R U R AJL N E W-YO R K B R 
1267 
Milk Sold Direct to Consumer 
FAllMERS P>UY CITY I*T>ANTS.—I^ast week a 
miinber of cb-oi)erative creameries in Central New 
York announced that they had jointly purchased 
two wliolesale milk stations in New York f’ity of 
tlie Modern Dairy Company, (ine of these places 
is at 609 West 49th Street, New York City, - and 
the otlier at 868 Dean Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. It 
wiis also announced that,the farm creameries would 
sell milk through these stations direct to grocery 
stores in the city for October milk at $.8.40 i>er can, 
or Si/^c per quart, for milk aboard the cars at New 
Voi-k City terminal.s, and at .$8.60 per can or 9c per 
quart delivered at the grocery stores, with the pro¬ 
viso that the stores will sell this milk to families 
Jit a price not to exceed lOo per (juart. The lowest 
] trice charge<l the stores by the city dealers is $4 
]»er can, or lOc per quart, and the stores have been 
distributing this milk at 11c and 12c a quart. This 
is the first attempt to rtsiuce the cost of distribiition 
so that milk might l)e .sold to con.«!timers at reduced 
cost. The sharp advance in cost to the consumer 
during the past year has I'educed the consumption, 
and the advance since la.st July from 11c to the 
present price of 14c per quart for Grade B milk, 
has .seriously nsliiced the consumitlon of milk in 
ibe city. Farmers, of eour.se, realize that any in- 
iluence that causes a reduction in the cost to the 
consumers through a saving in the cost of distribu¬ 
tion wdll increase consumption, and also increa.se the 
demand for milk. It is stated that these creameries 
will be able to supply 206,000 quarts of milk daily 
as .soon as they can secure a sufiicient supply of 
('ans. At all events a beginidng has been made, 
and if properly dev^eloped there is no reason why 
the producers of milk should not ultimately .supply 
every stor(‘ in the city with its requirements for 
milk, either in cans or bottle.s. 
now SMAIJ. DEALERS WERE FROZEN OUT. 
—The stores have always sold milk dipped from 
the cans under regulations prescribed by the Board 
of Health. Until rec^ent years the small dealers were 
permitted to bottle milk in the city under hygienic 
regulations, but a new regulation from the Board 
of Healtli required milk to be bottled where it i.s 
l)asteurized. The rule, of course, drove the small 
dealer out of the bottling bu.siness and put it entirely 
in the hands of the big rtKudvers. The stores have 
.always wanBal to sell milk in bottles, but Inive been 
unable to get a regular .supply from the big ih'alers 
at prices that would justify the handling of it. The 
stores were oldiged to i>ay as much as the families, 
and the grocers .say the regulations and inspectors 
I ompolled tlK-in to give up the trade as unprofitahle. 
ATTITUDE OF BOARD OF ITEALTII.—.Since 
the announcement by the farmers to sell milk direct 
to the stores in the city and jtossibly increase their 
tra(h‘, the Board of Health had Intimated an oppo¬ 
sition on its part to the .sale of milk in the stores 
from cans. This opposition has been expn'ssed in 
an interview in local papers, and in addr(!sses at 
public meetings. There is no intimation yet that a 
)-(‘gnlation to this effect would be adopted, and it is 
doubtful if the consumers of New York would accept 
such a dictum at this time with patience. They have 
welcomed the .saving of one to two cents a quart in 
their milk supply, and any attempt to again defeat 
this I’eductiou in cost would meet with rather posi¬ 
tive opposition. ^ 
ROUNDABOUT ARGUMENTS.—At the meeting 
of the Women’s City Club at the Park Avenue Hotel 
Last week, representatives of the dealers, of tlie Board 
of Health, and of the Milk Committee described the 
old methods of distributing milk by Intelligent milk 
dealers in contrast with the present methods by the 
milk tru.st and the regulations of the Board of 
Health. It was asserted that through the.se agencies 
infant mortality was materially decreased in the 
City of New Y’ork. Later, discussing the decrease 
in the consumi)tlon of milk at the present time, it 
was stated that the mortality among children during 
I he past three or four months had very seriou.sly 
increased in some sections of the < lty. This increa.so 
in the death rate was assumed to be due to an in- 
sutticient consumption of milk, and in some measure 
due to milk of an inferior quality. Of course the 
r(‘si)onsibility for this was not charged in any 
iiu^asure to the high c^ost of distribution. It .^tamied 
to be chargeable entirely by this argument to the 
advance demanded by the farmer for his milk. 
