THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
June 14 
41 4 
DISINFECTING A DAIRY BARN. 
Cleaning Up After Tuberculosis. 
The greatest danger in respect to tuberculosis is 
through the association of healthy with tubercular 
cattle. The first thing to make sure of is that all of 
the tubercular cattle have been removed from the 
herd. This cannot be done by one inspection if the 
infection is widespread. A second and a third test 
with tuberculin must be carried out in order to dis¬ 
cover and remove all of the tubercular animals. The 
disinfection of the stable is important, but it is by no 
means as important as the removal of tubercular cat¬ 
tle from the herd. There is scientific evidence in 
favor of the opinion that the chief danger of tubercu¬ 
losis is from the tubercle bacilli in the moist stage 
as they are freshly excreted from the diseased ani¬ 
mal. They come from the lungs of the tubercular cow 
during the act of coughing, or upon forced expiration, 
and may then readily be inhaled by cows standing 
near. Of course the coughed-out solid particles and 
the mucus and saliva from the mouth contain tubercle 
bacilli, but these are dangerous chiefly in the fresh 
condition. 
Guided by the work of Cornet an opinion has 
sprung up to the effect that it is the dried tubercle 
bacilli carried in the air as dust that are the chief 
sources of danger. Under the leadership of Fluege a 
great deal of work has been done during recent years 
which proves that tuberculosis may readily be carried 
by bacilli excreted during the act of speaking, cough¬ 
ing, sneezing, etc. Cows do not cough out large quan¬ 
tities of mucus or clumps of tissue as consumptive 
persons do. Upon reaching the throat the expector¬ 
ated material of the cow is swallowed, as a rule. In 
1898 and 1899 a very long and careful series of experi¬ 
ments were carried out in the laboratory of the State 
Live Stock Sanitary Board of Pennsylvania for the 
purpose of testing the infectiousness of dust in the 
various parts of stables that had been occupied by 
tubercular cattle. The dust was collected above 
beams, in the upper parts of the stable, from cracks, 
from the tops of window cases and other remote 
places where it had been allowed to collect for 
months, if not for years, and where it could only have 
been deposited from the air. In practically all cases 
this dust was found to be free from tubercle bacilli, 
notwithstanding the fact that in many instances it 
was collected from stables that had been occupied by 
tubercular herds for long periods. On the other hand, 
scrapings from the mangers were found to contain 
tubercle bacilli in many instances. This shows that 
the material coughed directly from the lungs and the 
saliva dropped from the mouth may be dangerous, 
but that the fine particles of dust are not so likely to 
carry infection. The instances wnerein there is good 
reason to believe that tuberculosis has been spread 
from cow to cow indirectly, through the occupancy 
of infected premises, are quite rare. They are com¬ 
paratively fewer than those wherein the disease has 
been traced directly from one animal to another or 
than the cases wherein the disease has been carried 
from tubercular cows to calves and swine through the 
milk. If the barn under consideration is so construct¬ 
ed that it can be cleansed in accordance with the in¬ 
structions following, 1 should have no hesitation in 
saying that, it may be safely used again for housing 
cattle. Let me impress the point that the chief factor 
in eradicating tuberculosis is, first of all, the removal 
from the herd of animals that are so afflicted. Fol¬ 
lowing this, the premises should be disinfected, when 
they may be used without fear of their propagating 
infection. 
It Is very evident that the usual so-called disinfection, 
which consists in scattering a little strong smelling sub¬ 
stance about, cannot be efficient. When the disinfectant 
(an agent used to destroy disease-producing germs) is 
scattered carelessly about on the floor of a stable it may 
not cover more than but one-hundredth of the area upon 
which the germs are lodged. So that, in this case, but 
one per cent of the stable Is disinfected. Disinfectants 
cannot destroy germs that they do not come in contact 
with, and if but part of the germs are destroyed and the 
others are allowed to remain, the result of the whole 
operation will be disappointing. 
1. Permit the entrance of a plentiful amount of light. 
Disease-producing germs are destroyed by the direct rays 
of the sun within a short time. They are destroyed by 
less intense light more slowly, but will live for long per¬ 
iods in dark places, so that one of the cheapest and best 
disinfectants is sunlight. 
2. Cleanse the stable thoroughly as follows: Remove 
the manure: remove piles of fodder; sweep the ceiling, 
walls and floor; remove rotten woodwork and loose 
boards, especially of the floor; remove dried accumula¬ 
tions about mangers, floors and drains; scrub the man¬ 
gers, feed-boxes, stalls and partitions with hot water 
and strong soap, lye or washing soda. 
