path: root/78261-0.txt

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78261 ***




Transcriber’s Note: Italicized text is surrounded by underscores:
_italics_.




                       Issued October 28, 1907.

                   U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

               BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY.--CIRCULAR 117.

                    A. D. MELVIN, CHIEF OF BUREAU.

                     A CITY MILK AND CREAM CONTEST

                       AS A PRACTICAL METHOD OF
                      IMPROVING THE MILK SUPPLY.

                                  BY

                          C. B. LANE, B. S.,
               _Assistant Chief of the Dairy Division_,

                                  AND

                             IVAN C. WELD,
                 _Assistant Dairyman, Dairy Division_.

                      [Illustration: (colophon)]

                              WASHINGTON:

                      GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.

                                 1907.




                        LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.


                           U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
                                BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY,
                                 _Washington, D. C., August 29, 1907_.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a manuscript entitled “A
City Milk and Cream Contest as a Practical Method of Improving the
Milk Supply,” by C. B. Lane, assistant chief of the Dairy Division,
and Ivan C. Weld, assistant dairyman in that division, and recommend
its publication as Circular 117 of this Bureau.

In view of the widespread interest now being taken in the production
of pure, clean, and wholesome milk, the contest described in this
paper, which was held at Cleveland, Ohio, is of especial significance
at this time. The results have been decidedly beneficial, and it is
believed that similar contests in other cities would be productive of
much good.

Because of the prevalence and danger of tuberculosis among dairy cows
and the importance of the tuberculin test as a means of detecting
and eradicating the disease, some information regarding Cleveland’s
experience with this test and some suggestions for the eradication of
tuberculosis have been included in the paper.

The thanks of the Department of Agriculture are extended to Dr. H.
G. Sherman and Mr. Howard Strong, of the Chamber of Commerce of
Cleveland, and Dr. C. W. Eddy, chief of the inspection division of
the public health department, for valuable cooperation and assistance
which contributed very largely to the success of the milk contest.
Acknowledgment is also made to the Cleveland press for bringing the
matter to the attention of the dairymen and the public in general
through the columns of the papers.

      Respectfully,                           A. D. MELVIN,
                                                    _Chief of Bureau_.

        HON. JAMES WILSON,
            _Secretary of Agriculture_.




                              CONTENTS.


                                                                 Page.

  The first national milk and cream exhibit                          5

  State contests                                                     5

  The first city dairy contest                                       6

      Conditions of entry                                            7

      Judges                                                         7

      Medals                                                         8

      Letter to dairymen                                             8

      Scoring the milk and cream                                     9

      The dairy-farm contest                                        14

      Principal defects found                                       16

  Value of the contest to Cleveland                                 17

  The value of milk contests                                        18

      Value to the producer                                         18

      Value to the dealer                                           19

      Value to the consumer                                         19

  Application of the Cleveland plan to other cities                 19

  Extracts from addresses                                           20

  Cleveland’s experience with the tuberculin test                   23

  Importance of the tuberculin test                                 25

  Methods for eradicating tuberculosis                              26

      Eradication of tuberculosis from the farm                     26

      State aid for the eradication of tuberculosis                 27




             A CITY MILK AND CREAM CONTEST AS A PRACTICAL
                 METHOD OF IMPROVING THE MILK SUPPLY.




              THE FIRST NATIONAL MILK AND CREAM EXHIBIT.


The first milk and cream contest in this country was held in
connection with the National Dairy Show in Chicago, under the
direction of the Dairy Division, Bureau of Animal Industry,
Department of Agriculture, February 15-24, 1906.

The object of the contest was, first, educational; second, to
determine the possibilities in the handling and keeping of milk and
cream produced under sanitary conditions and kept cold; third, to
test a score card for rating fairly and accurately this class of
dairy products. Much interest was shown in this contest from the
beginning, and exhibits were sent from thirteen different States.
The results were most gratifying, one of the most striking being the
demonstration of the fact that clean milk, held at a low temperature,
could be shipped a thousand miles across the country and kept sweet
for a period of over five weeks.

It was further demonstrated that milk and cream could be scored with
reasonable accurateness for flavor, chemical qualities, keeping
qualities, etc., where a certain number of points were given to each.

A full report of this contest is given in Bulletin 87 of the Bureau
of Animal Industry.




                            STATE CONTESTS.


Since the national contest was held several States have had similar
exhibits in connection with the State dairy association meetings.
Among them may be mentioned New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
and Massachusetts. These contests have proved of great benefit to
dairymen, particularly in pointing out defects in the product and in
the styles of bottles used, and suggesting remedies for the same.
One of the most common defects in milk, and one which can readily be
seen, is the foreign matter in the bottom of the bottle, consisting
usually of particles of manure, hair, bedding, etc. The presence
of dirt indicates careless and uncleanly methods in production and
handling. Another common defect is off-flavored milk, which may
be due to a variety of causes, as (1) to feeding strong-flavored
foods, such as turnips, garlic, etc.; (2) to feeding certain foods
to excess, as, for example, silage; (3) to odors of silage or manure
in the stable; (4) to particles of manure and dirt getting into the
milk, and (5) to not properly rinsing the bottles after using washing
powders. Dairymen as a rule have been quick to see these defects
when pointed out and to appreciate the importance from a business
standpoint of producing milk as nearly perfect as possible.




                     THE FIRST CITY DAIRY CONTEST.


In view of the success of the national contest and those of several
States, it was thought that the plan might be applicable to cities.
Steps were therefore taken to give it a trial. As the city of
Cleveland had already adopted the Dairy Division score card for
rating dairy farms, and as this city was making a special effort
to improve conditions in the dairies and the quality of its milk
supply, arrangements were made with the Chamber of Commerce to
conduct the contest under its auspices. This organization looked
after the printing of the entry blanks, score cards, and letters to
dairymen and mailing the same; furnished the hall for the meetings
and laboratories for the chemical and bacteriological work; offered
medals for the best milk and cream and the best dairy farms, and also
furnished one judge. The Dairy Division performed the chemical and
bacteriological work and supplied two judges. Some 400 producers of
milk for the Cleveland market were present at an all-day conference,
when addresses on timely subjects were given by representatives
from the Department of Agriculture and the Cleveland Chamber of
Commerce, extracts from which are given elsewhere in this article.
Many questions were asked by the dairymen present, which resulted in
valuable discussions.

There were three classes in the contest, as follows:

_Class I. Market milk (raw)._--This comprised all milk not
“certified” or sold under any guaranty as to its quality. A very
large percentage of the milk supplied to our cities is of this
character. It was specified that it must not be pasteurized or
contain preservatives.

_Class II. Market cream (raw)._--It was specified that this product
should be sweet, unpasteurized, and free from preservatives.

_Class III. Dairy farms._--All dairymen having exhibits of milk or
cream in the above classes were permitted to enter the dairy-farm
contest. These farms were visited by the judges and scored on the
basis of a score card (see page 14).


                         CONDITIONS OF ENTRY.

Entry blanks were prepared for both milk and cream, but as they were
quite similar only the one for milk is presented here:

  [Dairy meeting and milk and cream contest, Cleveland, Ohio, March
    16, 1907, under the direction of the Dairy Division, Bureau of
          Animal Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture.]

                         OFFICIAL ENTRY BLANK.

                      CLASS 1. MARKET MILK (RAW).

  P. O. address: ----, ----.                       Date: ----, 1907.

  C. B. LANE,
     _Assistant Chief, Dairy Division_:

  Please enter for me 6 quarts of milk to compete for prizes
  offered by the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce, March 16, 1907, in
  accordance with the conditions herein prescribed.

    (Signed)    ---- ----.

  Rules: (1) Exhibitors are allowed to make only one entry in each
  class. This must include in Class I 6 quarts of milk in bottles
  (quarts or pints), placed in a box suitable for shipping. (2)
  The milk to be the property of the United States Department of
  Agriculture. (3) Every exhibitor is required to fill out and sign
  the following certificate:

  I, ---- ----, hereby certify that the milk entered in this
  competition is a fair sample of the product sold by me, that it
  is free from preservatives, and that it has not been pasteurized
  or sterilized.

                                             (Signed)     ---- ----.
                                             (Proprietor) ---- ----.


                            HOW TO COMPETE.

  Milk to compete for prizes must be sent by express or otherwise
  from station nearest the producer direct to C. B. Lane, assistant
  chief, Dairy Division, care Cleveland Chamber of Commerce,
  Cleveland, Ohio. Express charges on exhibits must be paid to
  destination.

  The package should be plainly addressed on outside; a card should
  also be tacked on box inside, giving plainly sender’s name and
  address, so as to avoid mistakes in identifying packages.

  In order that the milk entered by the exhibitors may be of the
  same age when scored, it is hereby specified that it shall be
  drawn from the cow March 11, and shipped by express or otherwise
  as soon thereafter as possible.

  A representative of the Department will be on hand to take charge
  of the milk on its arrival and will see that it is properly cared
  for.

  Only these official entry blanks, furnished by the Dairy
  Division, will be accepted.


                QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED BY EXHIBITORS.

  1. Give date and hour when this milk was drawn from the cow: ----.

  2. Give place, date, and hour at which this milk was delivered to
  the express company or otherwise shipped: ----.

  3. Does this milk fairly represent the average product of your
  herd in quality and cleanliness? ----.

  4. How was the milk treated from the time it was drawn from the
  cow until shipped? ----.

  5. Do you wish to compete for the dairy-farm prize? ----.

  Remarks: ----.


