‘Pie RURAL NEW-YORKER 
597 
The Price of Milk and the Price of Grain 
The following communication is from the newly 
elected*director of the Dairymen's League from St. 
Lawrence County, N. Y. Tn his letter he says that 
in “Northern New York, where little grain is raised, 
it. is a losing business to make milk when the price is 
less per hundred pounds than the price per hundred 
of a good dairy ration.” Hence he bases the price of 
100 lbs. of milk on the cost of 100 lbs. of feed. We 
think the paper will suggest further discussion of the 
subject 
I wish to submit the following plan for arriving at 
price of milk to be paid farmers at milk stations, which 
seems to me fair to all concerned : 
For example, will make price for January, 1020. 
First take the Savage dairy ration, as quoted in League 
News, December .10. 1910. 
Price dairy ration. Ftica freight.,$04.60 
Plus difference New York rate. .40 
Plus retail profit per ton. 5.00 
$70.00 
This gives retail price of dairy ration per 100. .. $3.50 
Plus 10 per cent for climatic conditions.35 
Price of 3 per cent, milk. $3.S5 
For surplus fat take New York quotations for butter 
of 70c at 7c per point. 
I would propose that November, December and Janu¬ 
ary milk be figured on same basis, namely ; take retail 
price of dairy ration for base and add 10 per cent for 
climatic conditions and add market price of but er for 
surplus fat. taking market price of grain about the 
10th of each month as basis for price of milk for the 
following month. 
For February, March and April, figure the same, 
except take actual retail grain price for 3 per cent basis 
and do not add the 10 per cent. 
For May, June and July, take retail price of grain, 
less 10 per cent on account of Summer conditions and 
to take care of the surplus. 
For August, September and October, take the retail 
price of grain for 3 per cent milk, same as for Febru¬ 
ary, March and April. 
This makes average for the year, 100 lbs. dairy ration 
to equal 100 lbs. of 3 per cent milk. To provide for 
the surplus which is bound to appear in the flush sea¬ 
son. simply keep the retail price fairly even during the 
year, except November, December and January, and 
make no cut in price to the consumer in the flush 
months. The cut of 10 per cent for May, June and 
July should easily take care of the surplus, and allow 
same to be made into butter and cheese at a profit, for 
example: 
1.000 lbs milk at $3.50 per 100 equals.$35.00 
Less 10 per cent. 3.50 
Price to producer.$31.50 
Value to distributor— 
8(10 lbs. market milk at $3.50 equals.$28.00 
200 lbs. surplus milk at $1.75 equals. 3.50 
Total .$31.50 
The market milk farmer in New York State under 
present conditions purchases for cash all the grain fed 
to milch cows. The average dairy farmer uses prac¬ 
tically all his homegrown grain to feed horses, young 
cattle, hogs, etc. For this reason the price of grain 
should be the base for computing the price of 3 per cent 
milk, and the price of surplus fat should be at least the 
market price of butter. It is a well-known fact that to 
keep up a reasonable flow of milk, on the average you 
must feed 1 lb. of grain for each 3 lbs. of milk. This 
being the case, then why not take the price of grain as 
the base for the price of milk, the same as the baker 
takes the price of flour as the base for the price of 
bread ? 
In support of the price of butter for surplus fat. will 
say that it is beyond ray comprehension why the water 
contents of milk •should be given the preference over the 
butterfat elements. When «this rule was first started 
butter was worth not over 30c pei lb., and price of sur¬ 
plus fat was figured at 3c per point, which at that time 
was fair. Under present conditions, with butter or milk 
both much higher, why uot take price of butter as base 
for surplus fat? 
My reasons for suggesting price of grain as a basis 
for the price of milk in preference to the Warren for¬ 
mula is that it is both positive and definite, and no 
chance of uot being able to ascertain its value on any 
given date; also this same plan would apply to auy 
city—New York. Boston or Chicago. With Warren 
formula there is more or less chance for error in esti¬ 
mating value of hay. silage, labor, etc., and again, very 
few market milk farmers either buy or sell hay, and 
they all buy grain. The price of labor you will find by 
looking back over a term of years will average to rise 
and fall with the price of grain. 