8 . Apply chemical disinfectants. After the stable has 
been treated as above recommended, it is ready for the 
application of chemical disinfectants. These are sub¬ 
stances that poison disease-producing germs. Carbolic 
acid mixed with water in the proportion of one to 20 
parts or one pint to 2t4 gallons of water is efficient, and 
should be applied with a spray pump. 
4. Whitewash. Although whitewash is not an active 
disinfectant, in the usual meaning of this term, it is an 
excellent purifier, and should in all cases be used in 
stables after they have been thoroughly cleansed and 
disinfected with other agents. If chloride of lime is added 
to whitewash in the proportion of one pound to three 
gallons, the value of this application is greatly increased. 
It is advisable to whitewash cow stables frequently, at 
least once in six months, and better once every three 
months. Hot whitewash is better than cold for this pur¬ 
pose. 
5. Allow the stable to remain empty, if possible, for 
several weeks, for this allows a greater opportunity for 
the death of disease-producing germs that may have es¬ 
caped the disinfectant applications. 
There are some badly-constructed stables that it is 
almost impossible to disinfect, because cisterns, wells, 
cesspools, root cellars, spaces in the walls, floors, etc., 
cannot be reached properly. In these cases it is some¬ 
times necessary to vacate the premises for a long period, 
or, if they have but little value, burn them down. Where 
the floor of the stable is made of earth it is well to dig 
it out to a depth of about six inches and refill the exca¬ 
vation with fresh earth. The litter, old woodwork, etc., 
removed from infected stables should be burned. 
Pa. State Veterinarian. Leonard pearson. 
FARM INSURANCE. 
The question of farm insurance is simply one of 
honesty. If insurance agents would make a personal 
examination of property and be honest in insuring it, 
there would be no trouble. I know of a case a few 
years ago when a man sold his entire farm for less by 
several hundred dollars than the insurance he was 
carrying on the buildings. A neighbor of his had an 
unoccupied house burned that the agent swore in 
court was not over-insured, while every one present 
conversant with the facts knew the old house was 
an encumbrance on the property in the hands of the 
man who owned it, and insured for double its worth 
besides. Within sight of that farm a barn was burned 
A CONCRETE CHURCH. FlG. 163. 
that was in the last stages of dilapidation, and in¬ 
sured for enough to build a new one. The agent got 
his percentage and helped the man get his insurance. 
In cities danger to other property causes rigid in¬ 
quiry as to the cause of fires, but there is rarely any 
such inquiry when a farm building is burned, and 1 
have never known a case when an agent did not aid 
the insured party even when he felt that the building 
was burned to get the insurance. The reason the 
agents give is that it would ruin the business to re¬ 
fuse to pay, and as the amounts are usually small, 
they prefer to pay. The insurance companies also aid 
in this by insisting upon a policy being written for 
nearly the value of the property, to get the premium. 
So long as agents for the sake of the percentage are 
allowed to insure old tumbledown buildings in the 
country the insuring of farm property will be risky. 
There are, however, insurance companies with trust¬ 
worthy agents who insure for a reasonable proportion 
of the value of farm property in use at reasonable 
rates, but until we hear less of abandoned farms the 
big companies with all sorts of agents will do well to 
let country risks alone, unless they can afford to send 
out an appraiser whose pay does not depend on the 
amount of insurance placed. farmer. 
AYRSHIRE CATTLE.—The animals shown on page 
415, Figs. 164 and 165, are owned by Dr. C. E. Hatch, 
who writes the veterinary matter for The R. N.-Y. 
The cow Princess Alice 2d is 13 years old, and has a 
record of 56 pounds of milk in one day and a test of 
4 y s per cent. She is by Emperor 3355; he by Duch¬ 
ess of Smithfield 4256. The two heifers are Bonnie 
Mitchell and Spotted Douglas, eight and 8^ months 
old. They were sired by Prince Charlie 6111, he by 
Princess Alice 2d. The Ayrshire cattle have long been 
popular among those who know them well. Nothing 
has kept them back but the modesty of tboge \ytlo 
breed and sell them! 
CONCRETE FOR HOUSE CONSTRUCTION. 
Its Use in Place of Lumber. 
Part I. 
Our vast natural resources have in the past made us 
often unmindful of prodigality and its final result. 
