Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1900-08-24
Oleomargarine Under the Law

can citizen to engage in any lawful calling
that he chooses, and to dispose of his prop
erty as he sees 1T, so long as by 80 doing
he inficts no injury upon others; but it is
no less true that the legislature of state
may, in the exercise of its police power,
pass laws for the regulation or prohibition
of any trade or business that may be in
furious to the safety or well. being of soci-
ETY.. The police power of the state eX-
tends to all regulations affecting the health,
good order, morals, peace and safety OF So
ciety, and when such regulations do not
conflict with any constitutional inhibition
or natural right their validity cannot be
successfully controverted. A state can
not, however, under the disguise of the
exercise of the police power, overthrow or
impair the constitutional rights guaranteed
to its citizens.
2nd. AS to the court decisions:
Early in the year 1884 the Legislature of
New York passed a statute providing that:
''No person shall manufacture out
of any oleaginous substance, or any
compound of the same, other than that
produced from unadulterated milk or
cream from the same, any article de-
signed TO take the place of butter or
cheese produced from pure, unadulter-
ated milk or cream from the same, or
shall sell or shall offer to sell the same
as an article of food"
One Marx was indicted under this
statute for having sold oleomargarine. 1t
was not charged that the article so sold
was represented TO be butter, or was sold
as such, or that there was any intent to
deceive or defraud, or that the article was
in any respect unwhoesome or deleterious,
but that it was simply an article designed
to take the place of butter.
In June, 1885, the supreme court OF New
York delivered an opinion. holding that a
statute which absolutely prohibits the
manufacture or sale of any compound de-
signed as a substitute for butter, however
wholesome, valuable and cheap it may be,
and however fairly the character of the
substance may be avowed and published,
is unconstitutional, because the prohibition
| is not limited TO unwholesome or simulat
ed substitutes.
On the other hand, in Missouri
statute substantially identical with that Of
New York was held by the courts of that
state to be constitutional and valid, and in
Pennsylvania a statute of similar charac-
ter has been held by the courts OF that
state TO be constitutional as being within
the police power Of the state. The Penn
sylvania case was taken to the supreme
court of the United States on writ OF er-
ror from the supreme court OF Pennsylya-
MIA, and il was there held that oleomarga-
rine has for nearly a quarter OF century
been recognized in Europe and in the Unit
| ed States as an article of food and COM
merce, and was recognized as such by
| Congress in the act of Aug. ,, 1856, and
| being thus lawful article of commerce it
cannot be wholly excluded from importa-
ton into a state from another state where
Il is manufactured, although the state into
which it was imported may so regulate the
introduction as TO insure purity without
having the power totally to exclude IT,.
The court further held that to the extent
that it prohibited the introduction of cleo
margarine from another state and its sale
in original packages, the statute was IN
| valid.
1t will be noted that in all these cases
the legislature absolutely prohibited the
manufacture and sale of oleomargarne
under the supposed police power of the
states, and that the courts of different
states have disagreed in respect to the con-
stitutional question, New York holding
the statute invalid, and Pennsylvania and
Missouri holding it valid, while the supreme
court of the United States holds that no
state can prohibit the bringing into the
state Of oleomargorine and the sale OF il in
original packages.
Sd. As TO our Vermont laws:
During the Vermont legislative session
of 1854 Mr.. Parker of Cambridge intro
duced A bill into the house of representa-
tiyes which by its terms did not prohibit
either the manufacture or the sale of oleO-
margarine, but fully recognized it as le-
Ultimate article of commerce. 1t did not
seek either TO regulate or prevent the sale
of oleomargarine under the police power
of the state; it simply sought TO tax the
manufacturer of and dealer in it. The
tax upon the manufacturer was 10 cents
for each pound manufactured. The an
nual license to be paid by the wholesale
dealer was $4,000 and by the retail dealer
$1,000. These impositions were so heavy
as to make it apparent that the bill was in
tended to be prohibitory. Mr.. Parker,
the author of the bill, has himself said in
a recent interview that his intention was
to 'stop the sale of oleomargarine as but
ter" He further says, FINALLY, one night
after had retired the thought came 10 me
that the way to overcome the sale OF oleo-
margarine as butter was to tax the article. -
Thus It will be seen that his purpose was,
| ullutl tue pAtAGAb VI la-NNtANDi op7pluhCl1
to prohibit both the manufacture and sale
of oleomargarine in Vermont, and this for
the one purpose of protecting the farmer
against competition. In other words, the
bill was intended by his own confession TO
be, and had it become a law it would have
been, actually prohibitive. Yet at the
same time it treated oleomargarine as le-
climate article of commerce and did not
seek to prohibit its sale under the police
power of the state, which was recognized
in sustaining the statutes of Missouri and
Pennsylvania.
The inference is plain, under the court
decisions here quoted, that, had the bill
been enacted into a law, it would have
been held unconstitutional If brought to a
test.
That the present statute of Vermont,
which imposes penalty upon any person
who exposes for sale or has in his posses
sion with intent to sell any article made in
imitation of butter that is of any other
color than pink, is unconstitutional, there
can be no question in view of the decision
of the supreme court of the United State:
in the case of Collins V. New Hampshire
I'll U. S. 80, which was decided as late
as May, 1898. The New Hampshire
statute contained provision that oleomar-
garine land other substitutes for butter,
should not be sold in that state 'unless ii
| ia of a mink cOlOrn The New Hamnshire