Vernon County censor. [volume] (Viroqua, Wis.) 1865-1955, 1908-01-15
OLEOMAHGARINE
WINS TEST CASE
SUPREME COURT oisAGREEs
WITH FOOD COMMISSIONER.
LEGISLATIVE RESTRICTION
Part of Statute a Restraint Rather
Than an Enlargement of Prohibi-
tory Law-Evidencs Of w. D..
Hoard and J. c. Moore Enormously
Admitted.
Madison. Jan. 9

Madison, Jan. 3.
The state dairy and food depart
ment according to an opinion handed
down by the supreme court yester
day, made mistake in interpreting
a legislative restriction as mrthei
extension of the authority OF the de
partment with respect to the prohibi
zion OF the selling OF oleomargarin,
OF sucn a color that the product is u
imitation OF yellow butter. The case
was decided In favor OF the defend
ANS which had oeen prosecuted By
the dairy and food department, AMI
is victory Tor the oleomargarme
manufacturers who III fact defended
the case.
The supreme court refers TO the
proh. bitory statute and also 10 the
following restriction:
Nothing in this section shall be
construed TO prohibit the manufacture
or sale Of oleomargarine in a sepa-
rate and distinct form aud In such
manner as will advise the consumer oil
its real character aud free from color
alton or ingredient that causes it TO
look like butter
We cannot, declared the court,
consider this as enlarging Il any de.
gree tle prehlbitiye words OF the stat
ute; rather The caution Of the Iegis-
lature so as to forbid the extension OF
the mandate SO as To take in or IN
clude that ssh ch is described as eX.
Guided.
The opinion is yolulninous and dis.
cusses ut great length the various
questions involved In this case It
was conceded by the dairy aud food
conmiss ON that oleomargarine is a
pure and wholesome fat product, al
least the product in question.
Trial Court Erred.
The supreme court holds that the
trial court erred la admitting the tes-
timony Of Ex-Governor w. ID. Hoard
and of J. G. Moore. The court also
erred in .nstructing the jury that al
though the color OF the oleomargarine
was produced solely by its ingredients,
they were to consider the claim made
by the state that the ingredients were
so selected as to make the product
look like butter"
Whether or not the article il in
imitation of yellow butter says the
court, "canr"t be determined alone by
its resemblance to yellow butter, bat
resemblance ded by evidence of the
existence oil u dye as one of the in.
gradients, etc.
The application and Interpretation
OF the nti-oleomargarine law has
been severe in this state and 1t was
held to be unlawful to market any
oleomargar ne. however pure and
wholesome, however carefully labelled
and plainly packaged so that the
buyer could not possibly be deceived
or misinformed as TO the true char
acter of the product. unless the prod
act was practically pure white. Even
though a slight golden or yell0wisb
color was impaired to the product,
not by outer coloring as used law
fully n. all creamery and most
"da ~" butter. but by the natural in
gradients of the oieomargarine. the
sale of the article was held to be
unlawful, under the second portion of
the statute, which the supreme court
now holds is a Legislative restriction
rather than a further extension and
Of the proSlbtory stat
ute