                                JUDGES.

It was arranged to give the products exhibited, as well as the dairy
farms in the contest, the most careful examination possible, so that
the final results would be beyond question; and it may be said that
the dairymen generally expressed themselves as well pleased with the
absolute fairness with which the contest was conducted. The judges
were C. B. Lane, assistant chief of the Dairy Division; Ivan C. Weld,
assistant dairyman, Dairy Division, and Dr. C. W. Eddy, chief of the
inspection division, public health department, Cleveland.


                                MEDALS.

As previously stated, the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce offered
medals to the dairymen. This feature increased the interest and
stimulated keen competition. A gold and a silver medal were awarded
for the two samples of milk scoring highest, and the same for cream.
Medals were also awarded to the five dairy farms scoring the highest.


                          LETTER TO DAIRYMEN.

In order to bring the matter before the dairymen the following letter
was sent to about 2,000 milk producers in Cleveland and vicinity:

                   U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
                               BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY,
                                 _Washington, D. C., March 5, 1907_.

  DEAR SIR: The Dairy Division of the United States Department of
  Agriculture is arranging for a dairy meeting and milk and cream
  contest to be held in the Chamber of Commerce hall, Cleveland,
  Ohio, March 16, 1907, in cooperation with the municipal
  sanitation committee of the Chamber of Commerce. The object of
  the meeting is to discuss with the dairymen problems relating to
  the production and handling of market milk and cream. A special
  feature of this meeting will be an exhibit of milk and cream
  from the dairymen supplying Cleveland. These products will be
  carefully analyzed by experts from the Department and scored for
  flavor, composition, acidity, general appearance, etc. There will
  be three classes in this contest, as follows:

  Class I. Market milk (raw), two prizes (gold and silver medals).

  Class II. Market cream (raw), two prizes (gold and silver medals).

  Class III. Dairy farms, five prizes (gold and silver medals).

  After being scored, all the milk and cream will be placed on
  exhibition, accompanied by the score. Questions regarding the
  scoring of the various products will be cheerfully answered.
  Prizes will be awarded to those scoring highest in each
  class. The whole object of the meeting and of the exhibits is
  educational and entirely for the benefit of the dairymen.

  All dairymen supplying milk or cream to the city of Cleveland
  are invited to exhibit in one or all of the above classes, in
  accordance with the conditions on the entry blanks inclosed
  herewith.

  In addition to prizes offered for the milk and cream exhibited,
  prizes will also be given in Class III to the five dairy farms
  scoring the highest. Only those dairymen, however, having
  exhibits of milk or cream will be entitled to have their dairy
  farms scored and to compete for these prizes. If you desire to
  compete for the dairy-farm prize, do not fail to answer question
  5 relating to this on the entry blank provided for milk and cream.

  If the milk and cream you handle are of high quality it should
  be of interest and value to you to enter the contest. If your
  product is not of good quality you ought to know it. The defects,
  whatever they are, will be pointed out to you by those qualified
  to make a careful examination.

  Come prepared to ask questions and to get all you can out of this
  meeting.

  Respectfully, yours,

                                       ED. H. WEBSTER.
                                          _Chief of Dairy Division._


                      SCORING THE MILK AND CREAM.

The scoring was done on the basis of score cards, similar to those
used at the National Dairy Show already referred to. The standard
for perfect milk in the present contest, however, called for a much
smaller number of bacteria, and the standard for fat was also made
higher. The judges experienced but little difficulty in scoring the
various samples; in fact it was demonstrated that milk and cream can
be graded as accurately as butter or cheese by the use of the score
card, although the system is comparatively new.

All the milk and cream entered in the contest was produced March 11
and shipped to a cold-storage house in Cleveland. The scoring was
done March 14, when the product was three days old.

The score cards used in this contest are presented herewith:


                      SCORE CARD FOR MARKET MILK.

    Exhibitor: ---- ----.
    Address: ----, ----.

                           NUMERICAL SCORE.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
           |             |          |         | Appearance of | Perfect
    Flavor,| Composition,| Bacteria,| Acidity,|  package and  |  score,
      40.  |      25.    |    20.   |    5.   | contents, 10. |   100.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
           |             |          |         |               | Judge’s
           |             |          |         |               |  score.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
                          DESCRIPTIVE SCORE.
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
      Flavor. |  Composition.  |  Bacteria. | Acidity. | Package and
              |                |            |          |  contents.
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
    Excellent.|Perfect.        |Perfect.    |Perfect.  |Perfect.
    Good.     |                |            |          |
    Fair.     |Fat, ----       |Total, ----.|----      |Foreign matter.
    Bad.      | per cent.      |            | per cent.|
    Flat.     |Solids not fat, |Liquefiers, |          |Metal parts.
    Bitter.   | ---- per cent. |  ----.     |          |
    Weedy.    |                |            |          |Unattractive.
    Garlic.   |                |            |          |
    Silage.   |                |            |          |
    Manure.   |                |            |          |
    Smothered.|                |            |          |
    Other     |                |            |          |
     taints.  |                |            |          |
       ....   |                |            |          |
       ....   |                |            |          |
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
    Remarks: ----.
      Date: ----.                                   ---- ----, _Judge_.


                        DIRECTIONS FOR SCORING.


                                FLAVOR.

  If rich, sweet, clean, and pleasant flavor and odor, score
  perfect (40). Deduct for objectionable flavors and odors
  according to conditions found.


                             COMPOSITION.

  If 4 per cent fat or above and 8.5 per cent solids not fat or
  above, score perfect (25). Deduct 1 point for each one-fourth per
  cent fat below 4 and 1 point for each one-fourth per cent solids
  not fat below 8.5.


                               BACTERIA.

    Less than 10,000 per cubic centimeter               (perfect)     20
    Over 10,000 and less than 25,000 per cubic centimeter             19
    Over 25,000 and less than 50,000 per cubic centimeter             18
    Over 50,000 and less than 75,000 per cubic centimeter             17
    Over 75,000 and less than 100,000 per cubic centimeter            16
    Deduct 1 point for each 25,000 above 100,000.

  When an unusually large number of liquefying bacteria are
  present, further deduction should be made according to conditions
  found.


                               ACIDITY.

  If 0.2 per cent or below, score perfect (5). Deduct 1 point for
  each 0.01 per cent above 0.2 per cent. (If Mann’s test is used,
  discontinue adding indicator on first appearance of a pink color.)


                  APPEARANCE OF PACKAGE AND CONTENTS.

  If package is clean, free from metal parts, and no foreign
  matter can be detected in the contents, score perfect (10). Make
  deductions according to conditions found.


  SCORE CARD FOR MARKET CREAM.

    Exhibitor: ---- ----
    Address: ---- ----.

                           NUMERICAL SCORE.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
           |             |          |         | Appearance of | Perfect
    Flavor,| Composition,| Bacteria,| Acidity,|  package and  |  score,
      40.  |     25.     |    20.   |    5.   | contents, 10. |   100.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
           |             |          |         |               | Judge’s
           |             |          |         |               |  score.
    -------+-------------+----------+---------+---------------+--------
                          DESCRIPTIVE SCORE.
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
    Flavor.   |  Composition.  |  Bacteria. | Acidity. | Package and
              |                |            |          |  contents.
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
    Excellent.|Perfect.        |Perfect.    |Perfect.  |Perfect.
    Good.     |                |            |          |
    Fair.     |Fat, ----       |Total, ----.|----      |Foreign matter.
    Bad.      |  per cent.     |            | per cent.|
    Flat.     |                |Liquefiers, |          |Metal parts.
    Bitter.   |                | ----.      |          |
    Weedy.    |                |            |          |Unattractive.
    Garlic.   |                |            |          |
    Silage.   |                |            |          |Lumpy.
    Smothered.|                |            |          |
    Manure.   |                |            |          |Frothy.
    Other     |                |            |          |
     taints.  |                |            |          |
     ....     |                |            |          |
     ....     |                |            |          |
     ....     |                |            |          |
    ----------+----------------+------------+----------+---------------
    Remarks: ----.
      Date: ----.                                   ---- ----, _Judge_.


                        DIRECTIONS FOR SCORING.


                                FLAVOR.

  If rich, sweet, clean, and pleasant flavor and odor, score
  perfect (40). Deduct for objectionable flavors and odors
  according to conditions found.


                             COMPOSITION.

  If 20 per cent fat or above, score perfect (25). Deduct 1 point
  for each one-half per cent fat below 20.


                               BACTERIA.

    Less than 10,000 per cubic centimeter                (perfect)   20
    Over 10,000 and less than 25,000 per cubic centimeter            19
    Over 25,000 and less than 50,000 per cubic centimeter            18
    Over 50,000 and less than 75,000 per cubic centimeter            17
    Over 75,000 and less than 100,000 per cubic centimeter           16
    Deduct 1 point for each 25,000 above 100,000.                    -

  When an unusually large number of liquefying bacteria are
  present, further deduction should be made according to conditions
  found.


                               ACIDITY.

  If 0.2 per cent or below, score perfect (5). Deduct 1 point
  for each 0.01 per cent above 0.2. (If Mann’s test is used,
  discontinue, adding indicator on first appearance of a pink
  color.)


                  APPEARANCE OF PACKAGE AND CONTENTS.

