380 
' THE RURAb NEW-YORKER 
March 25, 
window frames are three feet square except those in 
front, which are 3x4, and there are seven windows in 
each side and two in each end, which will give 
ample light, over five square feet of glass per cow. 
The windows are to be hinged at the bottom and will 
have galvanized shields on the sides to prevent drafts. 
The air for ventilating will enter through the win¬ 
dows, using the muslin system if we find it necessary, 
and the outlet is through two 12-inch ventilators in 
the center of the roof. The main doors are seven 
feet six inches by 10 feet, the stable doors are 4x8 feet, 
being made extra high on account of the carrier 
track. As will be seen by the plan, the stable extends 
to the south beyond the other buildings, so that it 
gets the full benefit of the sunlight, and is protected 
from the northeast and northwest winds. 
The roof is the most interesting part of the building. 
While the roof was being built it was supported by 
centering studding being set up about every four 
feet, planks laid lengthwise on them, and then cross¬ 
wise 16 inches apart on centers. Two I beams, into 
the sides of which the rafters and tiles are laid, were 
put up lengthwise of the building, each one supported 
by six 2j4-inch pipes filled with cement set just in 
front of the stalls. Then the four-inch tiles are laid 
on the planks with a four-inch space between the 
rows, which is filled with cement reinforced with 
three-fourths-inch rods, part of which are bent over 
the I beams to give added strength and bind the sec¬ 
tions of the roof together. The hooks for the carrier 
tracks are laid into these cement rafters. The center 
14-foot span is made level, the side spans are 12 feet 
long and slope about two feet. A coat of cement vary¬ 
ing from one to three inches is plastered on the out¬ 
side, the center span being crowned to shed water. A 
ridge of cement is built up on the edge of the cornice, 
making a fine gutter. The roof is to be covered with 
a heavy coat of asphalt to make it entirely proof 
against rain and frost. After standing about two 
weeks the centering was removed and the inside plas¬ 
tered. The whole roof is estimated to weigh 40 tons 
and to be strong enough to support 40 tons more. The 
two small rooms have four-inch walls, and are roofed 
with cement plastered on metal lath. The passage 
to the barn is 6x12, and the one from the stable to the 
milk house is 6x8 and will be used for a straining 
room. The milk house is 12x16 outside measure; the 
tank room is six feet six inches by 10 feet eight 
inches inside, and the other room for washing, sepa¬ 
rating, etc., is eight feet by 10 feet eight inches inside. 
There are three tanks for cans and bottles; the outlet 
pipes are so arranged that when the caps arc removed 
the surplus water runs off, the pipes in two of the 
tanks being cut to the right height for cans, the other 
for bottles. When we change the water the pipes un¬ 
screw out of ties set flush with the bottom of the 
tank. The partition and table are of cement plastered 
cn lath like the roof. The can rack is of half-inch 
galvanized pipe, and will hold 40 cans; it extends 
through the partition with a rack for pails on the 
ether side. 
Most people think, because the buildings are fire¬ 
proof, that they must be very expensive, but that is a 
mistake. As near as we can estimate, counting our 
own time, they will cost about $2,000 all equipped 
ready for use, and they are paid for wholly by the 
money received for milk. Wooden buildings, built 
in first-class shape, sheathed inside and with slate or 
shingle roofs, would not cost, much, if any, less. It 
is easily seen that the first cost of a cement floor is 
less than a wooden one. The builder said he could 
put up the terra cotta roof cheaper than one of slate 
or shingle, partly because it would be nearly flat, mak¬ 
ing less roof space and making the end walls of the 
building much smaller. The walls probably cost some 
more than wood, but not much, if any, more than 
enough to balance the saving on the rest of the build¬ 
ing. Of course cheaply constructed wooden buildings 
can be put up for much less money, but that is hardly 
a fair comparison. We have the great advantage of 
having a set of buildings that cannot burn and will 
last indefinitely with no outlay for insurance and 
little for repairs, besides being as sanitary as they can 
possibly be made. eemer f. bodurtha. 
Hampden Co., Mass. 
A BUMPER CORN CROP IN KENTUCKY. 
I have 18 acres of slightly rolling, rather thin yellow 
clay land containing just enough sand to make it wash 
badly when left exposed to heavy rains. In June, 1910, 
it was drilled to Whippoorwill peas; the best spots were 
mown for hay and seed, and remainder was gleaned by 
the pigs. In October it was double disked, fined with an 
Acme harrow and drilled with 1 1-2 bushel of rye per 
acre, no fertilizer having been used at any time. The rye 
seeding was followed by several weeks of dry weather, 
and it had made but very little growth until January 10, 
since which time we have had some pretty warm weather, 
and the field has “greened up” nicely. I wish to raise a 
bumper crop of corn on this land, and on account of bad 
roads large quantities of manure are out of the question, 
although the thin spots will be manured slightly and the 
rye turned under. The growth of rye will not be great. 
