Prairie Farmer, Vol. 56: No. 5, February 2, 1884.: A Weekly Journal for the Farm, Orchard and Fireside — John Shaqi
Prairie Farmer, Vol. 56: No. 5, February 2, 1884.: A Weekly Journal for the Farm, Orchard and FiresideVarious
Science
Prairie Farmer, Vol. 56: No. 5, February 2, 1884.: A Weekly Journal for the Farm, Orchard and Fireside
Various
Agriculture -- United States -- Periodicals; Farm life -- Periodicals; United States -- Rural conditions -- Periodicals
The papers and discussions at Lake Mills comprehended quite a range of
topics, and they were handled with marked ability. Three of the essays
have now appeared in THE PRAIRIE FARMER in full. They were too good to
slaughter by abridgment, and the same remark applies to other papers,
yet our space is too limited for an unabridged report.
THE ROAD TO THE FACTORY,
by Robt. Fargo, showed the people how much they are losing by persisting
in having poor roads, when by a small expense they might have good ones.
The road tax is improperly applied. He thought that a good gravel road
in most localities could be made for $1,000 per mile, the road-bed to be
graveled one foot deep and twelve feet wide.
CANADA VS. WISCONSIN.
Mr. Harris’ paper, printed in last week’s FARMER, elicited considerable
discussion. Members desired to know if, in the essayist’s opinion,
Canadian dairy management was superior to that of the States, and
especially of Wisconsin. The reply was in the affirmative. There seems
to be more thoroughness on the part of Canadian dairymen. They have no
better grass, nor water, nor cows. They discriminate more rigidly
between good and bad patrons. They sometimes bring the law to bear
against those who water milk or skim it. The factories there are mostly
owned by stock companies. When tainted milk is discovered in the vat, it
is traced back as soon as possible to its source, and the patron
bringing it is excluded. The law there is similar to that in New York
and was founded upon that law. Mr. Fish related an instance where a
fraudulent patron in Herkimer county, N. Y., had been detected, sued,
and heavily fined for his practices. Mr. Harris said as inspector of
factories, he always refused to receive milk from cows allowed to feed
on slough grass or drink stagnant water. Such milk would always prevent
the manufacture of good cheese. He wants no milk from cows forced to
feed on marshes. When a man applies to a factory to sell his milk, he
looks the man over, he visits his farm, he looks at the stables and all
the surroundings, and he can generally tell whether or not it is safe to
receive that man’s milk.
COMPETITION.
It cropped out in this discussion that in some parts of Wisconsin and
Illinois there are too many factories. Competition leads factorymen to
often receive milk that should be discarded. To offend a man by
enforcing strict cleanliness, non-skimming, and stripping was to drive
him to a neighboring factory and his custom is lost. It is hard to make
owners of cows honest when dishonest or selfish factorymen encourage
them in selfish and fraudulent ways. Mr. Harris said at some of the best
Canadian factories patrons were refused the privilege of taking home the
whey in their milk cans. He would have no objection to their taking the
whey if all would cleanse their cans properly. But this could not be
depended upon.
WATER IN MILK.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account