  If package is clean, free from metal parts, and no foreign matter
  can be detected in the contents, and physical condition of
  product is good, score perfect (10). Make deductions according to
  conditions.

The composition, condition, and numerical scores of the entries of
market milk and cream are given in the following tables:


  _Table showing composition and condition of market milk and cream._

  ------+-----+------+-------+-------+---------------+-------------------
  Sample| Fat.|Solids| Acid-| Total  | Appearance of |   Remarks.
   No.  |     | not  | ity. |bacteria|  package.     |
        |     | fat. |      |   per  |               |
        |     |      |      |  cubic |               |
        |     |      |      |centime-|               |
        |     |      |      |  ter.  |               |
  ------+-----+------+------+--------+---------------+-------------------
   1    | 4.1 | 9.82 |0.235 |  3,100 |Slight sediment|
   2    | 4.0 | 8.67 | .198 |  1,600 |    do         |
   3    | 3.5 | 8.70 | .194 | 16,300 |Clean          |
   4    | 3.4 | 8.55 | .198 |  5,500 |    do         |
   5    | 3.7 | 8.61 | .200 | 15,200 |    do         |
   6    | 4.5 | 9.02 | .192 |  5,100 |Slight sediment|
   7    | 3.9 | 8.78 | .180 |  1,600 |    do         |
   8    | 3.6 | 8.59 | .174 | 35,800 |    do         |
   9    | 3.3 | 8.53 | .187 |  4,730 |    do         |
  10    | 3.7 | 8.74 | .174 | 11,300 |    do         |
  11    | 3.9 | 8.78 | .183 |  4,900 |    do         |
  12    | 3.8 | 8.76 | .189 | 12,500 |    do         |
  13    | 4.5 | 8.90 | .180 | 33,000 |Clean          |
  14    | 3.2 | 8.37 | .194 | 38,600 |    do         |
  15    | 3.4 | 8.55 | .196 |  5,200 |Slight sediment|Bottle not full.
  16    | 4.0 | 8.80 | .196 |  6,000 |    do         |
  1     | 3.2 | 8.64 | .200 |  3,100 |    do         |
  18    | 3.5 | 8.80 | .189 | 17,500 |    do         |
  19    | 3.4 | 8.78 | .200 | 17,200 |Clean          |
  20    | 3.5 | 8.45 | .180 |  5,400 |Slight sediment|
  21[a] |33.6 |  ... | .162 | 29,200 |    do         |
  22    | 4.4 | 9.25 | .216 | 26,500 |    do         |
  23[a] |25.0 |  ... | .180 | 21,000 |    do         |
  24    | 3.9 | 8.90 | .198 |  8,700 |    do         |
  25    | 3.7 | 8.86 | .198 | 20,700 |Clean          |
  26    | 3.1 | 8.25 | .189 |166,000 |    do         |
  27    | 4.3 | 8.86 | .182 |  1,000 |    do         |Soapy flavor.
  28    | 3.8 | 9.13 | .183 |  9,500 |    do         |
  29    | 4.4 | 8.88 | .185 | 86,000 |    do         |
  30[a] |37.2 |  ... | .162 | 20,700 |Slight sediment|Silver medal
        |     |      |      |        |               | (cream).
  31    | 3.7 | 8.74 | .207 | 18,000 |Clean          |
  32    | 3.9 | 9.78 | .200 | 10,400 |    do         |
  33    | 4.4 | 9.00 | .200 |  8,500 |    do         |
  34    | 4.1 | 8.82 | .192 | 31,300 |Slight sediment|
  35    | 3.6 | 8.92 | .234 | 26,300 |    do         |
  36    | 3.6 | 8.59 | .200 |  1,000 |    do         |Soapy flavor.
  37    | 4.1 | 8.94 | .216 | 23,900 |    do         |Manure flavor.
  38    | 3.4 | 8.98 | .200 |  2,100 |    do         |
  39    | 3.5 | 8.45 | .198 |  7,500 |    do         |Metal and rubber
        |     |      |      |        |               | parts to package.
  40    | 4.0 | 8.80 | .191 |  6,300 |Slight sediment|
  41    | 4.0 | 9.00 | .198 |  6,700 |    do         |
  42    | 3.3 | 9.03 | .219 |  3,100 |Clean          |
  43    | 4.1 | 9.19 | .219 |  5,500 |    do         |
  44    | 3.6 | 8.72 | .184 | 18,300 |Slight sediment|
  45    | 4.1 | 9.82 | .200 |  5,700 | Clean         |Gold medal (milk).
  46    | 3.5 | 9.70 | .192 |  1,000 |    do         |
  47    | 4.0 | 9.00 | .198 | 10,500 |Slight sediment|
  48    | 3.7 | 8.74 | .208 |  5,200 |    do         |
  49[a] |18.0 |  ... | .216 |402,500 |    do         |
  50    | 3.5 | 9.90 | .210 |  5,800 |    do         |
  51[a] |24.0 |  ... | .182 |  1,100 |    do         |Gold medal (cream).
  52    | 3.9 | 8.40 | .198 | 32,000 |    do         |
  53    | 4.2 | 8.84 | .200 |  5,600 |    do         |Silver medal
        |     |      |      |        |               | (milk).
  54[a] |31.6 |  ... | .180 |392,000 |Clean          |Soapy flavor.
  55    | 3.9 | 8.90 | .207 |  5,600 |Slight sediment|
  56    | 8.1 | 7.03 | .207 | 27,000 |    do         |
  57    | 3.9 | 8.53 | .200 |  6,700 |    do         |
  58    | 3.9 | 8.73 | .200 |  1,500 |    do         |
  59    | 2.5 | 8.25 | .185 |  1,200 |Sediment       |Metal and rubber
        |     |      |      |        |               | parts to package.
  ------+-----+------+------+--------+---------------+-------------------

  [a] Cream.


        _Table showing numerical scores of the milk and cream._

  ------+----------+-----------+---------+----------+--------+---------
  Sample| Flavor   |Composition| Bacteria|Appearance| Acidity|  Total
    No. | (perfect |  (perfect | (perfect| (perfect |(perfect|  score
        | 40       |     25    |    20   |    10    |    5   | (perfect
        | points). |  points). | points).| points). |points).|   100
        |          |           |         |          |        | points).
  ------+----------+-----------+---------+----------+--------+---------
   1    |    34.0  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    1.5 |    90.0
   2    |    34.5  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    94.0
   3    |    35.0  |        23 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    92.0
   4    |    34.0  |        22 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    91.0
   5    |    33.0  |        23 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    90.0
   6    |    32.0  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    91.5
   7    |    33.5  |        24 |      20 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    91.5
   8    |    33.0  |        23 |      18 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    88.5
   9    |     29.0 |        22 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    85.5
  10    |    34.0  |        23 |      19 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    90.5
  11    |    34.0  |        24 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    92.5
  12    |    32.0  |        24 |      19 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    89.0
  13    |    32.0  |        25 |      18 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    90.0
  14    |    35.0  |        21 |      18 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    89.0
  15    |    35.5  |        22 |      20 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    91.5
  16    |    35.0  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    94.5
  17    |    36.5  |        22 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    93.0
  18    |    32.0  |        23 |      19 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    88.0
  19    |    34.0  |        22 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    90.0
  20    |    32.0  |        22 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    88.5
  21[a] |    37.0  |        25 |      18 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    94.5
  22    |    32.5  |        25 |      18 |      9.5 |    3.5 |    88.5
  23[a] |    36.5  |        25 |      19 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    95.0
  24    |    32.75 |        24 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    91.25
  25    |    33.0  |        23 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    90.0
  26    |    30.0  |        20 |      13 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    78.0
  27    |    28.0  |        25 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    88.0
  28    |    31.5  |        24 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    90.5
  29    |    34.0  |        25 |      16 |     10.0 |    5.6 |    90.0
  30[a] |    37.5  |        25 |      19 |      9.0 |    5.0 | [b]95.5
  31    |    37.0  |        23 |      19 |     10.0 |    4.5 |    93.5
  32    |    34.5  |        24 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    92.5
  33    |    35.0  |        25 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    95.0
  34    |    36.25 |        25 |      18 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    93.25
  35    |    36.0  |        23 |      18 |      9.5 |    2.0 |    88.5
  36    |    31.0  |        23 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    88.5
  37    |    31.0  |        25 |      19 |      9.5 |    3.5 |    88.0
  38    |    34.5  |        22 |      20 |      9.0 |    5.0 |    90.5
  39    |    35.0  |        22 |      20 |      5.0 |    5.0 |    87.0
  40    |    33.75 |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    93.25
  41    |    34.0  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    93.5
  42    |    35.5  |        22 |      20 |     10.0 |    3.5 |    91.0
  43    |    35.0  |        25 |      20 |     10.0 |    3.5 |    93.5
  44    |    28.0  |        23 |      19 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    84.5
  45    |    37.0  |        25 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 | [c]97.0
  46    |    36.0  |        23 |      20 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    94.0
  47    |    32.5  |        25 |      19 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    91.5
  48    |    34.5  |        23 |      20 |      9.0 |    4.5 |    91.0
  49[a] |    35.0  |        21 |       4 |      9.0 |    4.5 |    73.5
  50    |    35.0  |        23 |      20 |      9.5 |    4.5 |    92.0
  51[a] |    36.5  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 | [d]96.0
  52    |    36.5  |        24 |      18 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    93.0
  53    |    36.5  |        25 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 | [e]96.0
  54[a] |    32.0  |        25 |       5 |     10.0 |    5.0 |    77.0
  55    |    34.0  |        24 |      20 |      9.5 |    4.5 |    92.0
  56    |    32.0  |        25 |       8 |      9.0 |    4.5 |    78.5
  57    |    33.0  |        24 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    91.5
  58    |    34.0  |        24 |      20 |      9.5 |    5.0 |    92.5
  59    |    27.0  |        19 |      20 |      5.5 |    5.0 |    76.5
  ------+----------+-----------+---------+----------+--------+---------

[a] Cream.

