<{ Chemical Test ” for Butter Production. 
847 
only 1| oz. more butter than did that of No. 1211. On the other 
hand, the second prize winner gave 40 lb. 12 oz. of milk against the 
29 lb. 7 oz. of No. 1205, and it was only the exceptional richness 
of the milk of No. 1205 on one occasion (the fat percentage being 
as much as 8 - 20) that gave to it the first prize. The fat percentages, 
5T9 and 8'20, of No. 1205 do not show such consistency as do the 
4T6 and 6T1 respectively of No. 1211. Nor, when the total yields 
of milk are severally compared, do the 12 lb. 13 oz. and the 
16 lb. 10 oz. of No. 1205 show anything like the weight or regu- 
larity instanced by the 19 lb. 2 oz. and 21 lb. 10 oz. of No. 1211. 
No. 1184, also, shows great consistency both in the yield of milk 
and the richness of quality. 
Taking these points together, I feel I am justified in saying that 
it was probably only due to an exceptional circumstance, or possibly 
to some irregularity of manipulation in the working of the churn 
test, that gave the first prize to No. 1205, and that the chemical 
test in all likelihood more accurately represented the true position 
of the competing animals. At all events, it will be conceded that 
it more clearly indicated which was the best animal of the whole 
number on the occasion of the trial. 
However, there was a marked similarity all through, and the 
trial showed that both methods, when properly worked, are capable 
of giving comparative results not differing widely from one another, 
and that the chemical test can, in competent hands, be absolutely 
depended upon for ascertaining the value of cows competing with 
one another as butter -producers. It is very certain, however, that 
had it not been for the extreme care exercised, and the minute pre- 
cautions taken beforehand by the assistant-steward, the Hon. A. E. 
Parker, to avoid as far as possible any cause of failure, the churn 
test could not have been carried out to the successful issue attained. 
The details of the arrangements are recorded in the Journal, Sep- 
tember 1893, pp. 525, 526. Mr. Parker took great pains to elimi- 
nate, as much as he could, those causes of variation which I touch 
upon later in this note, and was careful to use the same separator 
throughout, to employ the same temperature for separation, to have 
the same kind of churn, and to conduct all the operations under 
like conditions and temperature. Had all this not been done, or 
had any accidental loss by spilling of milk or cream occurred, or 
any unevenness of working of separator or churn been experienced, 
it is certain that the test would have turned out very differently from 
what it did ; and I am sure that, unless put in the hands of men of 
experience and aptitude, its actual working will be found to be very 
far from an easy task, while, even with such men directing it, it 
must always be, until completed, a matter of considerable anxiety. 
Like most tests of the kind, its worth depends in chief measure 
upon the kind of men who are entrusted with its working. 
Having shown that results not widely differing can be obtained 
by the two methods when properly worked, it remains to consider 
the relative accuracy and general adaptability of the methods. 
On the one hand, the churn test has the advantage (if advantage 
