The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-01-31
bUTTER|NE TAX IS
BLOW To CONSUMER
RICHMOND DEALER PROTESTS
AGAINST MEASURE INTRO
DUCED IN HOUSE.

Reasons why dealers In butterire
and oieomargarine should not be fur
Their taxed are very forcibiy and in
lterestingly set out in a communica-
ton from George McSweeney. Eso
proprietor OF large Richmond house
handling these products.
/ Thousands OF families in the cities
are compelled to make use OF butter
substitutes or eat their bread dry
owing to the high prices of genuine
butter, and IL is this view of the stu
alton that MIR. Mcsweeney sets out
as follows:
| "A blu has been introduced by Del
egate Robertson, OF NORTHAMPTON.
providing for a special tax on but
Itertne or oleomargerine. It states
that manufacturers shall pay annually
a tax of s25 where the business done
lis not more than $4,000. and $40 ad-
ditional for every $1,000 per annum.
/ 1T also calls for a tax OF $40 on
all who engage in the sale of same.
Conducting q public restaurant, eat
iing house or hotel.
! If this is allowed to become A
law IL viii prohibit all boarding
houses and colleges in the State from
serving this article on their tables,
unless they pay the extra tax
| There is an extra tax on the re-
on coiored. and fifty cents per month
on uncolored. to handle this produce.
and this should be sufficient
. "Butterfne is sold strictly on it's
merit. and every pound that the rner-
chants sell is stamped with the word
"oleomargerine" on the package, so
there can be no deception, and the
consumer knows Just what he is pur-
chasing.
! "Buuerine is made strictly under
Government supervision. and every
pound that is manufactured is testa
as to its purity. Furthermore. il IA
impossible to make salable butterIne
In IA place that is not spotless. because
the ingredients are so easily tainted.
Under these conditions impure
butterine Is practically an imposs.-
/ bility. Can this much be said OF
butterT
/ Butter Would BE Out OF Reach.
! IF 1t were not for butterine the
average city householder would not
be able to have butter on his table.
1 for the price would be so high he
would have to do without it. and In
stead OF creamery butter retailing at
forty cents per pound (butterine at
twenty cents per pound). as 1t is now,
I II would be eighty ceuts to ST. This
can be easily understood when you
stop to consider that the output OF
buttcrine for Chicago alone for the
month OF December was la734.67s
pounds. and with the output Of many
other cities. you can readily see that
/ 1t runs away up into the millions OF
pounds Take this amount of but
certne out OF the market and the price
Of butter would be far out of reach
of the average household. thus d.
priving them OF this necessity.
| When the Government put spc-
cial tax on colored oleomargerine, In
1906, the cry was that 1t was done to
protect the farmer This was not SO;
1t was to protect the butter interests.
In an investigation held by the Gov
eminent a few months ago, the fact
was established that the butter inter.
ests met every Thursday and decided
ION price. AT which all buffers were
to be sold the coming week
This same interest, In statement
! In one OF their papers. stated that o
have the bill passed, imposing a. sf4--
cfal tax Of ten cents per pound on
colored oleomargerine, the same
shade as creamery, they paid $4,000
900. Why did they spend this
amount OF money! Was 1t for tho
fun Of itT No. 1t was done so they
could have things their own way and
charge exhorbitant prices for their
product
This law caused the consumer to
add thirty or forty cents per week
moro to his living expenses when Il
could have been put to some other
good cause. Instead OF adding more
to the cost OF living, do you not think
! 1t our duty to all work to have this
ta xtaken off. and allow the goods to
be sold as other foods?
| "Why does every State institution
in this State use butterine exclusively.
also every Government institution in
this country? The answer Is very
plain. First, because II is cheaper
Secondly. because II Is pure, whoi>
some and recommended as such by
all those who have made a study OF
pure foods Then. II 1t is pure ana
wholesome. why tax 1t out of ~xis-
Itence7 The trouble Ia. there are too
many who are willing to condemn an
article without first going to the
trouble to find out its merits.
Not a Hardship.
Does the butterine business cause
Ia hardship on the faNner? Without
stopping to 90 into details. we would
naturally say II does, but after max
Ing q study Of the facts and consider
that everything from which butterine
IL churned comes from the soil. viz
milk. cream, neutroleo. or honey Of
tho cattle salt and water, we are con-
vinced that IL is q benefit instead or \
hardship.
III the farmer will take the pains
and make butter that IL palatable n~
-