[b] Silver medal (cream).

[c] Gold medal (milk).

[d] Gold medal (cream).

[e] Silver medal (milk).


The flavor of the samples of both milk and cream was generally good.
A few were soapy, owing to bottles not being properly rinsed, and one
or two suggested a flavor of the cow stable. The lowest score for
“flavor of milk” was 28 points, the highest 37; the lowest score for
“flavor of cream” was 30 points, the highest 37.5.

The percentage of fat in the milk was close to 4 in the majority of
instances; the lowest was 2.5 and the highest 8.1. Both of these
samples, however, may safely be regarded as abnormal. The percentage
of fat in the cream samples varied from 18 to 37.2. The lowest
percentage of “solids not fat” was 7.03, and the highest 9.9.

With but few exceptions the milk and cream exhibited did not exceed
the required standard for acidity, which was two-tenths of 1 per
cent. The lowest percentage of acidity was 0.162, the highest 0.235.

The number of bacteria per cubic centimeter found in the milk samples
varied from 1,000, which was the lowest number, to 166,000, which
was the highest. Seventeen out of the 59 samples examined contained
over 20,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter, and more than half of all
the samples exhibited contained less than 10,000, or a number small
enough to meet the requirements for certified milk as established by
the milk commissions. The lowest number of bacteria found in cream
was 1,100 per cubic centimeter, the highest 402,000.

The appearance of the packages of milk and cream was generally good.
Only two had rubber or metal parts. Many of the samples contained
more or less foreign matter. About one-third showed no sediment
whatever in the bottom of the bottles.

Of the 59 samples of milk and cream competing in this contest 6
scored 95 or over, 35 between 90 and 95, 12 between 85 and 90,
and 6 less than 85. The large number scoring 90 or above is very
noticeable, and indicates that the majority of the dairymen were
successful in their efforts to produce high-class milk.


                        THE DAIRY-FARM CONTEST.

This was an entirely new feature in connection with milk contests
and proved to be of great interest and practical value. Twenty-five
dairymen entered their farms in this contest, and the farms were
visited by the judges and scored on the basis of the score card shown
below. While this part of the work required considerable time and
some expense, it is believed that it resulted in much good along the
line of improving the conditions affecting the city milk supply. Full
details of this feature of the work are given in the table.


      [United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal
                      Industry, Dairy Division.]

                    SANITARY INSPECTION OF DAIRIES.

    Owner or lessee of farm: ---- ----.
    Town: ----. State: ----.
    Total No. of cows: ----. No. milking: ----.
                                   Quarts of milk produced daily: ----
    Is product sold at wholesale or retail? ----.
    If shipped to dealer, give name and address: ----.
    Permit No.: ----. Date of inspection: ----, 1907.

  --------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
                                  |     Score.      |
                                  +--------+--------+     Remarks.
                                  |Perfect.|Allowed.|
  --------------------------------+--------+--------+------------------
               COWS.              |        |        |
  Condition                       |      2 |        |
  Health                          |      8 |        |
  Cleanliness                     |      5 |        |
  Water supply                    |      5 |        |
                                  +--------+        |
                                  |     20 |        |
              STABLES.            |        |        |
  Construction                    |      5 |        |
  Cleanliness                     |      5 |        |
  Light                           |      5 |        |
  Ventilation                     |      4 |        |
  Cubic space per cow             |      3 |        |
  Removal of manure               |      2 |        |
  Stable yard                     |      1 |        |
                                  +--------+        |
                                  |     25 |        |
            MILK HOUSE.           |        |        |
  Construction                    |      2 |        |
  Equipment                       |      3 |        |
  Cleanliness                     |      5 |        |
  Care and cleanliness of utensils|      5 |        |
  Water supply (Temp. ---- °F.)   |      5 |        |
                                  +--------+        |
                                  |     20 |        |
        MILKERS AND MILKING.      |        |        |
  Health of attendants            |      5 |        |
  Cleanliness of milking          |     10 |        |
                                  +--------+        |
                                  |     15 |        |
       HANDLING THE MILK.         |        |        |
  Prompt and efficient cooling    |     10 |        |
  Storing at a low temperature    |      5 |        |
  Protection during transportation|      5 |        |
  Temperature of milk ---- °F.    |        |        |
                                  +--------+        |
                                  |     20 |        |
                                  +--------+--------+
      Total score                 |    100 |        |
  --------------------------------+--------+--------+------------------

  Sanitary conditions are:
                  Excellent: ----. Good: ----. Fair: ----. Poor: ----.
  Suggestions by inspector: ----.
                                      (Signed) ---- ----, _Inspector_.


DIRECTIONS FOR SCORING.


                                 COWS.

                                                               Perfect
                                                                score.

  _Condition and healthfulness._--Deduct 2 points if in poor
    flesh, and 8 points if not tuberculin-tested                    10
  _Cleanliness._--Clean, 5; good, 4; fair, 2; bad, 0                 5
  _Water supply._--If clean and unpolluted, 5; fair, 3;
    otherwise, 0                                                     5


                               STABLES.

  _Construction._--For cement floor or other material equally
   as good (_a_)[A] in good condition allow 2 points; fair, 1;
   poor, 0; wood floor (_b_) or other material in good condition,
   1; fair, ½; poor, 0; good tie (_c_), 1; good manger (_d_),
   1; box stall (_e_), 1                                             5
  _Cleanliness._--If thoroughly clean, including floor (_a_),
   windows (_b_), and ceilings (_c_), 5; good, 4; medium, 3;
   fair, 2; poor, 1; bad, 0                                          5
  _Light._--Four square feet of glass per cow, 5; 1 point off for
   each 20 per cent less than 4 square feet                          5
  _Ventilation._--Good ventilating system, 4; fair, 3; poor, 2;
   bad, 0                                                            4
  _Cubic space per cow._--If 500 cubic feet or over per cow, 3;
   less than 500 and over 400, 2; less than 400 and over 300, 1;
   less than 300, 0                                                  3
  _Removal of manure._--Hauled to field daily, 2; removed at
   least 30 feet from stable, 1; otherwise, 0                        2
  _Stable yard._--In good condition (_a_), ½; well drained
   (_b_), ½; otherwise, 0                                            1


                              MILK HOUSE.

  _Construction._--Tight, sound floor, and not connected with
   any other building (_a_), well lighted (_b_), well ventilated
   (_c_), 2; (_d_) if connected with another building under good
   conditions, 1; otherwise, 0; (_e_) if no milk house, 0            2
  _Equipment._--Hot water for cleaning utensils (_a_), 1; cooler
   (_b_), 1; proper pails (_c_) and strainers (_d_) used for no
   other purposes, 1                                                 3
  _Cleanliness._--Interior clean, 5; good condition, 4; medium,
   3; fair, 2; poor, 1; bad, 0                                       5
  _Care and cleanliness of utensils._--Clean (_a_), 3; kept in
   milk house or suitable outside rack (_b_), 2; otherwise, 0        5
  _Water supply._--If pure and clean running water, 5; pure and
   clean still water, 3; otherwise, 0                                5


                               MILKING.

  _Attendants._--Healthy                                             5
  _Cleanliness of milking._--Clean milking suits, milking with
   clean dry hands, and attention to cleanliness of udder and
   teats while milking, 10; no special suits, but otherwise clean
   (_a_), 7; deduct 4 points for unclean teats (_b_) and udder
   (_c_) and 3 points for unclean hands (_d_)                       10


                          HANDLING THE MILK.

  _Prompt and efficient cooling._--If prompt (_a_), 5; efficient
   (_b_), if 50° F. or under, 5; over 50° and not over 55°, 4;
   over 55° and not over 60°, 3; over 60°, 0; if neither prompt
   nor efficient, 0                                                 10
  _Storing at low temperature._--If 50° F. or under, 5; over 50°
   and not over 55°, 4; over 55° and not over 60°, 3; over 60°, 0    5
  _Protection during transportation to market._--If thoroughly
   protected (iced), 5; good protection, 4; partly protected, 2;
   otherwise, 0                                                      5
                                                                   ---
                                                                   100

  [Note: The letters _a_, _b_, _c_, etc., should be entered on score
  card to show condition of dairy, and when so entered should
  always indicate a deficiency.]


                                SCORE.

  If total score is 90 or above and each division 85% perfect or
  over, the dairy is EXCELLENT (entitled to registry).

  If total score is 80 or above and each division 75% perfect or
  over, the dairy is GOOD.

  If total score is 70 or above and each division 65% perfect or
  over, the dairy is FAIR.

  If total score is below 70 and any division is below 65% perfect,
  the dairy is POOR.


