^he RURAL. NEW-YORKER 
1473 
Notes on the Milk Situation 
ENOKMOrs PROFITS.—The Federal milk in- 
ve.^tipjation is golug on at this writing, though it is 
expected tliat the inquiries will close this month. 
The committee of consumers have had an attorney 
looking after their interests in the hearing, and he 
has asserted that he has information to show that 
the Borden Condensed Milk Company and Sheflield 
Farms, Slawson-Decker Company had made enor¬ 
mous profits for recent years. He said that from 
1902 to 1017 the Borden Company had paid more 
than in dividends on its common stock and 
100% in dividends on ])referred stock in seven years, 
and that in 17 years they had ])aid the stockholdei's 
.$.‘12.0(¥).000. The Sheflield Farms Company, ho said, 
had distributed 00% on its preferred stock and l:’0% 
on its common stock .since 1002. He al.^jo stated 
that a large portion of stock in both companies was 
watered, and he wanted to find out if the recent in- 
<-rease in stock of the Sheffield Farms Company 
had been issued for cash or as stock dividends. He 
asked the privilege of bringing the responsible hoiids 
of the companies before the committee to make 
these inquiries and to establish the amount of i)rofits, 
hut he was not at the time permitted to do so. It 
IS possible that his request may he considered again. 
MIT.K SHORTAGE.—The committee will make the 
price for milk for .Tanuary, Fehianiry and March. 
In the meantime the production of December milk 
has decreased and there is a shortage in the city. 
Some contracts have already been made at a pre¬ 
mium aliove the price to be fixed by the commission. 
■BUSINESS DIFFICULTIES.—Last week the ex¬ 
pected happened in the failure of the Mutual Mc¬ 
Dermott IMilk Company. Receivers were appointwl 
to continue the business for the present. It appeal’s 
that the eompany was not under bond by the 
.Vgricultural Department. The bonding law. indeed, 
like the majority of the laws of the kind, had a 
biophole in it for the benefit of the larger eompanies. 
It was left discretionary with the Commissioner of 
Agriculture Avhether to deimind a bond or not. In¬ 
deed, if the financial statement of the company 
seemed to justify a credit, it is doubtful whether the 
commissioner could enforce the filing of a bond un¬ 
der the law. In some cases the courts intervened 
and reduced the amount demanded. There was noth¬ 
ing particularly novel in this law. Virtually all of the 
laws of this kind ])assed to appease the demands of 
producers and consumers have some kind of a loop¬ 
hole in them for the imotection of the big di.stributor, 
whether in milk or in other lines of produce. For 
the most part the laws are devised by the distri¬ 
butors or their friends for the benefit of the di.s¬ 
tributor. We find these conditions in every phase 
of the distributing problem, and the .sooner we rec¬ 
ognize the conditions and sot about to correct them, 
the bettor it will l*e for producers. Just .so long 
ais we are satisfied with subterfuges and pretenses 
and camouflages just so long will we have experi¬ 
ences like the present with the Mutual McDermott 
Company. These accounts .seem to have run for 
six weeks. Even Avith the strongest eompanies, they 
should never run more than two weeks. Law or no 
law, the League has the authority to insist on secur¬ 
ity and prompt payment. It should enforce such 
provisions. Secure payment is of the very first 
importance. 
A GRE.VT OPPORTUNITY.-While the .schedules 
have not yet been made public it is estimated that 
the company owes producers something in the neigh¬ 
borhood of three hundred thousand dollars, and the 
assets are put at less than one hundred thousand. 
The Mutual McDermott Company owns one pasteur¬ 
izing plant in Manhattan Borough, and one or two 
distributing plants in other i)arts of the city. It 
owns several receiving plants through the country. 
