CORRESPONMKNCK \\1TII MANUFACTURERS. 65 



CYPHER'S INCUBATOR COMPANY. 



(Nos. 1854, 1739, 1759, 1693, 1581, 1795, 1893.) 



* * * In looking over these reports we can only come to tin- conclusion tlial there 

 has been sonic radical niislakc made in your reports or ihat you have pollen hold of 

 products not, of our manufacture, although possibly disguised under our name. We 

 will take them up one at a time. 



Cypher's clover meal i IS.VM: We discontinued manufacturing clover meal early in 

 the spring of 1904. 



Cypher's chick food (1739): You state that you find it to contain mostly wheat - 

 screenings, also that you find foxtail, charlock, smart \\-i !, chess, and rough pigweed 

 in it, also rock. \\'e I teg to state that we positively have never put out a pound of 

 chick food that contained an ounce of whoa! screenings or wild seed of any kind. 

 * * * It is possible that a year or more ago samples of our chick food may have 

 been picked up that contained three pounds of chick grit in each 100 pounds of food. 

 This was put in as a necessary element, but this year we omit it and caution the 

 buyer that the grit must be supplied separately. 



Cypher's forcing food (1759): * There is absolutely no weed seed and no 



wheat screenings. 



Cypher v cratching food (1093): You report that you find it contains wheat product 

 Xo. '2. *M* * We beg to state that Cypher's scratching food is now and always 

 has been made up of whole grains. 



Cypher's laying food (1581, 1795, 1893): You have three reports of this product. 

 In two of them you give wheat product No. 1, corn meal, and some animal meal as 

 being the products which it is found to contain. You have overlooked altogether 

 the product which is the base of our laying food and several others highly important 

 for egg production that appear prominently in the other reports of laying food/ * * * 

 It contains no wheat screenings or seeds of smartweed, foxtail, or charlock. 



Comment by authors. Cypher's chick food (1739): The micros- 

 copist made a second examination of this product and found no 

 reason to change his original findings. 



Cypher's forcing food (1759) : The microscopist made a second 

 examination of this product and found no reason to change his find- 

 ings, except in so far as to say that wheat screenings were not present 

 in large quantities. 



Cypher's scratching food (1693): The microscopist made a second 

 examination and found more of the outside coats of grains than should 

 be present in whole grains. 



Cypher's laying food (1581, 1795, 1893): The microscopist made a 

 second examination and was unable to find any products except those 

 given in the table. There was no reason to change the findings in 

 regard to weed seed. 



DAYTON MILLING COMPANY. 



(No. 1701.) 



" Referring to the analysis you have just sent us of No. 1701 (chop feed), in regard 

 to the microscopical examination we are unable to tell' what quality of our feed you 

 analyzed. We make several qualities. One quality contains no whole oats and the 



12228 Bull. 10807 5 