Particularly has this been true in the use and abuse 
of our timber lands. The older countries of Europe 
learned this lesson long ago, adopting a rational sys¬ 
tem of forestry. We shall soon learn the same lesson 
here, if we have not already done so. A marked in¬ 
dication of a readjustment in building material, lead¬ 
ing to a conservation of our valuable timber, is the 
constant flow of questions concerning cements and 
concrete construction. Farmers are interesting them¬ 
selves in cement floors for their cellars and outbuild¬ 
ings, which is not alone a question of economy but of 
sanitation and durability. Insurance rates are an¬ 
nually becoming more burdensome, and we shall soon 
be compelled to have fireproof buildings. The fire¬ 
proof structural work of the past few years has 
proved to be so only in name, as evidenced by the 
destruction of the Park Avenue Hotel in New York. 
Iron, brick, limestone and mortar are not inflam¬ 
mable, but when subjected to the heat generated from 
the combustible material found in the carpets, furni¬ 
ture, etc., the iron twists and bends out of form; the 
adhesive force in the mortar is destroyed. Limestone 
suffers under conflagration just as it does in a kiln. 
Concrete, when built of Portland cement, trap rock 
and pure sand, seems abie to withstand the heat of 
a conflagration without fracture. Proof is at hand in 
the case of a recent fire at Bayonne, N. J., destroying 
iron structural work. In the conflagration was the 
concrete building of the Pacific Coast Borax Co., a 
large building 200x250 feet, costing $200,000. The en¬ 
gineering Record reports that $1,000 will repair the 
damage to the building. Tne floors and walls were 
perfect after the terrible strain of heat and water, 
the water standing to the depth of four inches upon 
the floors after the fire. If the same tenacity can be 
expected in every instance we may feel that after all 
a fireproof building is possible. 
The first fine concrete building constructed in this 
country, according to my information, is St. James 
Church at St. James Place and Lafayette Avenue, 
Brooklyn, N. Y. This was built under the Ransome 
system. See Fig. 163. Another large building may 
be found near Pittsburg, where an accurate account 
was kept of cost per cubic yard: 
Gravel, coarse, 103 tons at 19 cents. $195 
Gravel, fine, 40 tons, at 21 cents. 85 
Sand, 32 tons at 36 cents. 115 
Cement, per bbl. $1.60. 1,535 
Lumber . 430 
Tools and storehouse account. 77 
Labor preparing site. 210 
Forms . 280 
Platform and building . 50 
Changing trestle . 53 
Excavation . 300 
Handling material . 37 
Mixing and laying . 440 
$4,849 
Some careful estimates I have at hand seem to war¬ 
rant a decrease in cost from brick of 25 to 50 per 
cent, not from lessened expense per cubic foot, but a 
less number required to obtain equal superficial wall 
area. Railroad abutments, when laid from concrete, 
have cost from $5 to $10 a foot. Stone costs from 20 
to 80 per cent more. 
The Germans and French are building freely of 
concrete. The firm of Martin & Ormand, Riverside, 
Cal., has patented a machine for manufacturing on 
the ground draining and sewer pipe, flumes, etc., 
which is said to do perfect work, rapidly and econom¬ 
ically. Nothing can possibly stand in the way of con¬ 
crete house construction, walls three inches thick 
each, with an air chamber, these walls being support¬ 
ed against each other with twisted steel rods covered 
with cement, making in all a thickness of eight 
inches. The inside is again furrowed out and plaster¬ 
ed to prevent dampness. Walls constructed of com¬ 
pact material are damp from their radiating power, 
hence any moisture in the room changes at once from 
vapor to water. h. e. cook. 
SKIM-MILK FOR HENS.—About a year ago a sub¬ 
scriber wrote to the Hope Farm man complaining 
that his hens did not lay as they should, and was 
promptly advised and consoled in H, W. C.’s usual 
kindly manner. As we happened to have exactly the 
same number of hens, and were fairly reveling in 
eggs at the time, we were impelled to write The R. 
N.-Y. and tell how it was done. Feed skim-milk! On 
page 381 Mapes the hen man tells us how Mapes does 
it. Skim-milk, which was our way, may be any man’s 
successful way. Mapes says that in order to produce 
eggs the hen must have albumen, and skim-milk sup¬ 
plies this in its most available form, together with 
the necessary mineral salts, etc. The genial Hope 
Farm man, while admitting that skim-milk would do 
it, reproved us, gently saying “Better give it to the 
children.” Certainly give it to the children in pref¬ 
erence, but there are places when you would be given 
to understand that the hogs have a prior right to it, 
and the wild longing for a generous swig of butter¬ 
milk must be denied because the pigs are squealing 
for it. Hens before hogs, but the children first of all'. 
Now will some one tell us how to make from skim- 
milk, or part skim-milk, small homemade cheese (not 
pot cheese) that will keep till used? j. yates peek. 
