Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1902-04-17
SENATOR DILlINGHAM'S SPEECH.
His Able Discussion of the Anti Oleo
Bill Which Has Just Passed the Sen
ate -Protection OF DhirY Interests.

|
Bill Which Has Just Passed the Sen
ate Protection OF Dairy Interests.
The Free Press has already reproduced
the principal arguments made by United
States Senator Redlicld Proctor in support
OF the ELECTROMAGNETIC bill which has
just passed the Senate. Following are ex.
tracts from Senator Dilinghams speech
in support of the same measure:
| The agitation of this question has ex.
cited the interest of three classes of pco.
| pie in this country. The record to which
| have referred shows that the producers
of oleonargarine have appeared before the
committees by attorneys, by agents, by
witnesses. The great agricultural interests
have been in like manner represented, ant
We nave before lis the record of the anti
color laws now in force In % of the States
representing the opinions of so per cent OF
the inhabitants of the Nation.
| 1t is not necessary to discuss the magni
tude of the agricultural industry. That has
already been done. Nor is ii necessary that
| should discuss in detail the growth OF
the oleomargnrine industry. 1t is enough
to say that within the last 20 years 1t has
assumed proportions and forms that have
attracted universal interest
Now, sir. stand here to say that whcr
Ioleomargarine is pres ented to this country
as oleomargarine when it is put upon sale
as and for what it really Is, ] am heartily
in favor of giving IL free field and an op-
portunity for fair fight. am of the
opinion that the American people are en-
titled to choose what they shall eat and
what they shall drink so long S the arti.
cles selected are wholesome and do not en-
danger health; but when an article is
placed upon the market under false col
or, in a false guise intended to deceive
and which does deceive, then 1t Is that the
consumers have vital interest in the ma t.
/ thIN IN "A
claim legislation which shall protect them
against deception and fraud.
The state laws adopted during that
period of its history prohibited to very
large extent the manufacture or sale OF
oleomarsarne in any form. In several
instances they were held to he unconstitu-
tional. At a later period legislation. in
tended to apprise the purchaser of the
character OF the article was adopted re-
quiring that olcomargarinc offered for sale
should be cClored pink. This law was also
held to be unconstitutional as prohibtive
in its character In a case that came up 10
the Supreme Court from the state of New
Hampshire.
But IN 1891 the Legislature of Massa-
cusetts enacted a statute which forbade
the sale of oleomargarine In that State
when it was made in imitation of yellow
butter. Its constitntionality was tested in
the courts Of that State and later. by APP
States in what is known as the Plumley
case by which court the statute was held
to be valid one that the State had "A right
to enact one that it could put in operation,
one that tended to protect the people from
the imposition of having that which was
not butter sold under tho guise of butter,
whereby the great public was defrauded.
Other States have followed in the lead of
massachusetts in adopting what are known
as anti-color laws until 81 of them now
have such statutes in force. These stat
utes represent 60,OOO.OOO of people, 50 per
cent of the entire population of the United
States. Some question has been raised in
this debate as to right of the government
to tax colored oleomargarine in the man
ner provided in this bill I do not know
that ANYBODY has ever directly raised the
question of the constitutonality of the law
Of 1856 lust referred to in any case which
has gone to the Supreme Court of tho
United States for final adjudication, and
the proposed law is simply an amendment
of the law Of 1885, reducing the tax on un-
colored oleomargarine and increasing it on
that which has been colored in senblancc
of butter. The nearest approach of the
court to that question that has come to
my knowledge is contained in the case of
in re Kollock in which the Supreme Court
uses this language
The act is on it's face an act for levy
ate in SO doing to prevent deception in
the sale of oleomargarine as and for
butter, it's primary object must be as
sumed to be the raising of revenue,
and considered as a revenue
act, the designation of the stamps,
marks. and brands Is merely dis
charge Of an administrative function.
etc.
l do not know I say. that the question
has ever been directly raised under that
statute, but the constitutionality of the
act is evidently assumed by the court In
he decision to which / have just eff errei.
Mr. President, there is in the United
States the greatest market for butter
which the world affords The people OF
the United States have been educated to
the use of butter. They know its history
They know its character. They know it's
quality. Ever since the time mentioned by
the eloquent senator from Iowa CHR. Dol
liver, when Abraham welcomed the angels
that came TO visit him by bringing forth
butter ful their refreshment, down to the
present time. butter. the product of milk,
has been known to the world as one of the
most choice and valued articles of food
Stimulated by the example of the senator
from Iowa. | consulted my Bible believ-
ing there was another reference to butter
that was even more significant than the
he referred TO and found that the grand
old pronhct Isaiah the man who thought
with God, and who. looking 800 years in o
tho future saw the coming Of the Son of
God and exclaimed:
BEHOLD n virgin shall conceive, and
boar = son and shall call his name
Immanucl