'The amount of mortgages on these has not yet been 
ascertained. Some of the country plants are located 
whore they duplicate other plants, and probably 
have very little value. The city plants, however, 
offer an opportunity for the Dairymen’s League 
to take up the distribution of milk at whole.sale in 
the city direct to stores both in cans and in bottled 
milk, ^'ooner or later this move will have to come, 
and this would seem like an opportunity to make the 
beginning. That the plan is feasible is already 
(hnnonstrated by the officers of tlie League through 
the Country Milk Company for a number of co-opera¬ 
tive creameries in the State. In our judgment this 
subsidiary company, designed to serve a part of the 
producers, should be abandoned and the League 
sell not only this milk but all the milk of all its 
members. This may, of course, be worked out in 
different ways, and no particular plan may be es¬ 
sential to its success, but it would seem that the 
present situation with the Mutual McDermott Com¬ 
pany offers a tempting opportunity for the League 
to take over the city plant and be in a position not 
only to handle a large volume of Avholesale milk, 
but also to standardize the cost of Avholesale distri¬ 
bution and make it impossible for the lai’ge dealers 
ever again to force a waste of milk in the country 
while con.sumers are hungering for it in the city. 
A delivery of milk at the lowest possible cost from 
the producer to the consumer is in,the best interests 
of the producer. His profits should be made on the 
production and the consumption can be increased 
only through an economic distribution, fi’he economic 
distribution Avill Increase consumption and create 
an extra demand for milk. If Ave put milk in cans 
or bottles in the stores in every corner of the citv, 
the distributors may Avell liaA’e a monopoly of the 
Avagou trade, and the farmer need md be concerned 
about the charges for that service. The competition 
of the stores Avould in any event take care of the 
price by Avagon delivery. ’The Mutual McDermott 
Company oAves the farmers more than enough noAV 
to pay for the properties and it is not improbable that 
a deal can be made that Avill at least save something 
to producers, and may turn the mi.sfortune to a feAV 
into a good bargain for all. 
The Daily Papers and Farmers 
I am enclosing an oditoriai taken from “Rochester 
Democrat and Chronicle,’’ which I take as an insult to 
the farmers in general. I think I shall write the editor 
and stop paper, and give reason for same. 'There are 
hundreds of acres in this county (Steuben Co., N. Y.) 
back from the railroads Avhich are practically aban¬ 
doned, and the greater per cent of those farmers remain¬ 
ing are well along past middle life, with no young people 
to take thejr places, their children taking up other lines 
of employment, and, as one man told me, “I don’t want 
them to have to Avork as hard as I have.” Unless you 
can make the people see this and remove the middle¬ 
man, just so long will the rural population flow to the 
city and the price of jAroduce go higher and higher. 
What we shall do for help the coming Summer I don’t 
know, as the aeroplane Avorks at Hammondsport are tak¬ 
ing what feAV men Ave had here. Our locai barber and 
blacksmith have shut up shop, and with about 50 others, 
are going Avhere they can earn from .$4 to .$5 per day 
more than the farmer can afford, and the general senti¬ 
ment seems to be “Do what you can and let the rest go.” 
The town system of schools cost our district about $100 
more than it used to hire a teacher. 
New York. anson cokyell. 
OltE than a dozcui rciulers have sent tis the 
editorial Avhich l\Ir. Coryell refer.s to. It is 
entitled “Lenine’s American Imitators,” and is an 
attack upon the Dairymen’s League and other organ¬ 
izations Avhich declare for a non-partisan political 
organization. Those who advocate any iTidependent 
movement, or Avho refuse simply to adopt the cast- 
iron, second-hand political ideas AA’hich are provided 
for us, are branded as traitors, unpatriotic or “dan¬ 
gerous.” The Democrat and Chronicle Avants us to 
take as a ])latf(Arm “Be good, be quiet and Avork Avith- 
oiit help or Avages.” No use trying to argue Avith 
“standpatters.” The argument which IMr. Coryell 
proposes is the only one Avhich can get into them. 
The New York School Law 
The folloAving are some of the objections to the now 
school law: We object to the Iuav because it increases 
taxes in the country districts and loAvers them in the 
villages, thus compelling us in the country districts to 
help pay the high-salaried teachers in the viliage schools. 
