and which enforced would fully protect us both as producers and consumers of butter.

Let me call your attention to two laws passed at the session of 1881:

[Act No. 254, Laws 1881.]

213. SEC. 4. No person shall mix any glucose or grape sugar with syrup, honey, or sugar intended for human food, or any oleomargarine, suine, beef fat, lard, or any other foreign substance, with any butter or cheese intended for human food, or shall mix or mingle any glucose or grape sugar or oleomargarine with any article of food, without distinctly marking, stamping, or labeling the article, or the package containing the same, with the true and appropriate name of such article, and the percentage in which glucose or grape sugar, oleomargarine, or suine, enter into its composition; nor shall any person sell, or offer for sale, or order or permit to be sold, or offered for sale, any such food into the composition of which glucose, or grape sugar, or oleomargarine, or suine has entered, without at the same time informing the buyer of the fact, and the proportions in which such glucose or grape sugar, oleomargarine, or suine has entered into its composition.-§9327.

214. SEC. 5. Any person convicted of violating any provision of any of the foregoing sections of this act shall be fined not more than fifty dollars or imprisoned in the county jail not exceeding three months.-§9328.

215. SEC. 6. It is hereby made the duty of the prosecuting attorneys of this State to appear for the people and to attend to the prosecution of all complaints under this act in all the courts in their respective counties.-§9329.

DECEPTION IN THE SALE OF BUTTER.

Act No. 34, laws of 1881, entitled "An Act for the protection of dairymen, and to prevent deception in sales of butter."

225. SECTION 1. The People of the State of Michigan enact, That every person who shall manufacture for sale, or who shall offer or expose for sale, by the tub, firkin, box, or package, or any greater quantity, any article or substance in semblance of butter not the legitimate product of the dairy, and not made exclusively of milk or cream, but into which the oil or fat of animals not produced from milk enters as a component part, or into which melted butter, or any oil thereof has been introduced to take the place of cream, shall distinctly and durably stamp, brand, or mark upon the top and also upon the side of every such tub, firkin, box, or package of such article or substance, the word "Oleomargarine," if such article or substance is composed in part of suet or tallow, or the word "Butterine," if such article or substance is composed in part of lard, where it can be plainly seen, in Roman letters which shall be burned on, or printed there on with permanent black paint, in a straight line, and each letter shall be not less than one inch in length; and in case of retail sales of such articles or substance, in parcels, the seller shall in all cases sell, or offer, or expose the same for sale from a tub, firkin, box, or package stamped, branded, or marked, as herein stated, and shall also deliver therewith to the purchaser a printed label bearing the plainly printed word "Oleomargarine," or "Butterine," as the same may be, with the name of the manufacturer in Roman letters not less than one-half inch in length, which shall be printed in a straight line; and every sale of such article or substance by tub, firkin, box, or package, or in any greater quantity not so stamped, branded, or marked as "Oleomargarine" or "Butterine," as the same may be, and every

sale of such article or substance at retail in parcels that shall not be sold from a tub, firkin, box, or package so stamped, branded, or marked, or without delivery of a label therewith as above stated, is declared to be unlawful and void, and no action upon any contract shall be maintained in any of the courts of this State to recover upon any contract for the sale of any such article or substance not so stamped, branded, marked, labeled, or sold.-§2245.

226. SEC. 2. Every person who shall sell, or offer, or expose for sale, or who shall cause or procure to be sold, offered, or exposed for sale, by the tub, firkin, box, or package, or in any greater quantity, any article or substance required by the first section of this act to be stamped, branded, or marked, that shall not be so stamped, branded, or marked, or in case of retail sales in parcels, every person who shall sell, or offer or expose for sale, or who shall cause or procure to be sold, offered or exposed for sale, any article or substance required by the first section of this act to be sold, offered, or exposed for such sale from a tub, firkin, box, or package, stamped, branded, or marked, and labeled as therein stated, contrary to the provisions of said section, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than ten nor more than one hundred dollars, and the costs of prosecution, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than five nor more than thirty days, or by both such fine and imprisonment for each and every offense.-82246.

