««8 
THE KURAL NEW-VORKEB 
Marca IS), 
receive the benefit. I further think that the require¬ 
ments should be only the necessary ones and not a 
lot of things that no one will ever comply with. 
I will now take up the letter in detail and analyze 
it. Keeping the ceiling, walls, ledges and windows 
clean at all times may be considered as part of the 
chores which should be performed anyway. It seems 
that these were not clean enough in my case to fulfil 
the requirements, although the walls had been ceiled 
up only about six weeks. Evidently these things 
should be cleaned every two or three weeks. If it 
was done every month, and a man could do it in a 
day, it would amount to about $18 per year. The 
whitewashing of a barn of that size would take about 
four days’ time a year if two men did the job in one 
day with a sprayer, and it was done twice a year. 
This would be $G for labor and perhaps one for lime, 
to say nothing of the outlay for the sprayer. 
The clause prohibiting the keeping of any other 
live stock than cows, with the gracious permission to 
keep calves and bulls in the same building with the 
dairy, means that I must either build a separate build¬ 
ing for my horses or put a partition across my barn 
at a cost of perhaps $.'50, and with the inconvenience 
which it would always occasion. It would make the 
end where the horses are too cold, and greatly cut 
down the air space of the cows, and it would make 
it necessary to open and shut a door every time any¬ 
one or anything went from one part of the barn to the 
other. If anyone can explain to me whereby the milk 
which is milked out of cows at one end of a 93-foot 
barn is contaminated by the presence in the other 
end of four horses, I would be greatly obliged; the 
inspector was unable to furnish such an explanation. 
As no mention is made of who is to pay the vet¬ 
erinary, it is supposed that the dairyman is to stand 
the expense, perhaps $2 a year. The clipping of the 
cows demands an outlay of $1.50 for clippers and a 
certain amount of time, say $2 per year for 10 cows 
if they are kept clipped. Any time spent on cleaning 
the cows, more than is now so spent, would entail 
extra expense. If this were one minute per cow, 
each milking, it would amount to $18 per year. In 
advising the dairyman to discard the fore milk, a 
great point is made of the fact that it is low in test. 
As all this milk is sold by the quart or by weight, 
this makes no difference to the dairyman or the re¬ 
tailer. As to the bacterial content, the only persons 
benefited by -a low count are the dealer and the con¬ 
sumer. The loss, however, falls on the producer. If 
only one pint were discarded at each milking, the 
amount would be about ten dollars’ worth in one year. 
Then one would either have to spend about five min¬ 
utes’ time at each milking, to milk if into a special 
receptacle, or milk it on the floor, and thus pollute the 
barn with sour milk. This 10 minutes per day would 
amount to $9 per year. Covered milk pails cost $2 
apiece, or $8 instead of $1.60 as an initial outlay if 
four are used. If they lasted four years the yearly 
outlay would -be $2 instead of 40 cents. This is cash 
paid out aside from the bother of milking into such 
pails. A milk house such as is recommended would 
probably cost in material and labor from $20 to $50, 
according to the kind built. I am unable to see my¬ 
self how the inside of a milk house can be much 
cleaner than outdoors, except in a city. 
As my milk is shipped only in the Winter, I fail 
to see why ice is a necessity. As my milk was going 
to a cheese factory at the time the inspection was made, 
it is to be presumed that the Department knew this 
and requires the ice anyway. This means an initial 
expense of about $30, and a yearly one of about $10. 
As the alterations in the privy are mentioned separately 
from the water supply it is to be understood that this 
is otherwise impure, unwholesome or contaminated. 
I am therefore supposed to dig a new well, or buy 
distilled water to wash the milk things in. As no 
one has ever had any diseases caused by a polluted 
water supply on this farm during the last 40 or 50 
years, that 1 have heard of, I have my doubts about 
the danger, especially after the changing of the closet 
to an earth one. It will be noticed that the burden 
of informing the Department is thrown on the dairy¬ 
man. It seems to me that if it is desired to find out 
these things it is up to those who want to know to 
find out. 
By adding up the above items, we get a total initial 
outlay of $110.50, exclusive of any new wells. The 
annual expense (mostly in extra labor) is $78, to 
which should be added $6.63 for interest on the new 
outlay and $5 for depreciation on the same. This 
makes the deficit $11 per cow, exclusive of the manure, 
instead of $2. If the manure is figured at $15 per 
cow the profit would only be $4 per cow, and if it were 
figured at $10, the profit would disappear and instead 
would appear a deficit. 