We object to it because it permits a majority of the 
board of education to be residents of one district, which 
gives them full control in the toAvn. In one toAvn, three 
members of the hoard and the clerk and treasurer live 
in the village, and the other 14 districts in the toAvn are 
represented by the other tAvo members. Another objec¬ 
tion is that school districts are obliged to surrender their 
school property to the tOAvn, Avhether they are willing 
or not and Avithout having anything to say in regard to 
the price, and it compels the country districts to help 
pay for the large and expensive buildings in the village, 
Avhile the village helps pay for the cheaper buildings in 
the country. The tax rate in my district last year under 
the old law was S4 cents on a hundred dollars. In the 
village it was $1.50. This year under the new hiAV in 
my district it Avas $1..”>0 and in the village the same, 
$1.:50. Those are a foAV of the objections and there are 
others. av. av. boakdmax. 
Jefferson Co., N. Y. 
The neAV school laAV has Avorked very Avell in this 
toAvn ; at least, that i)art of the toAvn Avhich is back from 
the river. Rhinebeck toAvn borders on the Hudson, and 
many Avealthy people live along it, also the N. Y. C. 
R. R. runs the whole length of the Avestern edge. There¬ 
fore the school districts bordering on the river have a 
great deal of taxable property. The school tax in sev¬ 
eral of those districts Avas about $1 on a thousand. The 
districts lying back from the river on the ejistern side 
of the town had a tax rate of from $(5 to $0.50 per thou¬ 
sand dollars taxable property. The iieAV school law, 
Avhich makes the Avhole toAvn the unit, equalizes the 
school taxes in the tOAvn so that all pay the same, not 
some people having to pay six times as much per 
thousand dollars taxable property as others. Of course 
the people who haA’e had to pay a rate of about $2 per 
thousand, Ayhen they formerly paid about $1 per thou¬ 
sand. are kicking and making a big tinu' and fuss about 
the new school law. Further, the districts that have the 
Avealth provided much better for their pupils than the 
poorer districts. They furnished textbooks, writing 
books, druAving paper, pencils, etc., which the others did 
not. Noav all the pupils in the districts get treated 
alike, which is a step in the right direction. Again, 
the poorer districts usualiy had a school term of but oO 
Aveeks; noAV they all have 40 Aveeks. ’The schools are 
better equipped, provided Avith more sanitary drinking 
vessels, cups, tOAvels, etc. 
In this toAvn there is no movement to discontinue any 
schools and transport children by teams, which so many 
are crying out about. If there is any part of the school 
laAV which needs repeal or changing it is that part Avhich 
requires all schools to have a physical training teacher. 
That, as far as I have been able to observe or hear, is 
generally condemned. It certainly seems the height of 
folly to have a high-priced teacher come around once a 
week to teach the pupils of the rural schools to hop on 
one foot, throw bean bags, or a big rubber ball, etc., or 
to practice them in difl’erent motion exercises Bovs 
and girls who get up early do a lot of chores or similar 
Avork before and after school and walk a mile or more 
to get to school, certainly have plenty of exercise. 'This 
part of the program has brought the Educational De- 
imrtment into more contempt and disfavor than any¬ 
thing they have put over on us in many a year. 
Dutchess Co., N. Y. ciiAS. k. traa’eu. 
;Wfe live in District No. 0, lying in the town of Athens, 
with a small portion in the toAvn of Coxsackie, N. Y. 
Last year our school tax was 32 cents on a hundred 
under the old system of rural school government, and 
this year under the ucav Iuav taxes are 72 cents .on a 
hundred, over 1(X)% increase and at the same time the 
school IS receiving no personal interest from any person, 
who is a direct representative of the district, as before. 
Under the present system Avith higher taxes, etc., the 
tax payers liaA’c absolutely no voice in the management 
and control of their district school. It is left entirely 
to a disinterested director who is supposed to look after 
the interests of -several schools in the town. It is 
simply a case of taxation Avithout representation as far 
as the residents of the rural school districts are concerned. 
