Vhe RURAL. NEW-YORKER 
59 
Another 
Report of a Milk Committee 
It Advocates State Control of Dairying 
THE GLYXN-FINLEY REPORT—Last Summer 
Governor Smith appointed former Governor Glynn 
and 1 >r. Finley. Commissioner of Education, as a 
committee to inquire into the high cost of living, 
with special reference to milk. In August they made 
a preliminary report in which (hey criticised severely 
the system of distribution of milk in New York City. 
Mr. Arthur Williams, the local Federal Food Admin¬ 
istrator, who was toying with so-called fair food 
prices in the city at the time, induced the committee 
to suggest a Fair Price Milk Committee, to fix tho 
price to the consumer after the plan adopted by tho 
Federal authorities. This the committee did, but 
evidently without much confidence in its efficiency, 
and as a “regrettable alternative” in the event of its 
failure suggested a State commission to regulate the 
distribution of milk in cities. 
THE NEW COMMITTEE.—The Fair Price Milk 
Committee was headed by Dr. Royal S. Copeland, 
Commissioner of Health of New York City; and 
eight other members, three of whom were appointed 
by the Governor, three by the Mayor and three 
named by Governor Glynn and Dr. Finley. None 
of these represented producers: but the committee 
plainly stated that the farmer was not receiving too 
much and not a fair share of the consumer’s cost, 
and the suggestion was for a reduction in distribu¬ 
tion cost, so that it was not then a producer’s prob¬ 
lem. The committee, however, never named any fair 
price. As a matter of fact, the price has gone on 
steadily climbing since, just as the price of food 
generally has increased during the attempts by ad¬ 
ministrators to regulate it by fair price announce¬ 
ments. which were mere playthings in the hands of 
dealers. The only reduction in food prices effected 
by the Federal Food Administration was the arbi¬ 
trary direct and indirect fixing of lower prices to 
the farmer, and most of that was effected by lower¬ 
ing the price after the foods had been produced. 
A DIFFICULT TASK.—The Fair Price Milk Com¬ 
mittee evidently realized its helplessness in the task 
imposed on it; and instead of attempting to fix prices 
conducted another investigation, which has been 
under way for several months. Dr. Copeland and 
the members of his committee have impressed wit¬ 
nesses aud the public generally as being entirely in 
earnest in their work, and quite determined to find 
a way to get cheaper milk for the people of the city 
of New York. It was a city committee, and its work 
has been for the city. It has frankly admitted its 
belief that the producer gets none too much, and that 
the cost of production must be paid in order to secure 
a full supply, but it has complained of the extrava¬ 
gance of the League officials and of their negotia¬ 
tions and relations with the dealers. 
EXTENSIVE REGULATIONS—The Fair Price 
Committee has now issued a report to the Governor, 
and goes entirely beyond the city limits, and makes 
recommendations for legislation to regulate the 
whole dairy industry of the State by a special com¬ 
mission. It makes several minor recommendations 
that we have long advocated and approve. Among 
these are the sale of both bottled and bulk milk 
through local city stores, requiring a deposit on 
bottles to save waste, the use of the city trolley 
lines to move milk after midnight, and less duplica¬ 
tion of plants and service. It also suggests a city- 
owned pasteurizing plant, which under present con¬ 
ditions would be useful, but which would not be 
needed if either the State or the producers them¬ 
selves owned and operated a plant, as they must 
and will yet do. 
COMMISSION PROPOSED.—In other respects 
the committee has gone wide of the mark and lost 
itself entirely in the production field, just as a city 
committee might be expected to do. It proposes a 
commission of three persons, who are to have com¬ 
plete control of the dairying industry of the State, 
and regulate milk from the cow to the consumer. 
It is to fix the price of milk to the producer, the cost 
of distribution and the price to the consumer. It 
is to license every producer of milk, every creamery 
and milk receiving station, and every dealer, and 
have power to revoke the license for cause. 