    _Detailed scores of the twenty-five dairy farms entered in the
                         dairy-farm contest._

    ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
                |  Cows  |Stables |  Milk  |Milking |Handling| Total
                |(perfect|(perfect| house  |(perfect|of milk | score
      Farm No.  |   20   |   25   |(perfect|  15    |(perfect|(perfect
                |points).|points).|   20   |points).|   20   |  100
                |        |        |points).|        |points).|points).
    ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
     1          |   10.0 |   14.0 |    2.0 |   10.0 |    5.0 |   41.0
     2          |   11.0 |   14.0 |    7.0 |   10.0 |    0.0 |   42.0
     3          |    4.0 |   14.0 |    8.0 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   46.0
     4          |    8.0 |    3.0 |   12.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   48.0
     5          |    7.0 |    8.0 |   16.0 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   51.0
     6          |   10.0 |   11.0 |    7.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   53.0
     7          |   11.0 |   13.0 |   13.0 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   57.0
     8          |   18.0 |   10.5 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   58.5
     9          |   15.0 |    8.0 |   10.0 |   12.0 |   15.0 |   60.0
    10          |   12.0 |   13.0 |   11.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   61.0
    11          |   12.0 |   18.0 |    7.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   62.0
    12          |   10.0 |   21.0 |    8.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   64.0
    13          |    7.0 |   10.0 |   17.5 |   10.0 |   20.0 |   64.5
    14          |   12.0 |   12.0 |   11.0 |   10.0 |   20.0 |   65.0
    15          |   12.0 |   16.0 |    7.0 |   10.0 |   20.0 |   65.0
    16          |   12.0 |   22.0 |   12.0 |   10.0 |   10.0 |   66.0
    17          |   19.5 |   16.0 |    7.0 |   10.0 |   15.0 |   67.5
    18          |   12.0 |   23.0 |   11.0 |   13.0 |   10.0 |   69.0
    19          |   12.0 |   16.0 |   16.0 |   12.0 |   15.0 |   71.0
    20          |    7.0 |   19.5 |   18.0 |   10.0 |   20.0 |   74.5
    21          |   14.0 |   20.5 |   16.0 |   10.0 |   20.0 |   80.5
    22          |   12.0 |   18.0 |   17.0 |   15.0 |   20.0 |   82.0
    23          |   11.5 |   21.0 |   19.0 |   12.0 |   20.0 |   83.5
    24          |   12.0 |   23.0 |   15.0 |   15.0 |   20.0 |   85.0
    25          |   19.5 |   21.0 |   17.0 |   12.0 |   17.0 |   86.5
    ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------
      Average   |   11.6 |   15.4 |   11.8 |   10.8 |   14.5 |   64.1
    Average per |        |        |        |        |        |
    cent perfect|   58.0 |   61.6 |   59.0 |   72.0 |   72.5 |   64.1
    ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------


                       PRINCIPAL DEFECTS FOUND.

The greatest defects on the dairy farms were found to be the lack
of cleanliness of the cows and the nonapplication of the tuberculin
test. This test had been applied to only five of the twenty-five
herds, and as it counted 8 points in the score the low average for
the cows is thus explained. The cows in fifteen of the herds were
more or less dirty. The water supply was generally good. The average
rating for the cows was 11.6 points out of a possible 20.

The next greatest defect was found in the construction, equipment,
and cleanliness of the milk houses. Many farms had no milk houses or
special rooms for handling the milk, some were lacking in the proper
equipment--particularly coolers and facilities for heating water.
The water supply and utensils for the milk house were generally
good. Seven out of the twenty-five received a perfect score for
cleanliness. The average score for all of the milk houses was 11.8
points out of a possible 20.

The third lowest rating was given to the stables, which scored 15.4
points out of a possible 25. The greatest defect here was the lack
of cleanliness, although the light and ventilation were frequently
deficient. The construction as a rule received a good rating, and
the cubic space per cow was generally satisfactory.

The cleanliness observed in milking was generally good, and the
method of handling the milk satisfactory. These two branches of the
dairy work rated 72 and 72.5 per cent, respectively.


                  VALUE OF THE CONTEST TO CLEVELAND.

The following letter points out very clearly some of the results
which followed the contest in Cleveland:

                                          CLEVELAND, _June 4, 1907_.

  Prof. C. B. LANE,
    _Assistant Chief, Dairy Division, Washington, D. C._

  DEAR SIR: Certain very definite beneficial results may be traced
  to the milk exhibit and contest held in Cleveland on March 16,
  1907. It was of special value from an educational standpoint.
  Few of the dairymen supplying milk to Cleveland previous to
  the contest had any appreciation of the significance of the
  inspection required by the city and submitted to it largely from
  necessity. The various addresses and discussions demonstrated the
  method and the value of the inspection. The dairymen present came
  to understand the importance and significance of improved methods
  of handling milk, and many of the recommendations made have since
  been adopted. The dairymen also felt pleased at the attention
  and interest of the Government officials in Cleveland’s milk
  producers.

  With the inauguration of the inspection by the Cleveland Board
  of Health considerable opposition developed among the dairymen,
  and in some cases open enmity. With a thorough understanding of
  the object of the inspection this opposition has ceased and the
  inspection is now sought and welcomed. Cordial relations now
  exist between the dairymen and the inspection department. The
  holding of the contest and exhibit definitely contributed to
  this kindly feeling. Friendly rivalry has been developed among
  the dairymen. The visit of the inspector is looked forward to;
  his suggestions are usually promptly complied with, and his
  subsequent visits result in a higher score for the dairymen
  generally. The general attitude of the dairymen toward an
  inspection system is well illustrated by a letter recently sent
  by several representative dairymen to the board of health:

    We milk producers, who ship milk to the city of Cleveland,
    desiring to make and ship milk of good quality and to observe
    the sanitary regulations as prescribed by your honorable body,
    respectfully ask that each and every person shipping milk to
    the city of Cleveland be required to take out a permit to be
    issued by your honorable body, revocable at your pleasure.

    That said permits shall be classified as 1 or 2. That dairies
    which score 50 points or above be classified as No. 1, and all
    dairies which score below 50 points be classified as No. 2.
    That all milk dealers, shippers, and peddlers who sell milk in
    the city of Cleveland be required to apprise their customers
    by placard or otherwise at all times of the class of milk that
    they are offering for sale, and in case of failure so to do,
    or in case of said milk dealer, shipper, or peddler offering
    for sale milk shipped into the city of Cleveland without a
    permit, said milk dealer, shipper, or peddler’s license shall
    be forfeited.

                                      AUSTIN HERRICK.
                                      W. A. MILLS.
                                      H. F. BICKER.
                                      S. H. MIZER.
                                      O. H. BENNETT.
                                      E. BOWEN.
                                      H. E. POST.
                                      G. W. ADAMS.
                                      W. H. CHAMBERS.
                                      A. F. DRESHER.
                                      C. E. RILEY.

  The exhibit also had a beneficial effect upon retailers. This
  class has come to realize the value of sanitary milk production.
  Before making the season’s contract they inquire into the rating
  of the dairies in question, discriminating against those having
  a low rating, and frequently paying a premium for milk from a
  high-scoring dairy. There is at present an almost universal
  demand for a repetition of the contest annually, and the interest
  and participation in the contest next year would be many fold
  that of this contest.

    (Signed.)

                            H. G. SHERMAN, M. D.,
                       _Chairman Committee on Municipal Sanitation_.

                            C. W. EDDY, M. D.,
           _Chief of Inspection Division, Public Health Department_.




                      THE VALUE OF MILK CONTESTS.


                        VALUE TO THE PRODUCER.

Milk contests are of value to the producer in that they point out to
him very clearly the exact condition of his product. This includes,
first, the flavor of the milk. Clean milk from a clean cow has but
little flavor or odor. If it is fairly well supplied with fat, pure
milk may be described as having a rich, sweet, clean, pleasant flavor
and odor, and free from foreign taints. Too frequently, however,
the ordinary market milk delivered in our cities tastes of the cow
stable, or the feed, and has too much acidity from the presence of
millions of bacteria. In addition to flavor, milk is tested for
chemical qualities, including fat and total solids. It is also
carefully tested for bacteria. If produced under clean conditions
and promptly cooled, these should not exceed 100,000 to the cubic
centimeter. Where extreme care is used, as in the production of
certified milk, the number may be kept below 1,000. Other points
considered are the acidity of the milk, the appearance of the package
(including metal parts, etc.), and foreign matter. Too often dirt of
various kinds is found in the bottom of the bottle, indicating not
only dirty conditions during milking, but poor handling, especially
as regards straining.

Defects of the product having thus been pointed out, the dairyman
will know what is lacking in his product and what he needs to do
in order to make it perfect. If the dairyman enters the dairy-farm
contest his place is carefully scored and given a definite rating.
Ideal conditions are pointed out and he is shown what needs to be
done and how it can be done without great expense.

But the question naturally arises: If the dairyman produces a perfect
product, can he secure any more money for it? Up to the present time
there has been but little incentive to the production of high-class
milk, with possibly the exception of certified milk. Clean and dirty
milk have sold for the same price and in direct competition with each
other. This is not right. With other commodities the grade determines
the price. It should be so with milk.

