it should sue
coed in framing a law that passed
muster as to its constitutionality by en-
forcing the provision on the foreign
meats. and relaxing them in favor of the
local butcher, so as to whip the devil
round the stump
Even if this should be done, the legis-
lation is against the many and in favor
of the few. 1t is for the interest of one
class and against all other classes.
The majority of our people will not
look with favor on any legislation that
debars them from purchasing meat
where they please and from whom they
please.
While they may be in favor of guard
ing governmental boundaries from for
eign intruders in trade, it is
doubtful if they will look on
pleasantly at the guarding of
state lines SO closely as to result in rails
ing the price of meats. sustain local
butchers and keep out foreign meats
without regard to its quality. What we
want is good meat, cheap meat, compe-
tition in meat-not alone Kansas meat.
The state of Kansas should be above cry
ing out to the world that it is unable to
hold its own in the butcher business and
must be protected. If we can't hold our
own in the cattle anG hog business what
on earth can we keep our end up in?
kANZAN.