The provisions of these two acts seem ample protection to the dairy interests, but like all prohibitory laws they must be enforced by those mainly interested. Most persons do not dream that there are such laws in existence. During a conversation with an enterprising groceryman the other day (who deals out butterine over his counter as butter), I called his attention to the unlawful practice. He replied, with some heat, that there was no such law and never had been. While we have these useful yet unused laws on our statute books, let me turn your attention to a neighboring dairy State where this butter adulteration question has begun to be agitated, and where at present no laws restricting its manufacture and sale exist. I quote the following_from the annual report of Secretary McGliney, of the Elgin, Ill., Board of Trade, issued Jan. 2, 1885:

Elgin still occupies the proud position of being the leading butter market of the Union, and quantity considered, produces more fine butter than any other section in the United States. So important has this market become that merchants in all the cities invariably wait and watch for the reports from the Elgin Board of Trade before making heavy purchases. It is conceded that the established price here governs the other markets to a very great degree, and there is every probability that it will continue to do so.

An examination of the table published below will reveal the fact that butter has ruled very low, and that on some sale days there was scarcely any sold. This could not possibly have resulted from a falling off in the quality, as it is uniformly admitted that the quality has been good all through the year, and especially during those months when the farmers were feeding more grain than at any other periods; during the fall when butter should have been high it ruled comparatively low.

ADULTERATION.

We must look, then, for some other cause, and we do not hesitate to say that in a large measure it is due to the immense quantity of adulterated butter

which has been made and sold in competition with fine creamery butter. Some may deny this statement, but the burden of proof is against them, and those who are in a position to know, but who are not guilty of deceiving the people by selling an unwholesome compound, state most unequivocally that adulterated butter is responsible in a large measure for the low price of the genuine creamery product. That being true, what will the manufacturers and dairy farmers do to protect their own interests, and what will the people do to prevent these soulless sharks from palming off upon them a substitute for butter which is neither clean or wholesome? Will they appeal to the Legislature, as has been done by the people of Vermont, New York, and Missouri, or will they sit idly down and be robbed of the fruits of their labor, which has required an immense outlay of capital and years of patient toil to bring up to a standard when it would be remunerative? That is a question for them to settle for themselves, and it should be settled speedily. The Legislature will soon be in session, and let its aid be invoked as has been done in other States. If this is not done, dairymen can prepare to retire from the business, because they cannot buy feed and produce milk at such low prices as it has brought the past season. Live cows cannot compete with dead hogs.

Secure the passage of a stringent law prohibiting the manufacture and sale of adulterated butter and better prices will be the result. Without such a law Illinois becomes the dumping ground for every oleomargarine and butterine factory in the country, and the dairy interest, which has done so much to build up the State, will disappear, and our farmers will be forced to seek other means of securing a livelihood.

The dairymen of Illinois are evidently awakened to the fact that war must be made on fraudulent butter. Undoubtedly their Legislature, at the present session, will enact laws similar to ours, and, judging from the tone of Mr. McGliney's report, they will not lack proper enforcement. If this is done, we may expect the tide of butterine to set in this direction, and Michigan will be the dumping ground of all Chicago butter substitutes, besides being well supplied with those produced within her own borders. It is apparent, then, that our laws restricting these frauds must be enforced.

At the last session of the N. Y. Legislature a most stringent act against butter adulteration was passed. The first section of the act reads as follows: "No person shall manufacture out of any oleaginous substance or substances, or any compound of the same other than that produced from unadulterated milk, or cream from the same, any article designed to take the place of butter or cheese produced from pure, unadulterated milk, or cream from the same, or shall sell or offer for sale the same as an article of food."

This act went into effect the first of last June. To insure its proper enforcement, a State Dairy Commissioner was appointed whose duty it is to enter complaints and secure convictions against both the manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers of this class of goods.

The new laws also compel every person selling butter outside of the county where it is produced to brand the package with the place of production and the name of the producer.

These stringent laws were passed after a very thorough investigation by the Legislative committee, in which they took evidence both from the manufacturers and the dealers. Among other similar testimony, one dealer stated that in his opinion half the material sold as butter during the past winter in New York City, were these adulterated substitutes. The investigation also brought out the fact that the shipment of adulterated butter to England had been largely practiced and was beginning to injure the market for American butter; and unless the miserable traffic was stopped this foreign market would be destroyed.