There are indications, however, that the dairyman who produces clean
milk will in the future receive a premium for his product, and
the careful inspection of the dairy farm and the milk produced is
going to help bring this about. Already an advanced price is being
offered by the milk dealers in Cleveland for milk from high-scoring
dairies. This certainly is encouraging to the dairyman who is trying
to produce a clean product. Every farm should be inspected, and
such inspection should be welcomed by every intelligent dairyman. A
score such as was given in this contest, stating certain conditions
found in the dairies to be satisfactory, will have a tendency to
increase the sales and inspire confidence. It will be for the
dairyman’s interest in the future to produce clean milk, and he
should be rewarded for his efforts. Producers should hold together
in this matter. Public sentiment is with the movement for a better
milk supply, and the prices of feedstuffs and labor being high,
the producers have every reason to demand a fair price for a good
product. But they should see to it that their product is clean and
that it deserves the price demanded. It is not for the producer’s
interests to allow the consumer to get the idea that this most
valuable food product, milk, is produced and handled under dirty
conditions.


                         VALUE TO THE DEALER.

Milk contests are of value to the dealer in assisting him to
determine where the good dairies are, hence making it easier for him
to find a supply of milk to meet the demands made upon him for a good
product. With a supply of good milk to handle, there is less trouble
with sour milk and less complaint from consumers.


                        VALUE TO THE CONSUMER.

The principal value of these contests to the consumer is in pointing
out the defects in milk and showing him what good milk really is.
Clean milk certainly ought to command a premium over dirty milk. With
the average consumer, however, milk is looked upon as a necessity
to be bought as cheaply as possible. If he is asked to pay a higher
price, he immediately characterizes it as robbery. He gives little
thought to the fact that the price of grain has been increasing
during the past ten years and that wages for farm labor are not only
higher but the labor is difficult to obtain. The consumer should know
that it costs more to produce clean milk and that it means extra
labor and extra care, and the dairyman can not be expected to produce
it without a reasonable profit.




          APPLICATION OF THE CLEVELAND PLAN TO OTHER CITIES.

The results obtained in the contest described in the preceding
pages indicate that a similar meeting and exhibit would be of value
in improving the milk supply of any city. It is simply a means of
reaching the producer, the dealer, and the consumer, and educating
them along the line of clean milk. That the plan worked successfully
in Cleveland there is no question, and it is believed that there are
scores of other cities where similar results might be obtained. Such
a contest should have the direct support of the board of health or
some organization directly interested in improving the milk supply.




                       EXTRACTS FROM ADDRESSES.

One of the objects of the contest was to discuss matters of interest
to dairymen and give them an opportunity to ask questions. The
following are some of the salient points brought out at the meeting:

  Dr. H. G. SHERMAN, chairman municipal sanitation committee,
  chamber of commerce: The sanitary code prepared by the committee
  provides that no milk from tuberculous cattle is to be sold
  within the city limits, but it was not intended that these
  regulations should be put into operation at once, as some
  apparently feared. We believe--and we think that you agree with
  us--that these regulations should be enforced gradually and
  reasonably, with due regard to the interests of the dairymen and
  with arrangements for the proper reimbursement of the dairymen.

  It is no longer a matter of theory, but it has been clearly
  proven that a good milk supply is of the greatest importance
  to the health of city dwellers. A large proportion of disease
  comes through improper food, and milk is one of the important
  elements of our food. Especially is this true of infants and
  young children, those least able to resist disease. With these it
  may constitute almost the only article of food. Epidemics costing
  thousands of lives have been traced to tainted or unclean milk.
  Deaths from typhoid fever, diphtheria, and scarlet fever are
  often caused by infection carried in the milk. In large cities
  nearly one-half of the children born die before they are 4 years
  old, but where all the milk has been carefully inspected this
  rate has been greatly diminished. You may say that you run the
  same risk with your children that we do with ours and that you
  have never discovered any danger; but this is not quite true.
  In the first place, the milk which you get is fresher than it
  is when is comes to us, and with you the disease germs which do
  the harm have not had time to multiply. In the second place,
  disease spreads much faster in a crowded city than in the country
  with its scattered population. In the third place, the power of
  resisting disease in the city is much less than it is in the
  country. Your children, who play all day in the fresh air and
  sunshine, who roll on the green grass, and who sleep in the cool
  night breeze are much more likely to shake off any threatened
  sickness than the babies in the slum districts, for instance, who
  must play in the gutter or on the hot pavement in the daytime and
  sleep in stifling and perhaps crowded rooms at night. The death
  rate among little children is half as high again in the city as
  it is in the country, and sickness is in even greater proportion.

                  *       *       *       *       *

  Dr. C. W. EDDY, chief of inspection division, public health
  department: When the Cleveland health department first undertook
  a definite system of sanitary inspection of the dairies shipping
  milk to the city the first question that presented itself was a
  form of report to be used by the inspector. It was first proposed
  to have a list of questions to be asked by the inspector, the
  answers to be his report on the dairy inspected. This was
  tried and found unsatisfactory, as it did not give an adequate
  description of conditions nor the exact relations of the good
  features to the indifferent or positively bad. While in this
  quandary I received a communication from the Dairy Division
  of the United States Department of Agriculture, in which was
  described the score card used by the inspectors of that division.
  It appealed to us at once as a solution of the difficulty, and we
  proceeded to give it a thorough trial. After a brief use of the
  card we decided to adopt it in our work.

  The card first used has been modified somewhat to make it more
  applicable to local conditions, but the principle remains the
  same. The most important feature of the score card is its
  absolute fairness, it being impossible for the inspector who
  follows the printed instructions to display any partiality. It
  further calls the attention of the inspector to many details
  which he might otherwise overlook, which, from our standpoint at
  least, are very important. After a dairy is scored and the score
  card sent in we can tell exactly what conditions exist upon the
  farm--where it is well equipped and where it is deficient. It
  should be borne in mind that we inspect the dairies and use the
  card to bring out the bearing of the production of milk upon the
  public health. Therefore some features looked upon in this light
  are of more significance than others and are consequently given a
  greater weight, as, for instance, cleanliness of milking counts
  10 points, while cleanliness of stable yard counts but 3 points.
  It is difficult for many dairymen to comprehend this, and they
  are prone to look upon an expensive herd of cattle or barns of
  more importance than the sanitary features of milk production.

  The average score of dairies inspected is too low, being below
  50. We hope and expect in time and as we score the dairies more
  frequently to raise the standard. This is, of course, a matter
  of education, but with intelligence and patience on both sides
  we shall certainly succeed, and those of you who profit by the
  points here discussed will be the first to reap a material
  benefit in the form of an increased demand for milk produced
  under sanitary conditions.

                  *       *       *       *       *

  Dr. R. G. PERKINS, city bacteriologist: Since the establishment
  of the laboratory the chief part of the work on milk has been of
  the ordinary routine type. Samples of suspicious milk have been
  studied, and a long series of counts were made on samples taken
  from the receiving stations and from wagons in the endeavor to
  find a suitable standard for the city. As a result of this work
  the standard was set at 500,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter.
  Even in the summer months it is the exception rather than the
  rule that this limit is passed, and it seems that a lower one
  might be quite practicable. The most interesting work done in
  the department was an endeavor to find the relative proportion
  of bacteria in milk obtained from the cans, as served to
  customers by the so-called “dip method,” and that obtained from
  bottles carried in the same wagons. An ordinance had been passed
  compelling the delivery in bottles, and these tests were made
  shortly before it went into effect. Samples were taken from
  dealers trading in various parts of the city, to cover all the
  conditions, and were taken every day for a week in each series.
  The conditions, such as weather, etc., were carefully noted and
  the following conclusions were reached:

  In the average of the 40 samples the “dip” milk was found to
  contain 37 per cent more bacteria than the bottle milk.

  In 77.5 per cent of the samples the “dip” milk contained more
  bacteria than that in the bottle. Sixteen samples were over 50
  per cent higher, and 8 of these were over 300 per cent higher
  than the corresponding bottled samples.

  In 22 samples the bottled milk had most bacteria, only 3 of these
  being more than 50 per cent over the “dip” samples.

  Dry weather, especially with a stiff breeze, usually resulted in
  an increase of several hundred per cent in the bacterial content
  of the “dip” milk over the corresponding bottles.

  The results of these examinations were considered adequate
  to justify the ordinance requiring the delivery in bottles
  exclusively, although in the case of a milkman who is dirty it is
  quite possible that the use of bottles may increase the amount of
  bacteria. This, however, is a matter which should be controlled
  by adequate inspection of the dairies and the bottling plants.

                  *       *       *       *       *

  Prof. WILLIAM PATE, Jr., city chemist: Our work consists
  wholly of the determination of quality as required by law and
  examination for the presence of chemical preservatives, colors,
  cream thickeners, or other adulterants. We collect and test 40
  samples of milk a day, taken from the milkmen upon the streets
  and from the stations as it is delivered to the milkmen. The Ohio
  law and our municipal requirements are that the milk must contain
  3 per cent of fats and 12 per cent of solids for the entire year.
  Formerly the requirement was 2.8 per cent fats and 11.5 per cent
  solids during the grass months of May and June, but it seems that
  3 and 12 per cent are low enough even for these months, and we
  conclude that any herd which produces milk below these limits
  is not a well-balanced herd, at least before our law. It is
  very true that some herds are producing milk below 3 and 12 per
  cent, but the producer having such a herd should balance it with
  animals giving lesser quantity but richer quality so as to bring
  his average for the entire herd up to the legal requirement.

  For the year just passed we had for average results of 6,045
  samples of milk taken: Lactometer, 312; fats, 3.71 per cent;
  solids, 12.51 per cent. And for the year 1905, 5,890 samples:
  Lactometer, 312; fats, 3.81 per cent; solids, 12.65 per cent.

