Evening star., 1948-03-20
By Chalmers M. Roberts

fIHS Is LHe SecODG OF L1oO GTIacteS on Lne
butter margarine fghtJ
The fact that renewed imports Of coconut
oil (and of copra from which the oil Is pressed
might result in cheaper pound of margarine
for the American housewife apparently failed tt
enter anybodys mind at the hearings before
the House Agriculture Committee.
All sides agreed, in public protestations, thai
they favor "the free enterprise system" and
"the free competitive system" They just want
to protect themselves against unfair compe-
tition.
Or, as Howard Roache of Iowa, one Of the
American Soybean Association representatives
told the committee:
1--WE don't want to be in a position where
some Hottentot in the Orient can shinny up a
tree to pick q cheaper OIL"
The State Department, which Is supposed to
look out for our interests in relation to foreign
nations, sent the House Agriculture Committee
a letter protesting clauses in many of the
margarine tax repeal bills which would exclude
coconut oil as an Ingredient
The State Departments protest was put in
the record in the last minute of the f1ve-day
hearing by Chairman Hope, Republican, of
Kansas.
The National Association of Margarine
Manufacturers has been for outright repeal of
all Federal taxes on margarine. But it swung
over to position where it now is backing a
bill which would reduce the 10-cent tax on
colored margarine to the same quarter cent
now levied on the uncolored type. This bill
was sponsored by Representative Corbett, a
Republican whose district includes thousands
of mill workers and other heavy industry
employees in and around Pittsburgh.
Foreign Oil Use Resisted.
The Corbett bill would keep the tax at 10
cents on any margarine containing any foreign
oil-meaning, of course, coconut oil. If any
bill can now be forced out Of the Agriculture
Committee by the petition method, 1t is the
Corbett bill
The soybean group said emphatically it
favors "the Corbett bill and no other" Mr.
Truitt Of the margarine organization testif ed
that his lobby favors the bill because IF you
can't get whole loaf. you take half loaf"
As a matter of fact, II States now impose
a 10-cent State tax on margarine containing
foreign oils and twelfth State adds 12-
cents-a-pound tax. The cotton States of Texas
and Georgia add the tax-for the obvious bene-
fit Of cottonseed oil.
II the reader Is just consumer of butter
and margarine and thinks this argument has
gotten pretty far from his own concern over
the nuisance caused by the tax on margarine,
he is not the only one. Many of the consumer
groups which are favoring tax repeal have
been muttering at the way the cottonseed and
soybean lobbies are looking out for themselves
first, while crying publicly for the consumer.
Some of the congressional sponsors of re-
peal legislation, it should be pointed out want
complete repeal. Mr.. Poage has stated he
opposes any tax on imported oils. But he is
the exception
Another strange angle to the butter-mar-
garine fight is the attitude of the concerns
which make oleomargarine. There are some Is
in the manufacturing business but witness
from only one OF them appeared at the hear
ing. And he was opposed to repeal of the taxes.
This witness was Wilson F. Douglass, head
OF the chemical laboratories at the Cudahy
Packing Co. 1t turned out that his company
now opposes repeal of the taxes, apparently
because of new competitive factor which
has entered into the margarine business.
The dairy and butter lobby recognizes that