Will it sour the soil enough to damage the corn crop? 
Please advise me how to proceed, how much and what 
kind of fertilizer to use, whether to sow the fertilizer 
broadcast or in the corn row, etc. T. m. d. 
yinitbland, Ky. 
It would have been better to have plowed and sub¬ 
soiled that land thoroughly last Fall, for there is noth¬ 
ing that tends more to prevent washing than a deep 
bed of broken soil into which the rain can sink. Most 
of the washing all over the 'South has been caused by 
shallow plowing, so that when the Summer torrents 
come the shallow surface gets into a creamy state and 
runs down hill because it cannot si.'k into the soil. 
But I would never attempt subsoiling in Soring, since 
the subsoil will be wet when the surface .s in good 
order for plowing. Then it would have been far bet¬ 
ter for the corn crop if you had sown Crimson 
clover seed last Fall, either alone or along with the 
rye. There is nothing better for a corn crop than a 
growth of Crimson clover plowed under in the Spring. 
We find here that where com is on a clover sod there 
is never any firing, but the leaves keep green to the 
ground. Of course with a liberal application of com¬ 
mercial fertilizer you can greatly increase the corn 
crop, but a clover sod manured during the Winter 
makes corn more economically than fertilizers. Mr. 
Clarendon Davis of Alabama makes corn at a cost of 
8J4 cents a bushel. I have been on Mr. Davis’s farm, 
who went from Kentucky to Alabama and has brought 
up a farm that made five bushels of wheat to a yield 
of 35 to 40 bushels But as you have the rye it will 
help getting organic matter into the soil. You should 
plow it under before it gets tough, for it decays slowly 
after the stems are strawy. Then harrow in a mixture 
made of 1,000 pounds of acid phosphate, 600 pounds 
of cotton-seed meal and 400 pounds of muriate of 
potash to make a ton. Of this use 500 pounds broad¬ 
cast, and harrow in well, for the feeding roots of 
corn run far and wide and soon get away from a little 
in the hill. Then leave a small portion without this 
fertilizer, and note the difference, and you can ascer¬ 
tain what it has cost you to make the extra corn. The 
man who farms in a regular rotation, grows plenty 
of forage from the legume crops, and feeds it and 
makes manure need never buy ammonia in a fertilizer 
and can usually make his soil more fertile and pro¬ 
ductive by the use of acid phosphate and potash alone 
on his wheat. Good, systematic farming is better than 
lavish fertilizer using. w. F. massey. 
CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING. 
No. 1. 
In taking up the question of cooperative marketing 
it seems but proper to diagnose the case as it stands, 
and see whether there is need of prescribing, and if 
so see what we are to do to correct each difficulty, or 
as the doctor would say, treat the symptoms. As to 
the need of improvement in market methods, the proof 
seems to be ample, but poorly comprehended by the 
grower. There is ample proof of the 33 per cent the 
farmer gets out of his product, but the reason is not 
always so evident, because the causes are variable. 
In order to arrive at some of the reasons let us fol¬ 
low a number of shipments of products. We will take 
as the shipping point any loading station in western 
New York. The cases will be specific and actual, 
but no names will be given, but designation will be 
made by letter. The first is a car of very fancy 
Spitzenburg apples shipped to a well-known com¬ 
mission house, A. A sold the apples at the car to 
B for $4, B sold them back to A for $6. A took 
them to his store and jobbed them out at $7.50. A 
makes returns to the shipper of $4, less freight and 
10 per cent commission, or $3.36; 45 per cent of the 
jobbing price. In this case the fruit must have re¬ 
tailed for a high price, and it is fair to assume the 
grower got very much less than 35 per cent of the 
consumer’s dollar. The practice cited here is a very 
common one. 
Take a car of potatoes; the fanner is paid 35 cents 
at the car or storage. The dealer gets from three to 
five cents per bushel for loading, the railroad nine 
cents for freight to New York, Philadelphia or Balti¬ 
more, bringing them up to possibly 50 cents delivered 
in New York wholesale market. Investigation shows 
that the consumer pays, when bought by the peck, 40 
to 60 cents, or $1.60 to $2.40 per bushel, and the poor 
people who buy by the quart at from eight to 10 
cents, or from $2.56 to $3.20 per bushel, if the quarts 
hold out. 