The amount of comfort to the consumers remained 
in doubt At the bt^ginning of the discussion we had 
the a.ssurance that all of the expensive regulations 
and costly, distribution had saved children’s lives, 
and at the conclusion of the argument the cost of 
1he,se luxuries, or necessities, if you will, had put 
the cost of milk lM*yond the power of the people to, . 
buy, and babies were dying in large numl>ers from 
starvation and .school children were growing thin, 
pale and anpcmie for the Want of milk. The question 
arising in a thoughtful mind is whether the babies 
and children would not fare as well with full 
stomachs and less regulation as they do now from 
empty stomachs and hygienic control. 
PLENTY OF MILK.—We have a full supply of 
milk. Big dealers say there is a surplus and have 
clo.sed more than a hundred distributing plants in 
the country and threatened to close more, but witii 
it all the s.vstem of distribution makes milk so 
expemsive in the city that many people are unable 
to buy it. The present conditions ai‘e artificial and 
evidently made so by a combination of interests 
that want to get back to the .system* of buying milk 
from the farmer at tlielr own price. 
ECONOMIC NEEDS OF PRODUCERS.—At the 
meeting of the Women’s City Club Coimmlssioner 
Dillon told the amllence in i)lain language that If 
the city wanterl a supply of milk for the future it 
would have to pay the cost of production for tlie 
future, and that in the past tliey had never paid 
for the cost of producing milk; that if tliey paid the 
labor of milk production at the rate of tlie wages 
paid chauffeurs, domestic help and street cleaners 
in tlie City of New York, the price at the farm would 
be 50 per cent higher than it had ever been in 30 
years or now; that the life of a ciiild anywhere Ls a 
precious and priceless gift; tliat tlie life of a child in 
the country was just as inqxirtant as the life of a 
child in the city ; and that if they expected a full siqi- 
]ily of milk in the future for city consumption, they 
would simply have to pay the farmer and the family 
enough to siqiport them and keep them contented 
on the farm producing it, otherwise producers would 
continue to give up the production of milk and would 
seek enterprises that offered lietter opportunity for 
life and fortune. He uiiade it clear that milk could 
not and would not lie i>rodu<*ed at the ffirnis, the only 
I)lace it could lie produced, for less than it has in 
Hie past, and in all probability they would have to 
pay more. He also showed that the cost of distribu- 
liou has been from two to three times the cost at 
tb.e farms, and that if they ever hoped to get clieaper 
milk it would be through a reduction in the cost of 
di.strllmtioii, and that the opportunities of saving 
in distribution were inviting. A .saving of two to 
fotir cents a (juart in the cost of delivery is possible. 
jMrs. Robert Bnu‘re, Ji city woman of broad vi.sion, 
stated that the oidy time the cost of milk to con- 
.sumers was <'ver redmasl was when the Attorney 
General laid shown in .an investigation that one com¬ 
pany had made 9'.> per cent th(> year jirevious, and 
.another 127 per cent. Tins was when the dealer.s 
had increa.sed the price one cent to consumers. They 
quietly drojiped the increase; and when the investi¬ 
gation was over just as quietly advanced it again. 
With this .single exception the ])rice never dropi>ed, 
no matter how low at the farm, luit increased unfail¬ 
ingly with every increase to the producer. 
Commissioner Dillon^s E.gg Ruling Upheld 
The following is from the Produce Review; 
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Cour4;^last 
week affirmed unanimously the order of .Tinstice Pendle¬ 
ton of the Supreme Court granting an injunction pend- 
the trial of the suit of State Food C/oinmissioner John ,1. 