  As the average result of the year will show, we have very good
  milk in Cleveland from the standpoint of quality as required by
  our law, although it is only fair to say to the producers that
  the milk as it comes into the city is better than it is when
  delivered to the consumer. I cite a few instances:


   _Table showing composition of milk as received by milkmen and as
                       delivered to consumers._

          +-----------------------+-----------------------+
          |    As received by     |    As delivered to    |
          |       milkman.        |       consumer.       |
          +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
          |   Fats.   |  Solids.  |   Fats.   |  Solids.  |
          +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
          |_Per cent._|_Per cent._|_Per cent._|_Per cent._|
          |      3.9  |    12.69  |      3.3  |    12.02  |
          |      4.1  |    12.77  |      3.4  |    12.17  |
          |      4.2  |    13.05  |      3.2  |    11.59  |
          |      3.8  |    12.62  |      2.7  |    10.55  |
          |      3.8  |    12.77  |      3.1  |    11.18  |
          |      4.0  |    13.21  |      3.2  |    12.20  |
          +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

  The examination for the presence of preservatives consists in
  carrying along a test for formaldehyde with all samples taken. We
  are particularly free from this preservative in Cleveland, but
  six samples having been found treated with formaldehyde in 1905
  and four in 1906. The offenders were immediately prosecuted, but
  in addition to prosecution the board of health uses an effective
  weapon in the revocation of licenses. The present policy is to
  revoke the license of any man who is found to have on sale an
  adulterated milk. Tests for the presence of sodium carbonate,
  borax, colors, etc., are carried on from time to time as is found
  necessary. In the past two years we found one sample containing
  carbonate and one to which annatto had been added as an enriching
  color.

                  *       *       *       *       *

  D. C. HALE, milk producer: In the past milk delivered to the
  Cleveland trade has been looked upon simply as milk, with no
  thought of the conditions under which it was produced. Whether
  it came from sanitary or insanitary stables it was all sold as
  one grade and for the same price. But now, since the question has
  been agitated and brought to the attention of the consumer, we
  producers look for more definite rules and regulations governing
  the city milk traffic whereby the dairyman may be rightfully
  compensated for his painstaking labor.

  There is no reason why milk produced in a well-kept dairy of
  healthy cows where sanitary methods are practiced should not
  bring more money than that produced by the careless dairyman. It
  has long been a puzzling problem to many of us why it was that
  other farm products could be placed in the city market strictly
  on their merits, while milk, which enters into more foodstuffs
  than any other product, has to be sold simply as milk and usually
  for one common price regardless of what has entered into the
  production of that product. We who profess to have produced
  sanitary milk in the past have an opportunity at this time to
  take an advance step in the way of adopting more rigid sanitary
  rules that may be recommended for the good of the consumer and
  that may prove practical and, we hope, beneficial to the producer
  in returning him a more remunerative price for his extra care and
  attention.

  I believe that it is injurious to the general health of a cow
  to be turned out of a warm stable and allowed to remain out and
  get chilled, as is the practice with many dairymen. If cows must
  be turned out of the stable in winter to get water, they should
  be put in the stable just as soon as they return from water.
  Keeping the cows comfortable will save hay and grain, increase
  the milk production, and keep the herd in better health. The
  kind of feedstuff to be used is a matter of choice, economy, and
  convenience. If there is one domestic animal more than another
  that is deserving of sunshine in her home during the winter
  months it is the cow, not only for her enjoyment, but for her
  health.

  Milk should be handled in such a way, after it leaves the milk
  room, as to lower the temperature rather than raise it. It should
  not be exposed to the hot sun. We should urge the importance of
  transportation companies doing their part toward taking care of
  the temperature of the milk after it has been delivered to them
  and until they have delivered it to the city milk dealer.




           CLEVELAND’S EXPERIENCE WITH THE TUBERCULIN TEST.

Cleveland was one of the first cities to incorporate in its
ordinances a requirement that no milk should be sold in the city
except from dairies holding certificates that their cows are free
from tuberculosis as shown by the tuberculin test. The experience
of this city is therefore of interest and value in connection with
the subject of a wholesome milk supply for cities. Following are the
sections of the Cleveland ordinance relating to the tuberculin test:


                          PART ONE, TITLE V.

  SEC. 4. On and after the ---- day of ----, 1906, no milk will be
  allowed to be sold or offered for sale or brought into the city
  from any cow or cows unless the owner of said cow or cows holds a
  certificate of this board’s veterinarian, or other veterinarian
  acceptable to this board, that said cow or cows are free from
  tuberculosis as shown by the tuberculin test.

  SEC. 5. Any person selling or offering for sale any milk from
  uninspected cows as above shall be subject to having his license
  revoked.

The city did not attempt at the outset to require all dairymen to
conform to this section, and it is not the intention to do so until
the State laws on the subject are more efficient and provide prompt
compensation for cattle destroyed. At present the tuberculin test
is required only of dairies where tuberculosis is known to exist
as determined by physical examination or by tracing cattle killed
at abattoirs. If the owner does not consent to the test and to the
slaughter of the reacting cattle, his milk is excluded from sale in
the city, and in addition the State board of live stock commissioners
is notified, which commissioners have the authority to enforce the
test or to quarantine the suspected herd. If the owner consents, the
test is made free of charge. After the test the reacting cattle are
appraised by two disinterested persons, one selected by the board of
health, the other by the owner. The average between the two values
is taken as the true value, and the appraisal and report of the test
is submitted to the State board of live stock commissioners. If this
board approves the finding, an order is issued authorizing the health
department to destroy the reacting cattle, which is done and promptly
reported back to the State authorities. The approved appraisal is
then submitted to the governor, approved by him, and submitted to
the proper committee of the legislature, which finally instructs
the State auditor to draw a warrant for the claim. The law allows
from one-half to three-fifths of the appraised value, but so far all
claims have been paid in full.

The attitude of the dairymen toward the test was somewhat hostile
at first, which was natural, as it was a great surprise to them
to find that tuberculosis existed to such an extent among their
herds. Several instances were met, however, even at the first, of
exceedingly public-spirited dairymen who did all in their power to
assist the board of health, even where the losses were very severe.
The hostile feeling manifest at first has since given way to a
fair-minded conception of the situation, and the only objection to
the general application of the test is the long delay in the payment
of the claims. This is a very great hardship on a dairyman who is in
debt and dependent upon his cattle for the support of his family,
especially as in Ohio the legislature meets only every alternate year.

The following are the statistics of the work of the board of health
for the eighteen months beginning with January, 1906:

  Number of herds tested      20
  Number of cattle tested    280
  Number of reactions         89
  Percentage of reactions     32

Tested by other veterinarians under direct supervision of the board
of health:

  Number of herds tested      13
  Number of cattle tested    201
  Number of reactions         29
  Percentage of reactions     15

It is understood that within the same period about three times as
many cows have been tested by private veterinarians, the reacting
cattle being secretly sold and shipped to other States.

The greatest good accomplished has been in the dissemination of
knowledge concerning bovine tuberculosis among not only the dairymen,
but the people generally. The health office receives almost daily
inquiries as to where milk from tuberculin-tested cows can be had
for domestic purposes, and almost as many inquiries as to where
tuberculin-tested cows can be purchased. Nearly one-half of the
herds tested have been tested as the result of requests of owners
who desired to know for themselves what condition their herds were
in. This has been specially true in the last six months. It is
expected that more cattle will be tested in the next year than in the
preceding eighteen months, and if State laws can be passed that will
be satisfactory and efficient and provide a fair compensation there
will probably be more herds to test than the present force can handle.

The efforts of the Cleveland board of health to eradicate
tuberculosis from dairy herds and to secure a safe milk supply for
the city deserve commendation, and other cities may well profit by
this experience and adopt similar measures to safeguard the health of
the public.




                  IMPORTANCE OF THE TUBERCULIN TEST.

The public has become aroused and general interest is being
manifested especially in measures for reducing the mortality from
tuberculosis in human beings. This is shown by the formation of
societies throughout the country for furthering these measures and by
the general campaign of education which is now under way. It has been
shown beyond question that human tuberculosis and animal tuberculosis
are communicable between persons and animals, and that a considerable
proportion of the cases of human tuberculosis are caused by infection
from animal sources. The eradication of tuberculosis from dairy cows
is therefore very desirable as a protection to human health.

The tuberculin test is recognized by sanitarians as an agency of the
greatest value for detecting tuberculosis in dairy herds and for
controlling and eradicating the disease. Without its assistance but a
small percentage of the cases could be detected in the live animals.
It is remarkably accurate, the records of thousands of cases in
which the animals have afterwards been slaughtered showing a correct
diagnosis in 97 per cent.

Unfortunately, in the early attempts to control tuberculosis in some
States, measures were adopted which were so radical that they aroused
the antagonism of the dairymen and cattle owners generally, and
little was accomplished in the way of either benefiting the cattle
owners or removing the dangers of the disease to the public. It is
time that those interested in the dairy and live-stock industries
of the country should give their support to all measures tending to
check this widespread disease and to prevent the serious losses which
it causes. It is to their interest to do so purely as a business
proposition, regardless of any benefit to the public health.

