FARM ANIMALS 193 



controversy still rages regarding the injurious effects 

 of preservatives in food it would obviously be with- 

 out point to enter into the discussion of the matter 

 in this connection. However, no injustice is done 

 any one in urging that, even if the use of preserva- 

 tives be finally justified in the case of meat and other 

 products destined for long keeping, this method 

 does not apply to milk. Milk is obtained twice 

 daily and can be delivered in a perfectly fresh con- 

 dition to a distance of two or three hundred miles 

 from surrounding towns by means of the fast milk 

 trains, which are a special feature of the modern 

 dairy business. Tt is, therefore, utterly unneces- 

 sary to attempt to preserve milk beyond the length 

 of time it will keep if clean. The use of preserva- 

 tives merely furnishes an excuse for the prevalence 

 of filthy habits about the dairy. Perhaps the least 

 objectionable of all of these preservatives is forma- 

 lin which, when used in the proportion of one part 

 to forty thousand, has the effect of checking the 

 growth of bacteria and preventing the souring of 

 milk much longer than would otherwise be the case. 

 Even formalin, however, has been objected to by 

 physicians on account of its injurious effects upon 

 infants. 



In comparing the relative power of the beef steer 

 and the dairy cow to make products out of food, 

 it was stated that the dairy cow makes ten times 

 as much milk from the same amount of food as the 

 steer does beef. This statement may be subject 

 to great discount by reason of the fact that meat is 

 considered to be a more solid food than milk. The 

 percentage of water, however, in meat and milk 

 is nearly the same and this fact makes the relative 

 production of the dairy cows as compared with the 

 steer even more marvelous. The average compo- 



