The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-10-05
UNCLE SAM SEXES
'WATEREO' BUTTER
LOCAL COMMISSION MERCHANT
ovERHAULED SIMULTANEOUSLY
BY STATE AND NATION -
CURIOUS COINCIDENCE
WORKING INDEPENDENTLY OFF,
GERS FIND TECHNICAL VIOLA
TIoN-BUTTER CAME FROM
NORTH CAROLINA.
CURIOUS COINCIDENCE

ing him with a violation of the law
in selling butter not up to standard
required by statute and fined SIS. Will
liam F. Gravins, a Richmond commits
sion merchant. now finds himself fac
ing a violation Of q similar federal
law which carries a. maximum fine
of $1,000.
1t was really a curious coincidence
that without knowledge of each
others moEemnts, State and fed
eral authorities descended upon Mr.
Gravtns' butter about the same time.
Ihe sleuths from Colonel w. II. Chap
mans office really spotted the viola
ton first, but Uncle Sans wheels turn
slower than the States an.. hence
the sequel Colonel Chapman's de-
putty secured samples of the butter
ana an Shipped 1t to the department at
washington. The report of the
analysis of the butter came back YES
teroay showing that the butter ranged
from 36 to over so per cent water.
Inc FEDERAL statutes provide that but
Ter containing more than 16 per cent
water Is subject to a tax of 10 cents
pound and maker and seller are ia
Die TO Hne or Imprisonment or both.
IN other words Uncle sam puts wa
tered butter In the same class with
the unstamped oleeomargarine ana
7 imposes the same penalty
state Lands First.
IN the meantime the State dairy
ana FOOD commission department
somehow got wind OF The butter Mr..
IraVlns was offering for sale and q.
u. Furceli, assistant commissioner.
sWore cut a warrant for him for vio-
/ I4tlnR tho 70.
warrant was served Friday.
Mr.. Grayins was hailed h.faEA- las.
| tee John Crutehhel6 yesterday morn.
ing and fined s25. In the meantim.
olhcers from the internal revenue de.
partment yesterday smoeprd tfayss.
upon Mr.. Gravins' place, at 20 South
thirteenth street, and seized loo
pounds of the alleged "waterea'.
butter. While no federal warrant has
| been issued for Mr. rayins-,t is-rp.
darstead that he viii have II f.xT,1aIf
now come" he was handling bntter
"hlch comes under the ban of the
| law. NV
! IN Justice Crutchfieids court yes
,o'uaF MI GraVins explained that the
pu'ter IN question was what is known
40 pachlhg STOCK and was never sold
TO the local trade. 1t was Skinned
1
North where the water is eliminated
and the prduet sold at good prices,
Fifty Per Cent Water.
state Chemist Nasrlder u.ho
ahaiyzed the questionable butter Sc
cured the samples, however. from n
local firm of commission merchants
who bought it-200 pounds of it
from Mr. Gravins. Mr.. Magruder's
.s agreed with the analysis of
tne government chemist. only Mr..
Magruder evidently got hold of Tho
worst of the lot He testified that all
ne tested contained more than so per
cent OF water. while the analysis of
the government chemist showed that
or three samples the per cent of water
ranged from SO per cent to 50.12
per cent.
The chemist explained that one
would have TO buy three pounds of
butter to secure two pounds of but
Ter containing the necessary con-
sutuents. While the law regulating
the grade of butter that NAV he sold
! imposes a. tax. it is in reality a purc
FOOD law. the extra tax Of ten cent;
imposed when it does not come nm
TO requirements being q deterrent To
aduteration of any kind The law is
broad and sweeping and cove~s ey-
cess of water and any foreign sub
stance which may be used to adul~
terate 1t or reduce the required
amount of pure butter fat-namely
"a per cent.
From North Carolina.
As in the case when oIeomargarine
Is seized by the federal authorities If
IS presumed that the watered butter
VIII be destroyed The shipment. IL
lSsald.-e-aIne~ Eaa-4Nertfr- Wilkes
boro, \. c., and was sent to Afr
Gravins to be sold on commission
for the maker hence the Richmond
man will not lose by the transaction.
colonel Chapman gave out this in
formation yesterday, and stated that
he had no idea that Mr.. Gravins in
tentionally violated the law and sold
the butter knowing that it was
'watered, but the statute was plain
and with the discovery of the fact
that 1t was inferior and under tn.
ban there was nothing else to do bIn
seize 1t. the law holding both the
maker and the seller liable for the
violation.
The fact that both the State ana
federal authorities had been working
up the same case without each other q
knowledge. and that the State had
fallen upon the guilty butter first was
a matter of some comment and con-
siderable amusement around the fed
aty,1~ Iaxr