Why the present method of computing price is wrong 
in principle and will first or last lead us into trouble is, 
first, it is based ou New York market price of butter 
and cheese made anywhere, on grain farms in the West 
and from the four corners of the earth, much of it un¬ 
der conditions vastly different from those found in mar¬ 
ket milk-producing sections. When was the butter, 
cheese and oleo made which we are using as a base 
price for January milk? The bulk of it, the part which 
controls the price, was made and put in storage last 
Summer. 
I am not saying we have or we have not received 
enough for milk under the system now in use, but if 
we had based the price of milk on the price of lumber, 
steel, clothing or shoes, the price would have been good, 
but the system would have been wrong just the same. 
A. F. SPOONER. 
A Few Farm Crop Reports 
I would like to relate my experience with my 1919 
potato crop. I planted about one acre of Irish Cob¬ 
bler, using one ton of fertilizer at $55. The seed cost 
me $6 per bbl.; used 4 bbls., $24 ; labor for planting, 
cultivating and harvesting, $34; total cost, $113. A 
poor season, for which I or no other farmer was respon¬ 
sible, nor was the middleman. However, these conditions 
caused short crop and a higher cost of production. The 
fact is when cold weather came I was compelled to sell 
some of my crop or let them freeze on my hands. I 
harvested 50 bu. only of good potatoes, at a cost of about 
$2.30 per bu. I was offered 55c per bu by a Brooklyn 
storekeeper, and I pay the freight. I decided, before I 
would do this, I would let them freeze. However, a 
little later a local grocer offer'd me $1.65 per bu. This 
was a loss of 75c pc bu., and tie best price I could get. 
I sold a few bushe s at this $1.65 price. The local 
grocer in turn used the poor season as a shield, making 
known the fact that there was a general shortage in the 
potato crop, and sold the potatoes that he bought from 
me at $2.50 per bu., which gave him a profit of 85c per 
bu. on the same potatoes that I lost 55c per bu. on., to 
say nothing of my interest on the investment, or rental, 
etc. MAURICE J. MITCHELL. 
Ulster Co., N. Y. 
On page 313 we printed an advertisement which 
John D. Pearmain of Framingham, Mass., ran in a 
local paper at his own expense. That was one way 
of educating the consumer. Now Mr. Pearmain gives 
us the following: 
The farmers about here are making a start toward 
bettering 'conditions under which they live and work, 
having now for more than a year riln an exchange for 
buying grain, hay, etc., and having started (last July) 
a co-operative provision store, run jointly with the 
townspeople. On February 25 the head of our newly 
created Division of Markets gave out some preliminary 
figures before the Massachusetts Fruit Growers’ Asso¬ 
ciation in Worcester : 42c on the average goes to the 
farmer in the United State of America of each con¬ 
sumer’s retail dollar, so it is with such thoughts in 
mind that I like to help put before the public facts as 
they are, that greater knowledge may direct dissatis¬ 
faction into constructive channels. And. by the way, 
putting the facts before the public includes enlightening 
the farmers—they go about 50-50 with the townsmen on 
being easy picking for the middlemen. 
Framingham, Mass. J. D. pearmain. 
Your reference to the attitude of the Philadelphia 
Public Ledger on the 35-eent dollar calls to mind our 
experience of last Summer with sweet corn. Having 
more than we could use, it occurred to us that we might 
be able to dispose of it in Baltimore. Accordingly we 
loaded 375 dozen on a truck, and left the farm about 
I a. m.. arriving at the market very early in the morn¬ 
ing. The corn was consigned to a commission house, 
and being of fine quality, was sold to a jobber for 17c 
per dozen, the top of the market price. We had to drive 
to the jobber and unload the corn. Some of it was 
loaded by our men direct into wagons and trucks of 
hucksters and retailers. The jobber realized 23 and 24c 
per dozen for this corn and never had his hands on some 
of it. He was entirely sold out in two hours. That 
same morning I inquired at one of the largest retail 
markets the price of sweet corn and was informed it 
was selling for 40 and 50c per dozen ; the same corn that 
the farmer got 15 to 17c for. If the consumer had gyt 
the benefit of this cheap corn I should not have felt so 
badly about the price we received. On the way home 
that morning I decided that the hogs would get the 
remainder of our crop, and accordingly we marketed 
over 1.000 dozen in this way and felt well repaid. 
