Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1902-02-13
THE 0lEOMARGARlNE BILL.
Speech OF Hon. Kittredge Haskins OF
Vermo ont In the House OF Repre-
sentatives, Monday, Feb. 8. 1902


Verm ont In the House OF Repre-
sentatives, Monday, Feb. 3, 1902
1t is because I represent. in part. a State
whose people are chiefly engaged in agri-
cultural pursuits. and especially that of
dairying. who have expressed to me- both
ny petition and by letters their strons, de-
sire that legislation affecting the produc-
ton and sale Of oeomargarine colored in a
way that causes it to look like butter and
sold as butter in competitor with the hon.
est product of the COW. may Re enacted t
this session of Congress that | ask the in
dulgence of the committee for a short
time: legislation which will protect the
farmer and the dairymen. who compose
the great majority of the electorate CT
the United States, who Fl oduce annually
100000 900 pounds OF an honest and leglti-
mate article for consumption and export,
which has been known and called butter
ever since Jacob tended the herds of La.
ban and Moses kept the fiocks of Jethro.
his father-in-law, the priest of indian. and
who also represent 70 per cent Of the
wealth of this country.
There exists in this country to-day So
ciety known as the Patrors Of HusbandrY,
having a membership of more than 800 zoo
farmers, representing all political parties.
ciganized for the purpose of elevatiny
education, raising the standard of that
riost honorable of all occupations, ard 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 Terri
tory. and representing IN a. marked degree
the intelligence and wealth of the whole
land, came before our committee IN the
pers' n of their chosen chief the Hon.
Aaron Jones of India ma. master OF thA Ma
ucnal Grange. and protested that their in
comes had shrunk by reason hat tn pro l.
uct Cf their farms had been placed in com
petition with adulterated. co,ored and
fraudulent articles made ir imitation Of
the Eonest product by unscrurulous mon
ey-Ta king adNonturers, and in the name
of the pee pie he represented earnestly ap-
pcaled to the Congress to unite with the
legislatures of the various States IN the
naueuration of 4 systeIT. Of laws that will
bring every person producing and selling
articles ir the markets of the country up
to the plumb line Of rectitude 3nd honesty.
Thirty-two states of the Urion. repre-
senting G0,Oo 900 of its entire population
Lave already enacted laws fOrbiddins che
manufacture and sale of olcomargarine
when made aud colored in imitation Ct
butter BY repeated decisions of the
coults 1t has been settled that the State
has the power, through it's legislature. to
control the manufacture and sale of oco-
margarine within its own borders. TO this
.
the Supreme Court of the United States.
tho last of which that has been brought to
my attention is that of The CAPITAL City
Dairy company, pl"ntiT in error. vs.. The
State of Ohio ex rel. attorney general, de-
Cided January s, 1902
1t will be asked, IL tho state has the
right to protect it's citizens against the
manufacture and sale of a fraudulent
product, what is tho necessity for inter-
Nention by C,lcrcss" Since the decision
OF the case of Plumley VS. Massachusetts,
d5I L. s., 46D and that of Schollen5rrgrr
vs. Pennsylvania on L. s., y there has
been a lack of uniformitv of decisions by
the lower counts some Judges holding that
tho decision of the latter case ovcrruled
that OF the former. and ether judges hold
ing the contrary.
The Plumey case arose under a statute
of the commonwealth of Massachusetts,
prohibiting the sale of sny substance IN ade
In imitation OF yellow butter produced
from pure, uladulterated milk
Piumley was convicted under that stat.
ute for selling compound known as oleo-
margarine, colored in imitation of yellow
butter The case was taken to the SuoreIne
Court of that State, which held the stat
ute valid
The defense contcnded that the statute
was unconstitutional, and brought up the
case under a writ of error to the supreme
Court Of the United States. In December
1891. the de cision was HANGED down, Affirm
ine tho judgment of the State court Jus
tice Harlan in delivering the opinion of
the court said
The Constitution Of the Tritrl
States does not secure to anyone the
privilege Of dofralding the public The
deception against which the statute of
Massachusetts is aimed is an onensa
against society. The States are as
competent &c protect the people against
such offense3 or wrongs as they are TO
protect them against crimes or wrongs
Of a more serious character. and this
protection may be given without in
frnging the right of the general gov
ernment. A state enactment forbdding
the sale of deceitful limitations of ar
ticles of food in general use among the
people does not abridge any privilege
secured to citizens of the United States,
nor in any just sense interfere with the
freedom of commerce among the sew
eral States"
1t Is now claimed by the friends of oleo-
margarine that the Plumley case, or the
decision in that case, so fsr as 1t related to
the question of interstate commerce, was
expressly overruled by the majority of the
court IN the more recent case of Schollen-
berger vs.. Pennsylvania In the opinion
handed down We find the following lam
9uaPe with reference to the Importation
OF product Of another State into the
state of Pennsylvania:
I'VE hold mat. In the absence of Con-
gre ssional permission to do so, the stat /,
had no power to interfere by seizure or
any action in prohibition OF importation
and sale by the foreign or non resident inn
porter"
This apparent, though to my mind un-
real, CONFLICT in the decision of our highest
judicial tribunal has led up to good deal
of conflict OF opinion with lawyers and
courts in the administrator of our State
oleomargariEe laws.
| And il is by reason of this conflict Of
crinion amorg lawyers and this apparent
conflict of decisions BY the courts ana the
difficulty experienced in enforcing the
4 State laws in certain cases where the
principle of interstate commerce is in
VOWED, rhat the friends of hone st coed =
those who believe that TIE manufacture
| and sale OF an imitation product or arti-
| Gle OF food is n cheat and a fraud, and IN
the language tf Justice Harlan in the
Pluinley case, lis an offense against soci-
Iety''-have come to Congress. and invoke