The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1895-08-30
ABOUT BOGUS BUTTER.
Oleomargarine Has Not Been a Means of
Reducing Cost of Living.

Oleomargarine Has Not Been Means of
Reducing Cost of Living.
Much of the public liberation Of
oleomargarine arises from the belief
that it is a means of cheapening the
cost of living, and, therefore, affords
to the poorer classes an opportunity
for economy. There are two objections
to the validity of this argument. In
the first place, believe it to be mat
ter of demonstration that no substan-
tial gain in the way of opportunity to
the accumulation of savings by the real
poor of the civilized community can be
secured by cheapening the cost Of liv-
ing. This, however, is a question of
abstract political economy, and need
not be entered into further. Indeed,
we may concede that if fatty food
was cheapened by the sale of cleo
margarine a benefit would result.
The real objection, however, to the
above argument is that oleomarga-
rine almost never reaches the con-
sumer under circumstances in which it's
economical production can be made
available. Imean by this that it never
Is cheap except to those who are the
mere purveyors of it. No poor man or
woman ever gets the benefit of the
cheapness of oleomargarine 1t brings
butter prices at all points at which it
meets the consumer.
Thousands of samples have been
brought into my laboratory by the
agents of parties prosecuting under
the act of 1885, and in all cases in
which purchases were made at retail
butter prices were paid. Oleomarga-
rlne has never afforded any real relief
in the question of living. No ''plea
more specious and corrupt" has ever
been alleged concerning any food ar
ticle. 1t could never secure a market
upon its merits. 1t has never found a
held In any amount except when the
ultimate intention of deceiving the
user and increasing the profit of the
seller has been part of the influence.
The so-called demand of the COM
munity for it is merely that the de-
mand is created by large users of but
ter who do not have to eat the materi-
al they furnish. For instance, restau-
rant keepers, hotel proprietors, man.
ayers OF public institutions; well-to-do
merchants, lawyers, doctors, etc., do
not desire to eat oleomargarine; they
prefer butter, and they never use the
former except when they do so unknow-
ingly.
In fact. it is not likely that a substi-
tute fat can ever be found except by
processes of deception. The public
will not voluntarily and knowingly
buy a material of artificial origin
when natural production is obtain
able. Even under the most liberal
laws persons who buy oleomargarine
ut sixteen cents per pound will sell it
Tor butter prices, tempted by the profit
thus secured.
Everyone admits that If the function
OF the government is to protect the un-
wary it is proper to legislate regard
Ing the sale of oleomargarine as but
ter. Two methods are open for this
purpose; one is to prohibit under all
conditions the sale Of the article; the
other is to regulate the business so
that no sale shall take place unless the
buyer is notified of the nature of the
article. 1t appears, however, that all
methods requiring simply labelling of
the package have failed to accomplish
the purpose. and it seems to me, to Sc
cure the protection of the community,
1t will be necessary, II regulating laws
shall be passed, to compel the article
to be put up in such forms that II can
not simulate butter. This may be 40
complished by requiring 1t to be col
ored OF some striking and peculiar
color by the use of some material, the
harmlessness Of which shall be known.
or by requiring 1t to be put up in such
shapes as shall at once betray its ma
ture.
Moreover, it may be necessary to
deal with such articles as with alco-
holic beverages, namely, to require ap-
piications to be made to some public
body for license to sell, to publish the
TACT OF such license having been grant
ed to such individuals, and to COM
pei the conspicuous display Of the
license in the store.-Dr. Henry Left
mann. in Prairie Farmer.