A Game Law for Farm Protection 
The Atlantic Co., N. J., Board of Agriculture has 
presented the following bill to the members of the 
New Jersey Legislature at. Trenton: 
1. When farmers find a wild animal or animals de¬ 
stroying their crops it shall be lawful for them to shoot 
and kill said wild animal or animals on their own 
property. S<iid killing shall be reported within 24 
hours to the Fish and Game Commission. Farmers 
shall herewith be defined to men or women obtaining 
their livelihood from the farm by the growing of crops 
or domestic animals, or both. 
2. When any person shall sustain damage or injury 
by reason of his or her fruit trees or growing crops be¬ 
ing destroyed or otherwise injured by a wild animal or 
animals, it shall be lawful for such person to take one 
respectable freeholder of the township or other munic¬ 
ipality, one member of the executive committee of the 
county board of agriculture, wherein such damage was 
done, who are in nowise kin to the party so calling 
them, to view the tree or trees and crop or crops so de¬ 
stroyed or injured, as aforesaid, and if it shall appear 
to their satisfaction that said tree or trees or crop or 
crops were destroyed or damaged by a wild animal or 
animals, then the said men shall make a return or cer¬ 
tificate thereof, in writing, stating the amount of damage 
such person may have sustained, which shall in no case 
exceed a fair value in the judgment of the appraisers 
for each tree or trees or crop or crops which said cer¬ 
tificate shall entitle the person so injured to the sum 
stated therein, as the damage sustained, to be paid by 
the Fish and Game Commission of the State of New 
Jersey. 
3. In case the damage so certified shall appear to the 
Fish and Game Commission to be excessive, it shall 
and may be lawful for said Fish and Game Commission 
to require the facts stated and the claim exhibited to be 
investigated before them upon oath or affirmation, and 
shall award payment accordingly. The amounts so paid 
under this act shall be taken from moneys coming into 
the hands of the Fish and Game Commission of New 
Jersey for hunting licenses issued by the commission and 
their agencies. 
This act shall take effect immediately. 
Orchard Spray Service for Onondaga Co. 
The annual meeting of the Onondago County, N. Y.. 
Fruit Growers’ Association was held in the Farm Bu¬ 
reau office on February 2. Prof. Carpenter of the Col¬ 
lege of Agriculture, Syracuse, gave an interesting talk 
on the grading of fruit in the Middle West, and sug¬ 
gested that the apple growers of Onondaga County 
might profit well by adopting a similar method. This 
was well received by those present and plans were dis¬ 
cussed for organizing a packing house for Onondaga 
farmers. Prof. II. II. Whetzel of Cornell University 
gave a convincing talk ou the value of spraying service 
and study of plant diseases, as has been developed in 
Niagara and other counties of the State, and explained 
how Onondaga could take advantage of such service. 
This plan was so well received that a committee was 
appointed, consisting of G. G. Ilitchings, W. A. Par¬ 
sons and L. L. Woodford, to consider plans for estab¬ 
lishing a spray system in Onondaga County for the com¬ 
ing season, and it is hoped for succeeding seasons as 
well. The work will be carried on with the co-opera¬ 
tion of the Farm Bureau and local Weather Bureau, 
under the advisement of Cornell a ,d Syracuse. Mr. 