“It shall require every producer of milk to register 
with the commission aud to report to the commission 
at stated periods, showing the disposition of the milk 
and milk products sold, setting forth the name aud 
address of the statiou or stations to which he delivered 
it, the prices obtained therefor and a statement as to 
whether such milk was sold for fluid or for manufac¬ 
turing purposes.” 
It would give the commission power to prohibit 
the sale of milk for manufacturing purposes and to 
divert it to city uses as fluid milk; and it would not 
have any milk manufactured within 150 or 200 miles 
of New York, but would reserve the supply in this 
zone for the city. It would give the commission 
power to make rules and regulations that have the 
effect of law, and impose a fine of $500 or one year 
imprisonment for violations. 
A LACKING DETAIL.—The plan lacks oue im¬ 
portant detail. We are not told who the committee 
members are to be. If we are to have three country¬ 
men who cannot be bought or mesmerized by the 
milk trust, producers might approve it. If it is to 
be a committee of dealers, the milk trust will not 
object to it, and if a city committee, the consumers 
will be satisfied, but neither interest will want to 
take any chances. It would be fatal to the interest 
that did. 
RESULTS FORESEEN.—It may well be consid¬ 
ered as a plan to reduce the production of milk, and 
to increase the cost. It would destroy the dairy 
industry, but the city consumer would be the greatest 
sufferer. The report, however, may well serve as a 
new warning to the producer. The control of the 
industry is in the hands of the men who control the 
city market, and there can be no bi-partisan artificial 
control of the market. Either the dealers or the 
producers will control it. It is conceded by all ex¬ 
cept themselves in public that the dealers dominate 
THAT’S SOMETHING, ANYWAY 
A Great Benevolence 
Iteprotluml from the N. Y. Evening Telegram 
it now. They are stronger than formerly, because 
they have removed virtually all the independent 
dealers, and the business is centered in fewer hands 
than ever before. The remedy is simple. Wholesale 
milk in the city, and build up an independent line 
of dealers to deliver bottled and bulk milk through 
the stores, and regulate the price through «to the 
consumer. If this is done efficiently and economically, 
by the League, the farmer will get his cost of pro¬ 
duction and profit, and the city consumption will 
rapidly increase under the stimulus of lower retail 
prices. Then we will hear no more of investigations, 
and the dairy industry will develop. 
Use of Borrowed Milk Cans 
I have received a letter from an attorney of the Milk 
Bottlers’ Federation in New York, saying that I am 
subject to a fine of $50 for the alleged reason that I 
had used a milk can without the consent of the owner, 
hut that he is authorized to accept one-half the amount 
provided check for $25 is sent at once; otherwise to 
take the necessary action under the statute and recover 
full penalty, together with the costs and expenses of 
such action. 
Some time back the Mapleleaf Dairy Company, at 
that time operating at Thompson Ridge, N.Y.. now out 
of business, gave me six cans to replace six which they 
lost of mine. One of the six returned to me had the 
name of William Richmond. I have witnesses to prove 
the way I came in possession of the can. AA hat would 
you advise? w. H. 
New York. 
We have taken this matter up with the attorney, 
and have his assurances that farmers will not bo 
prosecuted or troubled In any case where it is shown 
that the dealer furnished the cans on rental or 
otherwise. This decision is manifestly correct. The 
producer has no control over the matter. lie must 
use the cans offered him, or spill the milk. Dealers 
are continually using each other’s cans, aud some 
of them naturally find their way to farmers, cither 
on rental or in exchange for their own, and it is 
hardly an evidence of good intentions to annoy and 
prosecute farmers for inefficiency and carelessness 
on the part of the dealers themselves. 
This is one of the archaic agricultural laws that 
should be amended, and we do not believe a farmer 
can be convicted under such circumstances, but it is 
a source of needless annoyance. We advise against 
paying any fine in such cases. We are willing to 
defend the first case that is tried. 