Next we will follow several cars at once. A ships 
a car of cucumbers, B a car of celery, C a car of 
onions, D a car of potatoes, E a car of apples, to a 
commission man whom we will call Smith, at Phila¬ 
delphia. Jones, of Wilkesbarre; Roe, of Hazleton, 
and Doe, of Reading, all jobbers of fruit and vege¬ 
tables, go to Smith, of Philadelphia, to get supplies. 
Each buys some of A’s cucumbers, B’s celery, C’s 
onions, D’s potatoes, and E’s apples, making up a 
mixed car, and it is shipped right back by the railroads 
over which they had just come, sometimes nearly 
half of the way to point of shipment. The produce 
was grown by neighbors, but it had to go to Phila¬ 
delphia to be put up in mixed cars to be sold to the 
dealer who lived midway. There was the extra cost 
of freight, commission, and handling in Philadelphia. 
Query, were the products improved by the delay and 
handling? Could the growers have sold direct? 
I will next take up some peach shipments, Fall of 
1908. Tom, Dick and James shipped independently, 
and as in this case representing dozens of shippers 
who were scattered over western New York peach 
belt. Utica, N. Y., was short of peaches, and prices 
quoted there were high. Neither knew the others 
were going to ship, so he shipped to Utica, expecting 
to get the high prices. Result, 36 cars reached Utica 
in a single day. The bottom dropped out of the 
market, and peaches hardly brought freight. During 
the entire Fall Columbia, S. C., a town of about the 
same size, did not have any New York peaches, and 
many other towns were just the same. Why were 
all the peaches dumped on Utica and other places went 
without any? 
Some people know that good apples are grown 
about Rochester, N. Y. Some consumers in Rochester 
know it, yet W. C. Barry, president of the Western 
New York Horticultural Society, says friends of his 
could not find any. Mr. Woodruff, of the Rochester 
Chamber of Commerce, could not find any good Spies, 
and a friend of the writer, after searching in vain, 
sent to a friend in Canada and got two barrels at a 
cost of $7 per barrel delivered. The writer knows 
there were hundreds of barrels of good Spies grown 
about Rochester. Who is at fault? If the products 
of the manufacturers in any line were not sold regu¬ 
larly in such a market, would they or would they not 
see that they were sold? Is it the grower’s duty? If 
not, whose? 
Cases could be cited almost without limit to show 
the weakness of our individual system of marketing. 
A careful study of the causes leading up to the or¬ 
ganization of somg of the most prominent of our 
successful cooperative marketing institutions reveals 
the fact that most of them were organized, not be¬ 
cause of much better and cheaper facilities for market¬ 
ing or the better prices which might be procured, but 
because conditions had grown so bad that the mem¬ 
bers were forced into organization as an absolute 
necessity. If they could only exist they would re¬ 
fuse to organize, but as a last resort, absolute failure 
staring them in the face, they finally organize to co¬ 
operate in selling their products. Secretary Wilson 
says “Producer and consumer should get closer to¬ 
gether.” But with the present understanding or rather 
misunderstanding of each other or their needs, just 
how are such conditions to be brought about? Near 
to our large markets, market gardeners and fruit 
growers are familiar with the desires and require¬ 
ments of the consumer, and know what to expect, 
but when you go further from the consuming centers 
the growers are generally ignorant of the require¬ 
ments, and in a large per cent of the individuals it will 
be found that they believe what would suit them or 
would pass with them ought to be accepted by the 
consumer without complaint. At this point it would 
be well to compare the attitude of the manufacturer 
and farmer toward the consumer. The manufacturer 
labors constantly to meet the demands of the con¬ 
sumer, studying carefully to have every desire satis¬ 
fied, and if he discovers something new of which the 
consumer is ignorant, spares no pains or expense to 
bring it to his attention. He tries in every way to 
make his goods attractive, both as to the article it¬ 
self, and the package in which it is placed. Manu¬ 
facturers of superior articles enlighten the consumer 
as to the superiority of the article. The farmers’ 
mails are full of circulars from fertilizer companies, 
sprayers, plows, harvesting machinery, etc., setting 
forth the superior merits of the goods. They do not 
wait for the farmers to find them out, or for the 
middlemen to take them, but in numberless ways 
bring to the notice of the consumer their wares, and 
in many ways the smaller manufacturers cooperate 
in this work. It would seem that such example 
should be understood and accepted as a guide by the 
farmer. The only reason to which I can attribute 
this condition is that the farmers, being more isolated, 
have become more individualistic, and depend on their 
own judgment, and have formed so strong a habit 
of working independently that it is hard to overcome 
it. In my next article I shall endeavor to show how 
these conditions are overcome by cooperation, and 
how it can be extended to be of benefit to both pro¬ 
ducer and consumer. chas. r. white. 
Ontario Co., N. Y. 