Ward, the Associate Farm Bureau Manager, will be the 
assistant in charge of this spray service for the associa¬ 
tion, and certain orchards will be selected in different 
localities throughout the county which will be under the 
close supervision of Mr. Ward for the spraying, and 
will keep other farmers informed through the press 
and telephone service. The Fruit Growers’ Association 
passed a resolution that the farmers who have this 
special service should contribute at least $5 to help 
meet the extra expense of the work. The number of 
farmers who can receive the personal attention of Mr. 
Ward will be limited, and the first ones to apply for the 
service will be sure to receive it. Should you desire 
this service, send in your application to the Farm Bu¬ 
reau office. This service will be valuable, and the or- 
ehardist cannot afford to do without it. A special meet¬ 
ing of the Onondaga Fruit Growers’ Association will be 
called about the middle of March to more fully arrange 
details for the work. w. 
The Problem of Farm Finance 
In every small village we find quite a few retired 
farmers who are living on the interest of their savings, 
usually about $15,000 invested in gilt-edged securities. 
These securities are mostly either stocks or bonds of 
some large corporation of national repute, paying on 
an average about 8 per cent. These farmers are the 
very last to invest in local enterprises, primarily for 
the benefit of agriculture. I helped to sell stock in 
a cold-storage company, the by-laws of which forbid 
any speculation on any produce that may be handled. 
At the same time an ex-minister offered stock in a 
mine in the Cobalt district. These same farmers 
flocked into this wildest of wildcats with thousands of 
dollars, while our storage project had to go out and 
get the apple-growers themselves, many of whom had 
to step out and borrow the money. Now Orleans 
County, together with Niagara, Monroe and Ontario, 
have combined to secure a living wage on canning crops. 
If these growers should combine to build and operate 
their own factories, would these same men hunt up 
another wildcat mining scheme, or would they chip in 
and help out? 
I know of a farmer who actually farms land, who 
had some surplus on his cabbage crop. He refused 
absolutely to buy any stock in the Grange Exchange, 
but bought New York Central stock. Why do men 
prefer to invest in enterprises managed by men they 
know nothing about rather than in some home enter¬ 
prise managed by men who sat beside them in the 
little red school-house? The time is soon when this 
problem of finance will be prominent in many country 
towns throughout the State. t. w. a. 
A Pure Fabrics Law for New York 
Last week we mentioned a bill introduced by 
Jared Van Wagenen in the New York Legislature 
which aims to “protect against fraud in woolen fab¬ 
rics.” The active principles of this bill are stated as 
follows: 
Every manufacturer or dealer in textile fabrics, 
woven or knit or felted, which are purported to be com¬ 
posed wholly or partly of wool, or any manufacturer or 
dealer in garments or articles of apparel, if such be 
purported to be composed wholly or partly of wool, is 
hereby required to mark, stamp or tag such fabrics or 
articles in the manner hereinafter designated, and no 
person shall sell, offer or expose for sale or distribution 
in this State any fabric or garment or article of apparel 
purported to contain'wool, unless it shall be so marked, 
stamped or tagged. 
Every person who shall manufacture within the State 
any fabric or garment or article of apparel purported to 
contain wool shall. <>n or before January first of each 
calendar year in which such commodity or article is to 
be offered for sale, secure from the Commissioner of 
Agriculture a registration number, by which number 
the said manufacturer or dealer or distributor shall be 
designated in the records of the Department of Farms 
and Markets, and the Commissioner of Agriculture is 
hereby authorized to make rules and regulations for 
carrying out the provisions of this section. The state¬ 
ment to be attached to each fabric, garment or article of 
apparel purported to contain wool shall be as herewith 
designated. 
a. The name and principal address of the person manu¬ 
facturing the fabric, garment or article of apparel, to¬ 
gether with the registration number designated for his 
use by such Commissioner. 
b. The minimum percentage of weight of virgin wool. 
c. The maximum percentage of weight of shoddy. 
d. The maximum percentage of weight of material uot 
of animal origin. 
Such statement shall be printed with black ink ou a 
white cloth or paper tag. and securely attached to the 
fabric or garment or article of apparel in such a manner 
as the Commissioner may direct. 