Also the school building of this district has been used 
for Sunday school and other religious and social func¬ 
tions for the last 20 years or more. In fact it is the 
religious center of the neighborhood and now, if the 
Avorking plans of the present deplorable .school hiAV are 
alloAved to mature Ave stand a chance for our school 
property to be absorbed by the toAvn, the school consoli¬ 
dated Avith that in toAvn and the residents of the district 
compelled to send their children to a toAvn school, Avhere 
the common school advantages are no better. Examina¬ 
tion reports Avill corroborate this statement. The 
farmers of this section are very bitter in their denuncia¬ 
tion of Uie present school Iuav, stating that it is the 
most unjust, unpatriotic and unnecessary law that has 
ever been passed, affecting their constitutional rights and 
privileges as rural citizens. avm. h. miller. 
Greene Co., N. Y. 
In response to your request for views on the neAV 
township school laAV in this State, I submit mine. I 
am an active rural school teacher, have been for 3.3 
years, I also have a small farm. I. therefore, think I 
am somcAvhat qualified to speak. My salary is higher 
under the new law, and my taxes are loAA'er; so I might 
be expected to like it—but I don’t. I am a member of 
the board of education of the town of Taylor, doing my 
best to make the law successful hit I don't like it. W'e 
cannot do a given amount of work without the expendi¬ 
ture of much more money. It is wrong in principle. 
It places the control of schools too far from the people; 
in short, reverting toAvards the Kaiserist form of govern¬ 
ment. They tell us Ave are fighting Germany to destroy 
autocracy, (though I never admit it, I say we are 
fighting for our life). Shall we, then, admit that we are 
incapable of local self-government? No, and forever 
no! Shall we say England was right, when, in 1784, 
she told us that republican form of government would 
he a failure? I hope not! To summarize: "The schools 
under the town.ship law will co.st much more. They Avill 
not bo proportionately better. They will be more under 
control of partisan politics, and last, and far worse, 
too far from tbe people’s control. emmet b. kibbe. 
Cortland Co., N, Y. 
With us the law has increased our taxes 4% times 
over la.st year, besides giving us the privilege”!?) of 
helping to pay a bonded indebtedness of over $70,000 
in tbe town, in Avhich we had no voice in the making. 
We have had our .schoolhouses mutilated by the installa¬ 
tion of chemical toilets, at a great expense, and the out¬ 
buildings sold for a paltry sum and moved away. Our 
school property is soon to be appraised for a paltry sum 
and turned over to a corporation, the “Toavii Board of 
Education,” and Avith it goes the last bit of control of 
tbe rural schools. Our board informs us our taxes an¬ 
other year Avill be higher, and we can squeal if we want 
to; it AA'on’t do us any good, for we are obliged to pay it. 
lIoAV do Ave feel? Well, avo are “fighting mad,” and Ave 
don’t propose to stand for it. “We are going to fight it 
out on this line if it takes all Winter.” AVe have organ¬ 
ized a great many districts in this county and we expect 
to keep on organizing until we get power enough to 
strangle this Medusn-beaded monster to death. 
Ontario Co., N. Y. c. L. c. 
Another 35-cent Dollar 
I have filled about 1,4(X) No. .3 cans Avith tomatoes 
Avhich were produced on my own ground. They are 
hand-picked, and not one drop of water other than the 
juice of the tomatoes was put into the cans. The 
Avholesale grocery company of this city offered me today 
$1.50 per dozen cans, which are sold to retailers at 
$2.20 and are retailed at 25 cents each, or $3 per dozen. 
I paid six cents each for the cans, and tomatoes, Avhen 
packed, were worth 75 cents per half bushel. It cost' 
me about 16 cents per can to pack, including coal, labels 
and labor, and I am now offered 1214 cents per can. 
This wholesale company is growing by leaps and bounds 
in .lohnstown and has very recently started business in 
Altoona. One stockholder told me he put into the busi¬ 
ness $200, upon Avhich he received 6 per cent from the 
start, and has received for (^hristmas presents already 
14 shares of stock valued at $50 per share, and receives 
0 per cent annually on this watered stock. 
A number of farmers about here are quitting the 
farms and going to mills and mines, Av'here the wages 
are much higher; many boys receive $5 to $7 per day. 
The city folks are still hammering the farmers about the 
high prices, but I would like to see the farmer who can 
make the Avages that are paid in the city, notwith¬ 
standing the fact that he labors about eight hours more 
each day than the city man. FRED UEILMAN. 
Pennsylvania. 