Dillon against Swift & Co. The Justice ordered that uu- 
fl the determination of the action all of the employes of 
Swift & Co. be restrained from selling any cold storage 
eggs from the'r warehous''a nnV.-s each egg or origimd 
package bore the stamp: “Cold Storage.” 
Several injunctions of a similar character were ob¬ 
tained by Commissioner Dillon last Winter against egg 
dealers, and the Review is unable to learn of any appeals 
having been taken other than the above. The trade 
seems to be saddled with this foolish, costly and gener¬ 
ally disadvantageous ruling. 
d’hc Review docs not like this decisiou of the high 
court. Why? Eggs .aia* .shi])])4*d from the Western 
States in April, when they are cheap, and put in 
cold storage. Just as soon as eggs begin to get 
sc.ai-i-e in the late Summer and on through the Fall 
and Winter these eggs are taken oxit of storage and 
sold in competition with fresh-laid State and nearby 
(>ggs. They are sold as strictly fre.sh-laid eggs, and 
at the fresh eggs’ price.s. This reduces the demand 
for fi'c.sh egg.s and al.so reduc.a\s tlie prices of fresh 
eg.gs, at a time when feed and care and cold increar e 
the cost of production. Last year eggs were put in 
storage at 22 ceiits a dozen and more, being sold to 
consumers in December at 60 cents. Then Commis¬ 
sioner Dillon issued the order to mark each cold 
storage egg, and the price di-opixai to 38 cents. It 
is a plain fraud to sell cold storage eggs as fre.sh 
egg.s, and only the dealers profit by it. Producers 
and consumers suffer. I.lttle by little and against 
l>f>werful opposition Commissioner I>il|on is getting 
some of the kinks out f*f the foo^l business. 
“ Is This a Square Deal ? ” 
l have been very much int*;rested to see the printed 
letter.^ regarding price regulation of wheat as print<Ml in 
The R. N.-Y., and particularly that of M. W. Cole, 
page 1209, relative to Charles H. Porter’s letter. Mr. 
Cole states that hi.s rea.sons for taking public notice of 
Mr. Porter’s letter are that there are so many mis¬ 
statements and erroneous conclusions that dt <loes not 
deserve serious attention. Now, we would expect Mr. 
Cole to tell the truth. Mr. Cole .says the Million Acre 
Wheat Conimittoe lost $5,000. Doe.s any man who 
stopped to consider that statement believe this statement 
to be true? Doe.s any thoughtful man believe any mem¬ 
ber of that committee lost even five cents on the sale of 
seed wheat? 
As to selling wheat only where there was a scarcity, 
if there was a place in the State of New Y'ork where 
seed wheat of the best was to he had it was in Orleans 
County. I have carefully re-read that same issue nml 
find no statement that no farmer has received $2.20 per 
bushel for his wheat. However, the statement that 
mo.st of our readers will average $2.05 to $2.08 per 
bushel is nearly correct. The present price is $2 to $2.05 
.at .shipper’s warehouse, and $2 to $2.18 at local flour 
mills. These latter are being operated under the man¬ 
agement of the larger milling concerns of the cities 
nearby. 
Mr. Cole states that the farmers have consented to 
the price-fixing during this war for democracy. Thi.s is 
another mi.sstateinent. The farmei-’s consent was not 
asked, nor was he consulted. The farmer is in this husi-' 
ness, for lie realizes si>meone must rai.se the food to 
sustain the people. But when he .sees some fellow tell¬ 
ing him to raise crops and then telling him what price 
he will receive for it he has the- best of reasons to re¬ 
sent it. 
As to the cost of a bushel of wheat from year to year 
to a fanner, it will vary as inuch as the seasons and 
farmers’ circumstances vary. A college man can get at 
it closer, especially if there is large enougli iq)pro[)ida- 
tion back of the experiment so tliat he would not be 
bothered for his living if it failed. Mr. Warren is 
taken as an e.xample sit $81 per acre, sind Mr. Cole s.t 
79 cents per bushel. Mr. Cole does not stsite that this 
was a recent e.stiinate, so we shall not err, pta-haps, if 
we concluded that he tock an estimate on some bumper 
year. 