Is the act constitutional? Are they deceptive? How can you detect the adulterations? To illustrate this point, I must relate two incidents of what has been done with butterine :

During the past summer a farmer with his lumber wagon called regularly once a week at the butterine factory and purchased quite a quantity of the material. Coming as he did with such clock-like regularity, the manufacturers concluded to watch their customer and see what disposal he made of his purchase. Driving up to a grocery and taking his wife on board he then proceeded to the residence streets, and going from house to house, retailed his butterine as fresh dairy butter just in from the country, getting a little extra price "cause my wife, she made it, and she's a mighty good hand on butter." This the farmer had done successfully for over a month and might be doing to this day if the manufacturers had not refused to supply him with the stuffthis species of cheating being too much for their sensitive natures.

And now another similar case:

Last October the Central Michigan Agricultural Society, at their annual fair in Lansing, offered a premium for best and second best samples of roll butter. The committee of award was made up of three very competent judges of butter. There was one sample that two of the committee agreed was nearly good enough for first place; but second place it should have anyway. It was entered by an old maid living about four miles from the city, and known to be a good butter maker. The third member of the award committee was a gentleman (in the grocery business) who, as he said to me, could tell butterine when he saw it. He insisted on rejecting the sample sent by the old maid, as not being butter. The other two members of the committee protested that they could not be mistaken, but the gentleman remaining inflexible they took his advice and threw it out of consideration in awarding the prizes. A subsequent investigation brought out the fact that the enterprising butterine men

had bribed this ancient maiden to enter a sample of their goods for the prize, and had it not been for the presence of this butterine expert on the committee it would have taken the second prize at least as dairy butter.

You will meet butterine in first class hotels and restaurants, and you will eat it with relish and without suspicion of what it really is.

The question is, then, how can it be ordinarily be detected?

With oleomargarine and butterine containing any great amount of tallow, the crumbly appearance is quite a sure indication. With both butterine and oleomargarine there is an almost entire lack of grain-nothing approaching the waxy consistency of first class butter.

Upon melting these materials, it is usually the case that a higher temperature is required and it takes longer to melt up to a clear solution than with pure butter. When either substitute is eaten upon hot cakes or hot biscuit there is a peculiar grease taste left in the mouth that no pure butter ever creates. A test which is recommended for its comparative certainty and ease of application is to fill the mouth with ice-water and retain it until the roof of the mouth is cooled down below the normal blood heat. Then taking a piece of buttered cracker, with the suspected material used, into the mouth, the oleomargarine or butterine will be detected by the grease taste and by sticking to the roof of the mouth. The sample examined by this method should be warmed until it is quite soft before being spread on the cracker and tasted. Another method is to melt up the suspected article in a little lamp or case, insert a wick, ignite it, and after it has burned for five minutes or more, extinguish the light. If tallow is present, the characteristic oder of a smoking candle-wick will be emitted.

Chemically, there are quite a number of tests which will determine the adulteration of butter with either tallow or lard with great certainty, but, unfortunately, they are not of easy application, but require considerable skill in manipulation to secure certain results.

As long as the dairy had to compete against oleomargarine alone, it was comparatively safe, for only a limited amount of the oleo or more fluid portion of beef suet can be used in its manufacture, and the total product cannot therefore be very large. But with butterine the case is decidedly different. A skillfully made imitation that, as shown, cannot readily be detected even by good judges of butter, composed of lard, the supply of which is limitless, the dairyman of to-day must fight this battle against butterine, and fight it to win or go out of business.

I have estimated that the influence of butterine on the market has depreciated the price so that the farmer has received throughout the year one cent per pound less than he would otherwise have obtained. Supposing that we have produced in this State this year the same number of pounds of butter that we did in 1880 when the census was taken (that amount is 38,821,890 pounds), then the total loss to the farmers of this State from the illegal sale of butterine and substances of its nature is $388,218.90.

Supposing that the law as it now stands is enforced, what difference will it make?

Under the first act, which I have read, the per cent of lard and tallow will appear branded on the package in which the stuff is packed. This will have the effect to discourage people from buying it.

Then under the second act, when the material has to be constantly labelled "butterine or oleomargarine as the case may be," in its passage through the