The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1893-03-21

From the phIladeIpnfa Record.

o.As <ff~ ofse>NNsFHs~ @NSSce~~s 1
An effort " Ill be made in the next
Congress to repeal the tux on oleo-
margarine and butterine. AS the tax
was not imposed for the purpose OF
revenue, but in order to depress one
product for the benefit OF another. IL
is In fragrant violation OF Democratic
principles. There is not In the Nc
Kinley tariff anything more iniquitons
than this tax on oleomnrgine. IL is,
therefore, mere cant OF reform to talk
OF revising the Mckinley act while
leaving this bad law for the protee-
ton OF bad butter on the statute book.
The scandalous circumstances con-
nected with the passage OF tie oleo-
margarine law are well known. Al
lobby, consisting OF two or three inn
pecunious individuals out OF job. es-
tablished itself in Washington and
pretended to represent most OF the
dairymen's association of the eoun-
try. In tho name of these assocla-
tions the lobbyists sent out blank Pc
titions to the farmers and circular ap-
peals for funds to enable them to car
ry on the wa against artificial butter.
To the appeal for money most OF the
makers of poor and rancid butter re-
sponded with alacrity; and when the
campaign WIS over the lobbyists had a
very considerable balance in bank al.
ter the payment OF hotel bills and
printing expenses.
1t was in vain that some OF the most
distinguished chemists of the country
testified before committee OF Con-
gress that oleomargarine Is an 'abso-
lutely pure product and that much
of the butter put on the market can
not lie compared with it as a whole
some and palatable article OF food.
Professor Chandler, of Columbia Col.
lrge, testified that oleomargarine and
butterine ''are perfectly wholesome"
and that the process OF their manufac'
ture is conducted with care and clean
illness. Professor Barker, Of the Uni
versity OF Pennsylvania, said that the
; product prepared under the patent Of
) Nlege INQUIRIES is ''as valuable nutri'
Z, tive agent as butter" that it Is pure
and perfectly wholesome" and that II
is desirable as an article OF food
Professor Caldwell, Of Cornell Uni.
, .verslty, bore similar testimony. Pro
!, 'fessor Henry Morton, Of Stevens In
Istitute, said with confidence, that
IoleomargaIine lis essentially identical
with the best fresh butter, and is very
superior to much OF the butter made
from cream alone that is found in the
\ market"
: There is no necessity. however, to
. multiply this testimony. No chemist
= OF standing in tho world has ever ut
tered a word against oleomargarine
but all have testified to the great value
: OF the discovery of Nlege INQUIRIES
a Yet the testimony OF science could
not withstand the "pnbllc opinion" SO
eIindustriously manufactured by the
0 Idairymens lobby In Washington, and
a grossly Ubiquitous tax was imposed
Iby Congress upon puro and whole
some article of food for tho protection
n of the makers of bad butter. The
/, makers of good butter have no need
of such protection. Whe the oleo
y margarine bill was under considera
ton in Congress q com mlttee OF the
l. Knights OF Labor was in permanent
y session in Washington; but the walk
Ling delegates had nothing to urge
o,agGinst an outrageous tax upon 9
cheap and wholesome article OF food
Later on an attempt was made II
England to protect dairy butter from
/. the oleomargarine imported from tin
8 United States in large quantities. A
a Till to discourage its importation ant
y consumption was introduced in Par
T. lliament. but it was promptly defeated
l. In tho discussion DIR. Lyon Playfalr
/ Ole OF the most distinguished chem
siists in Europe and member OF tin
$ House of Commons, said that bad but
tier is fraud upon the poor; and oleo
margarine will sooner or later drive i
out of tho mprket." The workinginel
d OF England would not have tolerated
\ a prohibition OF a pure and palatabl,
I. article of food that had come into gen
eral use upon their tables. on thl'
7 side of the water the workingmen ap
Il peal to be less jealous of like inya
nsions OF their rights and interests.
l. But far more Ubiquitous than the taz
imposed upon oleomargarine by Con
Igress is the law of Pennsylvania, which
absolutely prohibits its manufacture
land sale. liz affirming the validity o!
II this law the State Supreme Court said
yIln substance, though in the delicately
A. yelled language that is due from on
1t branch OF the State Government II
r. speaking of another, that the Cour
u had no power to prevent an ayerag
y body OF Pennsylvania Legislators from
~ making fools OF themselves. The Law
AGAINST oleomargarine and against tn
IeyIdences OF science still fingers upol
the statute book of Pennsylvania, Ii
seIspite OF its iniquity and folly.
ri But il the tax OF Congress upon thi
nproduct should Q repealed tho Stat
s. law prohibiting its manufacture unt
saie would be reduced to comparative
Iharmlessness. 1t would then. as now
be in the power OF the manufacturer
5oin New York and in other States t.
= ship their oleomargarine into Penn
II sylyania In Original packages" Q
S Iconyenient size for retail. This woult
nsbe the more feasible in view of tn
fact that oleomargarine keeps 1T
Sweetness longer than does butter
The Pennsylvania law would then
,Ihaye no other effect than to prohibi
idthe manufacture of oeomargarin,
within the borders Of the state, Will
Ii it's consumers could obtain cheap ant
ii abundant supplies from neighborlnt
III States.
Il This article of food can be had o
r. T.. Carey, No. 4l0 King street.
"a ---