The darmer is entitled to the .s.-ime consideration that 
any person in any -other occupation is entitled to. and 
asks for only a “siiuare deal.” Has he been given sueli 
treatment in this price-fixing a.s at pre.sent adminLstered? 
Mr. Cole says there is a “world-wide shortage of wheat.” 
Mr. Hoover says there is plenty of whiut, but it cannot 
be transported. WJuch of these men is telling the 
truth? I.s this another of those misstatements? Mr. 
Cole says that the committee ha.s in its hands sufiicient 
data to show that our farmers will grow more wheat 
for tlie liarvest in 1918 than they grew in 1879. I’er- 
liaps he knows to the fraction of a bushel how much 
that w ill he, but we who grow the.se crops have learned 
liow stupidly foolish it is to estimate on how' much our 
crops will be next year. This, however, is not an un¬ 
usual statemeut, for we see it, in print in many 
papers throughout the country, so we are not surprised 
to find it once again. 
The politician, the lawyei*, the doctor, the merchant, 
the blacksmith, the manufacturer of machinery, binding 
twine, the tanner and harness-maker, the oil tnust, 
steel trust and all other, or almost all other classes of 
ineu go and sell their services and products for the 
most tliey can in the market, and why not the fariin*r? 
The President personally appears Ix^ore Congress an 1 
asks for an eight-hour day at 30 hours’ pay for the rail¬ 
road employees, but appoiuts a labor man’s representa¬ 
tive on. the committee to name the iirice of the fanm* s' 
wheat. Is this a squar,- d4*!il? i.. ir. wai.kki’.. 
Mount Morris, N. Y. 
Last Word on Assembly Candidates 
This is just the last word regarding candidates for 
the Assembly in New' York State. Farmers in all 
counties have been putting iq) the situation to tlieir 
candidates, and the men who go to Albany tiiis year 
will know what they go there for. There was not time 
to organize non-partisan work in every county. This 
w'ill be done before another year, but in a few cases the 
experimeut will be tried out. 
In Ontai-io County the Republicans have nominated 
Geo. M. Tyler of Bloomfield. Mr. Tyler is a farmer, 
a mau of good character, who will fully represeut the 
farmers in his county. lie ought to be elected for ev'ery 
reason. Opposed to him is a lawyer There are too 
many lawyers now at Albany, and the farmers should 
not send any more. MTienever they have a chance to 
decide between a lawyer and a farmer, they should uot 
hesitate for an instant in favor of the farmer. Mr. 
Tyler’s opponent will poll a large vote in the towns and 
cities, and the farmers of Ontario County must get 
out on election day and offset tliis vote. We must have 
Geo. M. Tyler at Albany, and the farmers must put him 
there. 
lu Tioga County, I’aul Smith, one of the most active 
members of the Dairymen’s Ixaigue, is a candidate for 
the Assembly. Mr. Smith is one of the best farmers in 
the county, and he will know what to do at Albany. 
We are surprised at the large number of people who 
without regard to party want to support Mr. Smith. 
In Washington County,^ John S. Petteys is reported 
as the candidate on two tickets. He has been endorsed 
by the Democrats and the Iudei>endents. He is a life¬ 
long farmer and dairyman, and reporte<l to us as the 
kind of mau we all want at Albany. 
Remember, too, that J. Clark Nesbitt is the^ non¬ 
partisan candidate in Delaware County. Mr. Nesbitt 
ought to be elected, not only for his personal qualities, 
but because he is the first candidate to be designated by 
la non-partisan committee. Delaware County shou’d 
elect him in order to show tbe rest of the State bow to 
put 50 farmers in the Legislature. 
In XTlster Coiipty, William Triiemau, of Lake Kat¬ 
rine, and proiuiuent in Grange circles, is a candidate 
on the Democratic ticket. 