I will not attempt to estimate the expense of chang¬ 
ing some of the old small dark stables with wooden 
floors, which were and still are common in dairy coun¬ 
tries, into sanitary ones, with enough air space and 
light to satisfy the requirements, and with cement 
floors throughout, but it would obviously be many 
hundred dollars. The only advantage offered the 
dairyman in return for all these expenses is the per¬ 
mission to sell the milk produced to the companies 
which ship to New York. Since they paid less all last 
Summer than the co-operative creameries, the advan¬ 
tage is problematical to say the least. The great bene¬ 
fits of shipping to the city fade even more when one 
realizes that there is no whey nor skim-milk to be 
brought back from a station, and that the time when 
the prices are the farthest below those paid at cheese 
factories is the very time when the most milk is pro¬ 
duced. 
Let no one imagine that I am “easy” enough to think 
that the Board is going to try to enforce all these regu¬ 
lations at once, or even at all. The inspectors have 
been coming around for several years now, and with 
the exception of a few dairies that were entirely de¬ 
pendent on the shipping station for a market, nothing 
seems to have been done. The milk, however, con¬ 
tinues to go to the city. The farmer seems to be the 
only man who is to be bluffed into things, and in this 
case he refuses to be bluffed. There is no doubt what¬ 
ever that the milk supply could be greatly improved in 
a very short time by simply enforcing the rules that 
have been made, and for the enforcement of which a 
large force of inspectors is being maintained. The 
reason that this is not done is a very simple one: the 
supply would immediately drop off and the price would 
rise. The supply would rise again as soon the price 
became remunerative, for many who are too far from 
a station profitably to deliver their milk there, would 
be attracted by the higher prices. Also many who can¬ 
not now afford to improve their stables could do so 
if they were to receive a decent price for their milk. 
I know that the men in control of the movement to 
better the milk supply have a difficult problem before 
them and that they are doing the best they can ac¬ 
cording to their lights, but it seems to me that their 
lights arc burning very low. The only way to im- 
Interior Arrangement 
of a Cave 
FORTHE KEEPINC OF SALADS. 
dazed mr opening 
Ch i corn 
Crowns plant et f 
, ni bo*ps of 
light toil or sa 
Mou:.J Of 
Uarbr-dr-Cauucm 
A FRENCH VEGETABLE CELLAR. Fig. 132. 
See Page 341. 
prove the milk supply is to go ahead and improve it; 
if better milk costs more money, it is time that the 
Board of Health looked over matters seriously and 
decided whether they want good milk or cheap milk. If 
they want cheap milk, let them stop all this expensive 
inspection and letter writing and devote the money 
saved to giving poor children free certified milk. If 
they decide in favor of good milk, let them send their 
letters stating that if after a certain specified time'cer¬ 
tain specified alterations are not made the milk will 
be rejected. Let the aim be to raise at the same time 
every score to a point above 50, and let those alone 
whose score is already above that point. Then the 
standard could be raised a certain number of points 
each year till the desired purity was attained. The 
price and supply would take care of themselves. 
Jefferson Co., N. Y. albert h. de graff. 
THE CANDLE TREE. 
Concerning the remarkable tree illustrated in Fig. 134, 
the Gardeners’ Chronicle (London), from which the 
illustration is reproduced, says the tree grows 30 to 
40 feet high, and produces from its stem and older 
branches a profusion of almost sessile campanulate 
flowers; these are followed by yellowish, cylindrical, 
smooth points, 12 to 18 inches long, which appear 
exactly like wax candles, as the botanical name im¬ 
plies. So close is this resemblance, that travellers, 
seeing the tree in fruit for the first time, are liable 
to be temporarily puzzled as to whether the candles of 
shops arc made in factories or grown on frees! The 
candle-like fruits are suspended from the bare stem 
and branches by short, slender stalks; dangling in the 
air, they readily give the impression of a chandler’s 
shop. This impression is intensified as night falls and 
the numerous fireflies move among the fruits. It is 
not, perhaps, surprising that the inexperienced travel¬ 
ler should not infrequently be informed that the fire¬ 
flies perform the duty of lighting up these “candles” 
when required by the denizens of the jungle. The 
fruits are fleshy and juicy, and have a peculiar apple¬ 
like odor. They are eaten by certain tribes and also 
by cattle. The tree belongs to the Natural Order 
Bignoniaceae, to which our familiar Catalpa and also 
the Trumpet creeper belong. 
KEEP THE CLOVER AT HOME. 
There is one subject in agricultural science which 
is rarely touched upon by our farm papers, and 
that is the possibility of actual money gain to the 
farmer by selling certain feeds that he raises and 
buying others to feed in their place. Sometimes 
our papers advise the farmer to sell some of his 
corn and buy oil meal, etc., to balance the rest, but 
advice along this line is too rare, and the reasons 
too seldom explained; and I do not remember seeing 
in any article the actual figures necessary to prove 
the point. The particular comparison I have in 
mind is between Timothy and clover hay. Our ex¬ 
periment stations teach us that the average farmer 
feeds too wide a ration for profit. His tendency is 
always to feed home-grown products, whereas he 
might often make a trade to the advantage of his 
soil, his stock and himself. Let us now consider 
this Timothy-clover problem on this basis. 
