Milk riticE Deteumixatiox 47 



figure, 1.77. It will be noted that by the u.se of this method the 

 ratio of the costs of feed and labor between the average of the 

 eight-year period and the November, 1917, period, is used rather 

 than the actual prices of the commodities. 



"The average monthly prices of milk per hundred pounds over 

 the eight-year period were as follows: November, $1,768; Decem- 

 ber, .$1.81^; January, $1,781; February, $1,737; March, $1.60; 

 April, $1,406; May, $1.15; June, $1,017. Applying this index, 

 1.77 November price, to these figures: November, $3.13; Decem- 

 ber, $3.20; January, $3.15; February, $3.07; March, $2.83; 

 April, $2.49; May, $2.04; June, $1.80." 



This report was signed only by the city members of the com- 

 mission. The agriculturally-minded members and the Chicago 



1907 I90g 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 /9l4 I9IS i9l6 /9l7 1918 1913 <9^0 



iiuiSlraUiiy when CliicuKo milk prices have been above and below their ten-year 

 average ratio to feed and labor prices. 



milk producers knew that the prices secured by the ratio method 

 as advocated by the commission were not high enough to cover 

 cost of production. The fault was in the method of application. 

 Hay and labor between them were made to represent, according 

 to the commission, 62 per cent of the total cost of producing milk, 

 which is altogether too high a weighting. This bad weighting was 

 made worse because of the fact that thoroly up-to-date figures on 

 hay and labor were not available, and the figures which were taken 

 wore far lower than those existing at the time when the report was 

 actually publisjied. The converting of silage into terms of hay 

 instead of into terms of corn is a matter open to grave question in 

 view of the fact that silage production costs are almost identical 

 with corn production costs, and the alternative market for silage 

 is the corn market and not the hav market. Several other mis- 



