San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1891-02-03
A Doctor on Bogus Butter.

A Doctor on Bogus Butter.
From the New York Star.
There is a great deal Of agitation
at present in various parts Of the
country on the oleomargerine Ques-
tlon," remarked Prof Chandler, of
the Columbia School of Mines, the
other day, land there Is more un.
reasoning and unreasonable opposi-
ton to this perfectly healthy and
pure product than I know of, in any
other such direction. In regard to
oleomargerihe our people for the most
part are thoroughly bigoted in their
opposition. Oleomargerine is pre-
pared from beet suet, and it contains
precisely the same chemical constit-
uents as butter made from
cows milk; the only difference
is that oleomargerihe is produced
from the suet by a chemical process
en- tirely, instead of partly by the in
fermentation of the COW. The strong
opposition to olemargarine is institute
ed for the most part by the farmers in
various parts of the country who pro-
duce butter, aided by the dealers,
who find larger profits from the sale
OF butter than they possibly could
obtain from the handling of Oleomar-
garine. The people who pretend to
find this beef.suet product injurious,
find no fault with precisely the same
material in mince pies and plumb
buildings. There is nothing wrong
with them!
"Some of the state legislatures have
enacted very extreme laws against
oleomargarIne In Difference to the
farmer vote, and the general govern
ment has Disseminated against 1t
aud against our poorer citizens by
placing an internal revenue tax upon
it-like the tax upon whiskey and to-
bacco-presumably with the idea that
it's consumption is detrimental, like
the COO liberal consumption of spirit
uous liquor and tobacco. Real
ly it is "politics" pure and
simple that prevents our people
from enjoying, at nominal price of
q few cents q pound, q perfect substi-
tute and equivalent for butter, the
high price of which renders the lat
ter an unwarranted extravaganza to
many. All for the votes OF the far
mers and dealers.
1--WE are fond of speaking of the
bigotry and stupidity OF the foreign
ers of the past centuries, who fought
vindictively against new theories and
inventions partly because of the fear
that they might disturb existing IN.
dustries. Many q labor-saving de-
vice was combated for this reason.
We sheer at these people for this sort
of thing, yet we do something just as
stupid in our fighting against oleo-
margarine.
cat one time most of the dyein gin
England, France and Germany was
done with the leaves of q woad, q
plant of the mustard family. When
indigo was brought into these coun-
tries and was found to be much supe-
rior to woad, there was q
tremendous outcry among the
Woad farmers aud others inter-
ested in the old process, and the I'M
portation of indigo was forbidden
for q time 1t was q capital offense to
arry it into some of these countries.
Many farmers did not raise woad
exclusively, but most of them Guilt
waited Q certain amount of 1t, so that
the interest in 1t was general. Now,
while these people may have had no
vote, they had tremendous infiu-
ence, and that influence kept out the
cheaper and better indigo for over q
hundred years. Now, of course, in
digo supersedes wOad. In time,
when we have more sense oleomar-
garine will be sold IS freely rs but
ter"