The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-12-08
It Makes All Imitation Buffers and
Cheese Subject To the Police
Powers OF the states
INCREASES GOVERNMENT TAX
ALL COLORED MANUFACTURED But
TER TO PAY 10 CENTS A POUND
Uncolored limitations. However, Are
Let OF with a Tax OF One-Fourth
Cent n Pound-The Debate.

WASHINGTON, Dec. THE House
shows disposition TO rush legislation:
yesterday IL passed the army reorganiza-
ton bill; to-day. il passed the Grout oleo-
margarine bill by a vote of l96 to 90. The
substitute offered by the minority OF the
committee on agriculture. which imposed
additional restrictions on the sale OF oIeo-
margarine to prevent its fraudulent sale
as butter and increased the penalties for
violators, was defeated by vote OF LIB
to 17s The bill as passed makes al. ar
ticles known as oleomargarine. butterine.
imitation butter or imitation cheese trans
ported into any State or Territory for con-
sumption or sale subject TO the police pow
er of such State or Territory. but prevents
any State or Territory from fornidding the
transportation or sale of such product when
produced and sold free from coloration in
imitation of butter The bill increases the
tax on oleomargarine colored in imitation
of butter from to 10 cents per pound and
decreases the tax oleomargarine un-
colored from cents TO u of cent per
pound.
A long and interesting debate preceded
the vote, in the course of which those who
favored the Grout bill claimed the addi-
tional taz on colored oleomargarine was
the only effective remedy for preventing
fraud upon the public. while those who
opposed it contended that fraud would be
prevented by the substitute ano that the
real purpose Of the Grout bill was TO de-
stroy the oleomargarine industry. Those
who participated in tss debate were
Messrs Henry tRep), Connecticut; Grout
(Rep.), Vermont: Lamb Dem.). Virginia.:
Davidson (Rep). Wisconsin. and Tawney
iRep1, Minnesota. in favor OF the bill,
and Messrs. Wadsworth (Rep.). New York;
Lorimer (Rep), Illinois; Bailey tsep),
Kansas; Grosvenor (Rep.). Ohio: Williams
Oem) Mississippi; Foster Dem). I'LL
nois, and Bailey ODem.), Texas. against Z
MR. HENRY EXPLAINS.
Mr. Henry, who was In charge OF the
measure, opened the debate in Its support
He explained the features of the bill. The
increase of the tax on colored imitation
butter, he said, the majority OF the COM
mittee on agriculture believed was abs0-
IuteIy necessary TO protect the dairy inter.
ests of the country. The cause OF the enor-
nous amount of fraud and the illegal SELL
ing OF oleomargarine. he said, was due TO
the great profits derived from the sale OF
the imitation, because of it's absolute coun-
terfeit of butter Thirty-two States al
ready had absolutely forbidden the manu-
facture and sale of oleomargarine colored
In imitation of butter, he said, and this
fact proved conclusively the policy of a
very large majority OF the people against
the existence of imitation butter in coun-
terfeit form. Mr.. Henry went exhaustive
ly into the figures as to the cost of man.
ufacturing the article TO show that, in
Guiding the payment of the present inter-
nal revenue tax of cents. it was not more
than 10 cents per pound Mr.. Henry said
the increase of the tax would prevent the
large profits which were the incentive to
violate the laws OF the State and govern
ment, and defraud innocent purchasers.
while the reduction OF the tax on oleo-
margarine I'm its natural color would en-
able those who desired TO consume IL TO
procure it at lower cost than heretofore.
Mr. Wadsworth. chairman OF the COM
mittee on agriculture who. with six other
members of the committee. signed the
minority report against the Grout bill. as
serted with emphasis that the minority
were just as earnest In their desire TO pre-
vent the fraud now practiced I'm the sale
of imitation butter as the majority could
be The only difference was that the minor
ity recognized the value of oleomargarIne
as a wholesome and nutritious article OF
food and entitled TO a place as a food
product. In support OF this statement ne
read the testimony OF number OF scien-
tffic men. He charged that the purpose
OF the supporters OF the GrOut bill was 10
destroy the manufacture of oleomargarine.
not to regulate its sale. The bin prepared
by the minority. he added would eliminate
al possibility OF fraud. by compelling the
sale OF oleomargarine I'm original packages
of one or two pounds. stamped with the
word "oIeomargarine" and bearing the in
ternal revenue tax stamp. and imposing
additional and heavy penalties for viola
tions of the law.
MR.. CIRCUITS SPEECH.
Mr. Grout in support OF the bin. de-
clared that the purpose OF the bill was to
suppress fraud I'm the sale Of a food product
by preventing the coloring OF cleomargarine
in imitation Of butter over iO40ooo00
pounds OF oleomargarine had been manu.
factured and sold last year That Vas
about one-ninth OF the total butter con-
sumption of the United States
do you not think the enactment OF a sub
stitute would prevent fraud IN the sale OF
oleomargarineg' asked Mr.. Burke. OF
Texas
II do not" replied Mr.. Grout THE pub
lie would have no more protection than Il
has now"
Mr.. Grout produced figures 20 show that
oleomargarine cost less than cents per
pound and worked OF on The public
BY the retailer AT from Is TO % cents per
pound. He gave practical illustration OF
the manner in which oleomargarine Is sold