THE MILK SITUATION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 361 



Suppose he has a herd of 20 calves. He may rely on getting 2 gallons of 

 milk from each calf on an average. If he gets 40 gallons a day and in the 

 winter gets 22 cents, which is a pretty good price, that represents $8.80 a day 

 from that herd of 20 calves. If we calculate the cost of feeding each one at 

 20 cents in winter we would deduct $4 from the $8.80, leaving the producer 

 with a net income of $4.80 a day. He would have to pay his rent and for 

 sending the milk to town, and from time to time his cows go dry, so his income 

 is really inadequate. 



If farmers are to be required to meet all kinds of expensive requirements, it 

 will add more expense. I think, personally, it is desirable that the cattle 

 should be housed in thoroughly snnitary stables, but that means an investment 

 of considerable capital, and if the tuberculin test is applied it means also a 

 certain amount to be written off at a loss; but it has a more serious bearing if 

 it is applied suddenly and without warrant or compensation. 



A man may have his whole fortune staked on this herd, and if he is to have 

 the test applied, having done nothing against the law, it may mean that half 

 of his cattle will be condemned ; and it is not infrequent for half the cattle to 

 go under the test, especially if housed under insanitary conditions. 



He faces a loss of half his herd with only what he can get from the butcher 

 for the meat; maybe in some cases he will lose all. At any rate it means a 

 serious loss to the producer. 



I don't think the producers or dealers should attempt to down the laws as to 

 what test should be applied, but if we submit to certain tests we have a right 

 to ask for proper compensation. It is not for us to determine whether the test 

 is by the Government of Maryland or Virginia or the District, but it is fair that 

 the people of the District should pay up a proper amount if they require it. If 

 there is increased protection to the public, the producers must be properly com- 

 pensated for it. If they have proper compensation, I don't think there is any 

 objection to submitting to the test. 



Then if the test is continually applied after proper compensation is given, 

 all that is required is that sufficient price is paid for the milk. A higher price 

 will have to be paid by the consumer for a more valuable article. I therefore 

 ask the commissioners to use their influence to obtain proper compensation for 

 the producer of milk. If this business is made productive enough to the people 

 in the neighborhood, there will be enough milk coming into Washington. 



Under present conditions it is not to be expected that any of the poor class 

 of producers can attempt to meet the requirements in the District, but if they 

 get compensation for the cattle condemned and get better prices they will in- 

 crease the facilities, and there will be no friction between the health depart- 

 ment and themselves in meeting the requirements. 



APPENDIX J. 



COMMUNICATION FROM A. S. TRUNDLE, REPRESENTING THE DAIRYMEN'S 

 ASSOCIATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MARYLAND, AND VIRGINIA. 



THE DAIRYMEN'S ASSOCIATION OF THE 

 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MARYLAND, AND VIRGINIA, 



Washington, D. C., November 20, 1910. 

 Mr. J. Louis WILLIGE, Chairman. 



DEAR SIR: In compliance with your suggestion, under date of November 18, 

 would say the complaints lodged by me in behalf of the Dairymen's Association 

 of the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia were, first, that the health 

 officer, in violation of law, has refused to issue permits to ship milk into the 

 District of Columbia, although all sanitary requirements had been complied 

 with; second, that the health officer had in the absence of any possible author- 

 ity cited members of this association to appear before him and show cause 

 why milk claimed to have been sold by them contained so-called excessive 

 numbers of bacteria (this in the absence of law or regulations to name any 

 specific number) and had threatened to have them summoned in court; third, 

 that in the opinion of this association the health officer had mislead the District 

 of Columbia Commissioners, by making to them (this determined by their reply 