1. Advantage to His Soil.—We find by analysis 
that each ton of clover hay contains nearly twice 
as much nitrogen, a little more phosphoric acid, and 
over twice as much potash as the same amount of 
Timothy. The actual figures are as follows: 
Fertility value, pounds per ton. 
Nitrogen. Phos. Arid. Potash 
Clover hay . 46.8 13.4 44.6 
Timothy hay. 25.2 10.G 18.0 
Balance in favor of clover.... 21.6 2.8 26.6 
Now, what value shall we assign to these amounts 
of fertility? I maintain that the experiment station 
trade values for 1909 are fair values, because if 
the farmer doesn’t have this fertility he must buy it, 
and pay these prices for it, plus the charges for 
bagging, shipping, credit, etc.; and further, because 
in the long run this nitrogen, phosphoric acid and 
potash will be just as valuable to him as the chemi¬ 
cals. On this basis, then, the nitrogen is worth 19 
cents per pound, the phosphoric 4, and the potash 5. 
Figuring on this basis we get the following result: 
21.6 pounds nitrogen . (S). $ .19 $4.10 
2.8 pounds phosphoric acid. <§> .04 .11 
26.6 pounds potash . @ .05 1.33 
Total fertility gain for clover. $5.54 
This shows that if instead of feeding our Timothy 
we sell it and buy an equal number of tons of clover, 
we shall actually gain $5.50 for each ton so replaced. 
2. Advantage to His Stock.—By our feeding 
tables we find that clover contains nearly three 
times as much digestible protein as Timothy and 
considerably more fuel value, while the percentages 
of carbohydrates and fat are slightly in favor of 
the Timothy. In other words, the clover makes a 
good deal narrower ration than the Timothy, which 
is very desirable. The actual figures are: 
Feeding Per Ct. Per Ct. Per Ct. Fuel 
Value. Protein. Car’hydrates. Fat. Value. 
Timothy . 2.89 43.72 1.43 92,729 
Clover . 8.15 41.70 1.36 98,460 
Clover gains .... 5.26 5,731 
Clover loses .... 2.02 .07 
Thus we see that by the exchange we lose some of 
our superfluous carbohydrates and fat, while we 
gain 5.26 per cent, protein and 5.731 calories (fuel 
value) per 100 pounds. On the ton basis this equals 
105.2 pounds protein and 114,620 calories. This 
amount of protein would be enough to last a cow 
giving IGFj pounds milk per day for 52 days, dur¬ 
ing which time she would produce 858 pounds of 
milk. Valuing this at $1.50 per 100 pounds it would 
be worth $12.75. Of course for obvious reasons we 
cannot accept this as the value of the 105.2 pounds 
protein. Unfortunately we have no means of valuing 
protein, carbohydrates and fat in dollars and cents, 
but let us arbitrarily assume that the 105.2 pounds 
protein were worth $2 to the farmer. That cer¬ 
tainly is not unreasonable. We then see that the 
clover is actually worth $2 more per ton as' a feed 
than the Timothy. In other words, the farmer makes 
$2 by the trade. 
3. Advantage to Himself.—Under this heading 
both these elements already discussed must enter, 
together with the comparative price of clover and 
'I imothy. This difference is usually about $2 to $3. 
That is, when Timothy is worth $15, clover can 
usually be had for $12. The clover may always be 
bought cheaper. Now we are ready to sum up the 
farmer’s total gain on the transaction in the fol¬ 
lowing table: 
Gain in manure value . $5.50 
Gain in feeding value . 2.00 
Gain in money by trade, say. 2.00 
Total gain by the farmer . $9.50 per ton. 
This is only a hint. It does no harm to figure on 
these things even if we do not follow our own ad¬ 
vice. At least we have the satisfaction of knowing 
where we ‘might gain if we only would. 
Wyoming Co., N. Y. chas. w. chappel. 
R. N.-Y.—Another thing that can be said is that 
Timothy brings a higher price as hay than clover. 
While it is inferior in food value, Timothy is the best 
horse hay. We have heard of cases where in dairy 
farms a few acres of the best land was kept in Timothy. 
Not a pound of this hay was fed, but it was all sold 
and the money used to buy cotton-seed meal and 
grain. This was fed with silage and clover. In this 
way an acre of Timothy was made to provide far 
more feed than the hay actually contained. 