A practice which is largely instrumental in the spread of
tuberculosis is the sale of animals known to be diseased without
transmitting this knowledge to the buyer. This is done not only in
private sales, but at public auctions as well. This practice should
be stopped. Where the tuberculin test is used under the direction
of a board of health, the animals as a rule are properly marked
(usually by placing metal disks in the ears), showing whether they
are tuberculous or healthy. This plan is to be commended, as it
renders difficult the deception of a purchaser.

While some States have laws prohibiting the importation of cattle
without the certificate of a veterinarian showing that they have
passed the test, other States have no such laws, and the transfer
of animals from one State to another goes on without molestation.
This shows the necessity of the Federal Government taking some
action in the near future to prevent the interstate shipment of
diseased animals. The work of the Government might also be extended
still further in a cooperative way, so that, when the disease is
discovered, the information will be communicated both to the owners
of the animals and to the proper State authorities.

The Bureau of Animal Industry furnishes tuberculin free of charge to
public officials for making tests under certain conditions.




                 METHODS FOR ERADICATING TUBERCULOSIS.

This subject has been discussed at some length by Dr. D. E. Salmon
in Bulletin 38 of the Bureau of Animal Industry. Because of its
important bearing on the improvement of the milk supply, the
following extract from that publication is appended:


              ERADICATION OF TUBERCULOSIS FROM THE FARM.

  If there is any reason to suspect the existence of tuberculosis
  in a herd, an effort should be made at once to determine
  definitely whether it is present and which animals are affected
  by it.

  The general condition of the animal should furnish some
  indication. If any of the animals are not doing well, are losing
  flesh, and fail to yield the amount of milk which is to be
  reasonably expected, a careful examination should be made of
  them to determine whether their temperature is normal, whether
  there are signs of enlargement of the external lymphatic glands,
  and whether abnormal sounds can be detected in the lungs. The
  examination of the carcasses of any animals which may have died
  or are slaughtered is a valuable indication as to the existence
  of the disease in the herd.

  The most reliable means of determining this question is, however,
  the tuberculin test. While this may occasionally fail to reveal
  tuberculosis in an individual animal, it may be relied upon with
  certainty to reveal the existence of the disease in a herd. If
  this test indicates that some of the animals are tuberculous,
  measures should be at once adopted to eradicate the disease from
  the herd, or at least to prevent its further spread. In case
  there are only one or two animals affected, and these are not
  especially valuable, the best plan is to slaughter them at once
  and thoroughly disinfect the stable in which they have been kept.
  If a large proportion of a herd is affected, and the animals
  are not especially valuable, the best and cheapest plan would
  be to separate the reacting animals from the healthy ones, and
  to have the former slaughtered under inspection as soon as they
  can be put in proper condition. It is probable that the flesh of
  most of these animals would be found fit for food, and the loss,
  therefore, would not be very great. In case the herd has been
  long affected and many of the animals are in an advanced stage of
  the disease, they are unfit for milk production, and the sooner
  they are slaughtered the less will be the loss.

  If the herd contains animals which are valuable for breeding
  purposes, the Bang system of management or some modification of
  it may be profitably adopted.


            STATE AID FOR THE ERADICATION OF TUBERCULOSIS.

  In the eradication of a disease so widely disseminated, and one
  which causes such serious losses to the animal industry of the
  country, there should be assistance offered by the State in order
  to relieve the burdens which fall upon the owners of live stock.
  A considerable number of States have shown a disposition to come
  to the assistance of farmers whose stock is affected, but the
  assistance has sometimes been coupled with conditions which made
  it unwelcome. In some States compulsory testing and the slaughter
  of reacting animals have been required, but this has not been a
  popular measure. It is essential that a plan should be devised
  which will meet with the approval of the stock owners and which
  will aid them without being too burdensome in its conditions.
  There are certain measures which have been adopted by individual
  States which have accomplished satisfactory results but which
  would be far more successful if adjoining States would adopt
  the same or similar regulations. Among the reasonable measures
  which a State may adopt for the repression of tuberculosis the
  following may be mentioned:

  1. Cattle which are brought into a State for breeding or dairy
  purposes may be tested with tuberculin, and those which react
  may be refused admission to the State. In connection with this
  measure it should be provided that cattle which have been tested
  by the authorities of another State or of the Federal Government
  and found free from disease should be allowed admission without
  being retested. The testing of animals coming into a State is
  essential in any effort to control this disease and is one of
  the first measures which should be enforced in any effort to
  eradicate it.

  2. There should be an inspection of all slaughtered animals
  coming from breeding or dairy herds within the State in order
  to discover in what herds the disease exists. Animals from the
  greater part of the milk-producing herds are being continually
  sold for slaughter as their usefulness in the dairy is over,
  and an examination of the carcasses of these cows would serve
  to locate the existence of the disease in many herds where its
  presence is unsuspected. Unfortunately, few of the animals killed
  in the small slaughterhouses are inspected, and in those cases
  where there is an inspection and tuberculosis is discovered it
  is seldom that the herds from which they came are traced and the
  owners informed of the discovery of this disease. In any effort
  to suppress tuberculosis it is almost essential that information
  of this kind should be obtained and an attempt made to persuade
  the owner to adopt proper measures for getting rid of the
  contagion.

  3. Measures should be adopted for testing herds with tuberculin
  without expense to the owners. In the beginning of the work,
  at least, this should not be compulsory, but it should be made
  to the interest of the owner of a tuberculous herd to have it
  tested under the auspices of the State. Apparently, it would
  also be wise and a great aid to stockmen for the State to test
  herds with tuberculin and certify to the healthfulness of animals
  from all those herds where no reactions occur. At present it is
  a difficult matter in most States for the breeder or dairyman
  to purchase cattle for his herd with any assurance that they
  are healthy. He may have them tested, but there is always a
  possibility that they have been treated with tuberculin a short
  time before and that for this reason they have not reacted.
  The loss which has fallen upon the breeders of the country
  through the introduction of tuberculosis in their herds has been
  tremendous, and it appears that it would be only a proper aid
  and encouragement to agricultural interests to assist breeders
  in obtaining animals free from disease. Not only would this
  encourage farmers to enter into breeding operations and increase
  the value of the industry within the State, but the certification
  of breeding animals would help to build up a market in other
  States for breeding animals.

  4. In order to encourage the owners of cattle to eradicate
  tuberculosis, States should allow a reasonable compensation
  for the animals which it is necessary to slaughter on account
  of being affected with this disease. It is certainly a matter
  of great importance to any State to have its herds free from
  tuberculosis and its animals and animal products above suspicion.
  With the recent demonstration of the communicability of animal
  tuberculosis to man, a demonstration which has been made by so
  many investigators and on such competent authority that the
  fact can no longer be questioned, there is a disposition on
  the part of sanitary authorities to scrutinize more carefully
  those animal products which are liable to be infected. It is,
  therefore, becoming every day more important for every State
  to repress tuberculosis within its borders and in that manner
  to maintain the reputation of its animal products. Where it
  is not deemed advisable to provide for slaughtering of all
  reacting animals with sufficient compensation from the State
  to make this measure satisfactory to the stockmen, the State
  may provide for the supervision of herds handled according to
  the Bang method or some modification of it. For the protection
  of its own citizens who consume dairy products, if not for the
  protection of its customers in other States, every State should
  make some arrangement which would lead to the removal of cows
  with tuberculous udders and those suffering from generalized
  tuberculosis from herds which supply milk, cream, and butter for
  human food. This much is essential for the public health, but
  it would be wise to go further and provide for the slaughter of
  all cows which show evidence on physical examination of being
  affected with tuberculosis.

  5. In cases where cattle owners are to have their tuberculous
  animals slaughtered in an effort to free their herds from
  disease the State should further assist them by disinfecting
  or at least supervising the disinfection of the contaminated
  stables. It is a somewhat difficult matter for persons not
  acquainted with the practical operations of disinfection to carry
  out this measure successfully, even after they have been given
  explicit instructions. It is impossible to impress sufficiently
  the importance of thoroughness upon persons who are lacking in
  experience in this line of work. As a consequence the majority of
  the premises disinfected by stockmen without the assistance of
  experts are imperfectly disinfected, and the disease breaks out
  again among the animals which are subsequently introduced. This
  is discouraging to the owner and serves to fix the impression
  that it is impossible to eradicate tuberculosis. This impression
  is already widespread, but it is essentially wrong, though it
  can only be removed by object lessons in the eradication of
  the disease under State supervision. There is no reason why
  tuberculosis should not be eradicated as pleuro-pneumonia was
  eradicated. The contagion is more widespread and the expense
  would be greater, but there are no inherent difficulties to
  prevent the success of such an undertaking.

  6. When a herd has been freed from tuberculosis by the slaughter
  of all reacting animals, and the premises have been properly
  disinfected, the State should give further aid to the stock
  owner by testing without expense the animals which he desires to
  purchase for renewing his herd. This measure is essential to the
  success of any plan for lessening the prevalence of this disease
  or eradicating it. The expense of testing such animals is almost
  too great to be borne by the individual, and, moreover, private
  tests are often unsatisfactory and unreliable.




                         Transcriber’s Notes


Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been
silently corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences
within the text and consultation of external sources. Some hyphens
in words have been silently added when a predominant preference was
found in the original book. Except for those changes noted below, all
misspellings and inconsistent spellings have been retained.

On the table on page 13, footnote b was changed to footnote d, and
footnote c was changed to footnote e.

New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the
public domain.

Italicized text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78261 ***