The Milk Business 
The farmers back in the cheap milk zone are inter¬ 
ested in Mr. Battle’s proposition to the Governor, that 
the Dairymen’s League, the Farms and Markets Depart¬ 
ment and all the rest of the agricultural law be abolished, 
and milk price be fixed and controlled by three com¬ 
missioners appointed by Governor Smith. If that isn't 
a scream just show me one. Do these gentlemen who 
talk so glibly about State Socialism and price-fixing 
know anything about railroad and wire control, or the 
conditions under which milk is made in the back coun¬ 
try? Perhaps a brief description of this section, which 
is fairly typical of general farming conditions, might 
be interesting. 
The people here are in no sense dairymen except in a 
few cases. Y'et two big loads of milk leave this section 
every morning all Summer, and there is quite a pro¬ 
duction now. The farmers milk from six to 12 cows, 
and formerly sent cream, but when a wagon would start 
in at a 40 per cent test and drop to 20 in a few months 
it made a cream producer tired, and he was apt to 
change and see how high his test would go with some 
other creamery. AA’e have had at least six different 
creameries operating on this basis, and one failed and 
robbed the farmers of three months’ cream. Such of 
us as worked hard to get the business started had to 
confess we were faked. 
The milk station where our milk goes at present buys 
on a flat test of 5.0 per cent. AA’hile this is not fair to 
men with milk that tests eight points better, it saves a 
lot of argument and trouble, and perhaps is just as well 
in tho end. Otherwise they are fine people to deal with. 
The measure is good, they pay once a week, and there 
is very little trouble with the milk if a man is reason¬ 
ably careful. 
As I say. most of us are general farmers, and milk 
with a lantern most of the year, and so put in that 
much more time. As a proposition figured scientifically 
the milk business does not pay, even with milk around 
eight cents per quart, working as we do with common 
cows and common care. I figure they just about pay 
for their feed at present price, with hay at $20 per ton, 
eornmeal $80 and cottonseed as much or more. Mixed 
feed is from $70 to $00 per ton here, but some of us 
buy bran and mix with ground oats and buckwheat, 
which with some high protein feed makes a fair ration. 
Of course some one says “get a silo and high-producing 
cows,” and then you have to get some high labor, which 
is not always productive, aud there you go again. For 
one. I would rather keep sheep. 
In a series of years the cow business is better than 
cropping. I believe, as it tends to keep up production 
of the farms, and as a side issue it is a good thing con¬ 
sidered as a community business, even with a seven- 
mile haul over abominable roads—if you can get some 
other fellow to face the weather. The men who try it 
here say “Never no more.” Some of us sympathize 
with the poor in the big cities also. For years we have 
been regularly dosed with stories about conditions in 
the tenements. How they live now with prices as 
quoted is beyond me. Such men as myself, who have 
followed the fairs for years, and who once knew the big 
city as we do the old farm, are fairly familiar with the 
poor, and believe more milk would do them good. Also, 
anyone who has peddled milk with a dipper, as we did 
25 years ago. knows that a cent or two rise in price 
means a lot of milk left in the can to take home, and 
of course that much less consumed on the route. AVe 
fully and freely concede the heartbreaking conditions 
which confront those who have to deal with a great 
city’s poor. 
But before Mr. Battle or his kind further reduces 
milk production in this State I wish he would look at 
the other side. Take this section as a sample. Nearly 
every man here owns a good farm and has money in 
the bank aud war bonds. Now what do you think 
these men would say to any of Governor Smith’s high- 
collar boys who come here and tell us what shall be the 
price of milk ? As I said before, we get out at five 
now, and milk with a lantern a lot of old cows that 
do not pay. not because it is absolutely necessary, but 
because it is better for the farms, the community and 
perhaps for mauy iu the big cities. I think, to use 
common parlance, the Governor would better be handing 
out bouquets aud encouragement than “bawling out ’ 
the milk producers of this State. 
As for breaking the Dairymen’s League, they surely 
are trying something. About every man who produces 
market milk belongs. I believe without the League 
there would be few cows milked, and it is no monopoly, 
but an association like the Grange. It would be a hard 
thing to put the League out of business 
Schuyler Co., N. Y. b. l. Hathaway. 
