Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1902-02-14
0LE0MARGARINE.
Speech Of Hon. Kittredge Haskins
On the Bill to Regulate and Control
the Sale of Imitation Butter.
delivered i'm the House of Representatives
Tuesday, Feb. t. 1902

delivered in the House of Representatives,
Tuesday, Feb. 4, 1902.
Mr.. Chairman 1t is because / repre-
sent, in part a State whose people are
chiefly engaged i'm agricultural pursuits,
and especially that of dairying, who
have expressed to me, both by petition
and by letters, their strong desire that
legislation affecting the production and
sale of oleomargarine colored in a way
that causes it to look like butter and
sold as butter in competition with the
honest product of the COW, may be en-
acted at this session of Congress that
| ask the indulgence of the committee
for a short time; Legislation which will
protect the farmer and the dairymcn,
who compose the great majority of the
electorate of the United States, who pro-
duce annually 1,5OO,0OO,OO0 pounds of an
honest and legitimate article for con-
sumption and export. which has been
known and called butter ever since ia
cob tended the herds of Laban and Mo-
SEES kept the focks of Jethro, his father
in-law. the priest of INDIAN, and who al
so represent 20 per cent of the wealth of
this country.
There exists in this country to-day a
society known as the Patrons of Hus-
bandry, having a membership of more
than 100000 farmers, representing all po-
litical parties organized for the purpose
dard of that most honorable of all occu-
pations. and for the advancement and
protection of their interests by State and
Federal legislation that Will relieve them
and the products of their labor from
unfair and dishonest competition. This
large society. having its representatives
in every state and territory and repre-
senting in a marked degree the intelli-
gence and wealth of the whole land,
came before our committee in the person
of their chosen chief the Hon. Aaron
Jones. of Indiana, master of the National
Grange, and protested that their incomes
had shrunk by reason that the product
of their farms had been placed in com
petition with adulterated, colored. and
fraudulent articles made in imitation of
the honest product by inscriptions, mon
ey-ma<ing Adventures, and in the name
of the people he represented earnestly
appealed to the Congress TO unite with
the legislatures of the various States in
the Inauguration of system of laws
that will bring every person producing
and selling articles in the markets of the
country up to the plumb line of recti-
tude and honesty
Thrty-two states of the Union, rep
resentng 60.000,0OO of its entire popula-
ton, have already enacted laws forbid
ing the manufacture and sale of oleo-
margarine when made and coored in
imitation of butter. BY repeated de-
cisions of the courts il has been settled
that the state has the power, through its
legislature to control the manufacture
and sale of oleomargarine within its own
borders. To this effect might be cited
several decisions of the Supreme Court
of the United States. the last of which
that has been brought to my attention
is that of The Capital City Dairy Com
panY, plaintiff in error, V. The state of
Ohio eX rel attorney general. decided
January 6, 1902.
1t will be asked. if the State has the
right to protect its citizens against the
| manufacture and sale of a fraudulent
product what is the necessity for inter
venton by Congress? Since the decision
| of the case of Plumley v Massachusetts
| G55 L. s. 46D and that of Schollenber-
ger V. Pennsylvania an L. s., u there
| has been a lack of uniformity of decis-
| ions by the lower courts some judg IS
| holding that the decision of the latter
case overruled that of the former, and
other Judges holding the contrary.
The PlumleY case arose under n stat
ute of the Commonwealth of Massa-
chusetts prohibiting the sale of any sub
stance made in imitation of yellow but
ter produced from pure, unadulterated
milk or cream of the same. and that
| statute contained proViso' that
Nothing herein contained shall be con-
strued to prohibit the manufacture or sale
| of oleomargarine in a separate and dis
| tinct form, and in such manner as will ad-
wise the consumer of its real character
| free from coloration or ingredient that
| causes it to look like butter
Plumley was convicted under that
statute for selling compound known as
| oleomargarine, colored in imitation of
| yellow butter The case was taken tC
| the supreme court of that State, which
| held the statute valid.
| The defence contended that the sta tnto
| was unconstitutional, and brought VI
| the case under a writ of error to the Su-
preme Court of the United States. Ir
| December. 1894 the decision was handed
| down. affirming the judgment of tho
| state court. Justice Harlan. in deliver
| ing the opinion of the court. makes use
| of this very strong and pertinent Ian
| guage:
And yet it is supposed the owners ol
| a compound which has been put in /
| condition to cheat the public into be
| lieving it is a particular article of fooC
| in daily use and eagerly sought for by
people in every condition of life are pro
/ tected by the constitution in making {
| sale of it against the will of the State!
| in which it is offered for sale because o
| the circumstance that it is in an origina
package and had become a subject o
ordinary traffic. We are unwilling Il
accept this view. We are of the opin
| ion that it is within the power of a Stat
| to exclude from its markets any com
| pound manufactured in another Stat
| which has been artiiicially colored o
| aduterated so as to cause it to look lilk
| an article of food in general use, and tn
sale of which may by reason of sucl
cOloration or adulteration cheat the gen
eral public into purchasing that whicl
they may not intend to buy.
THE constitution of the United State
| does not secure to anyone the priVieg