402 Bulletin 165. 



of a lack of thorough cleaning. The}^ had become obstructed 

 to such an extent that the reservoir would become half full of 

 milk before the pressure of the accumulated fluid was sufficient 

 to force its way through the meshes. The deep setting cans 

 were apparentl}- clean but they were never placed where sunlight 

 could act upon them. 



The method employed in washing the tinware was closely 

 observed. The tub of hot water in which the work was done, 

 w^as, at the beginning, as hot as could be borne by the hand, but 

 was allowed to cool so that it frequently fell to 8o°F. (28°C.). 

 After washing, the utensils were rinsed in hot water, but the}" 

 were not subjected to a high temperature for a long enough time 

 to sterilize them. So little importance was placed upon the 

 necessit}^ for extreme care in washing and scalding, that the 

 woman who came dail)^ to do mereh' that work, had been kept 

 in ignorance of the occurrence of ropiness in the creamer\\ 



Three different quantities of sterile milk were successively 

 exposed to contamination on the surface of the strainer. Four 

 other samples were allowed to remain for short periods in contact 

 with the interior of the deep setting cans. All three samples 

 contaminated from the strainer, and two from the deep setting 

 cans became viscid. To insure that no mistake had been made, 

 and that the viscid condition was caused hy Bacillus lactis viscosus, 

 the presence of that organism in each of the viscid samples was 

 demonstrated by a bacteriologic examination. 



The evidence concerning the cause of the constant ropiness of 

 the milk at that time requires little comment. To recapitulate : 

 The strainer througTi which all the milk passed was found upon 

 two different days to possess the powder of contaminating milk 

 with the specific organism which causes ropiness. Two out of 

 four deep setting cans examined were found in a like condition. 

 During the time that the ropiness was occurring at the creamery, 

 samples collected from the milk before being brought there did 

 not become viscid. In addition, a bacteriologic examination of 

 the probable sources of contamination at the farm gave negative 

 results. 



It ma}' be suggested, and reasonably, that each of the sterile 

 samples contaminated in the creamer}' may have received the 



