Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1895-10-12
MUST PAY THE PENALTY.
The Merchants Who Sold Butterine, Though
They Did Not Know 1t, Must stand the
Conseouaneas


They Did Not Know 1t, Must Stand the
Consequences.
Special to the Register.
Toronto. Ohio, October 11.-A decis-
ion has at last been reached by the
Commissioner Of Internal Revenue in
regard TO the oleO cases which have agi-
tated the merchants of Eastern Ohio for
the past year. Stole Bros, of Wheel
ing. sold TO these merchants. who in
clude some Is or so dealers located IN
Bellaire Martins Ferry, Urichsville,
Steubenville, Toronto, East Liverpool,
Richmond IrOndale, HammondsVille,
and other points, creamery butter,
which was developed by the agents OF
the government 70 be oleOmargTine.
Quietly the government worked up the
case. and it IS alleged that they can
prove that all the creamery butter sold
10y the Wheeling firm for year or over
was OleO instead of creamery butter, as
supposed by the merchants who pur-
chased it.
The merchants included in the list
met some months ago az the Clarendon
Hotel in S-eubenyille, organized and
subscribed a fund TO resist the proSecu-
J ti0n Of these cases. Attorney Atkinson,
J of Wheeling. was employed by them to
present the case TO the Commissioner at
Washington. This he did, and IL was
/ thought for a time that the cases would
I De called OF. as the merchants presented
| such q belligerent front. The Commis-
! sioner weighed the matter and arrived
/ at The following conclusion, and the
merchants have all been notified by Col
Iect0r OEgher, of Cleveland, to this ef-
/ feet.
| The assessments were because OF the
/ sales Of ole0margarine purchased from
/ Stole Bros. of Wheeling, w. Va, and
abatement is claimed on the ground
/ that The taxpayer in each instance, VINO
/ is q county merchant, ordered from
/ Stole Bros. creamery butter, paying
the market price for it, and supposed ad
! the time. and still thinks he received
| and sold creamery butter.
The evidence in the possession of
| this Office is conclusive that the article
/ sold by Stole Bros. to the parties as
! creamery butter, was OleOmargarine,
I and the fact that the firm may have de-
] IH-NtQ lNrll U-luiHtiS Is uUL Il N0l-u
reason for abatement.
The law (Sec. 3, Act of August ,,
/ 1851 defines a retail dealer in oleomar-
/ garine to be person who sells Oleo-
; margarine in less quantities than ten
| pounds ac one time
The dealer is presumed to know what
he buys and sells, but, #. as is claimed
in these cases. he did not know, he is
\ none the less liable to pay the special
| tax stamp as r. ID. o."
Collector OHgher is instructed by the
! Commissioner TO collect the special tax
| and penalty in these cases. To some
( the penalty the VIII not be a great
\ amount beside the tax, all being as
sessed as TO the amount of stun sold.
Many of the merchants have conclud-
ed to pay the amount assessed under
protest and then body as a whole has
not Yet concluded what further action
they viii take in the matter. It IS pro-
| bable that they VIII fight il further, as
they are thoroughly organized.
AS the government has positive proof
tha- StOlze Bros. sold oleomargarine,
their proof that these merchants sold
the stuff is not so positive, as they have
had no practical examination TO that
effect.