7ht RURAL NEW-YORKER 
985 
Replies From Candidates for Governor 
The 12 farm problems printed last week were sent 
to all the names so far suggested from any source as 
possible candidates for Governor of New York State, 
with request for full reply. The following have 
been received. Keep the records. They will help 
you to vote right later on: 
FROM SENATOR HENRY M. SAGE 
I will take up your points in their order: 
First—1 am in favor of and voted for the repeal of 
the State daylight -saving law. 
Second*—I certainly am in favor of revision of the 
State agricultural law in order to make it more an aid 
to the farmer and to production, rather than, as it is at 
the State daylight-saving law. 
Third—I do not think that I would approve the elec¬ 
tion of the Commissioner of Agriculture and Commis¬ 
sioner of Farms and Markets by a direct vote. The 
whole trend in the State is to shorten rather than to 
lengthen the State ballot. 
Fourth—I thoroughly agree that no one should hunt 
or fish on farm lands without the written consent of 
the owner, but I don’t think it wise to authorize the 
farmers to kill birds or wild animals, and sell or trans¬ 
port. the same, as it would open the door too wide. 
Fifth—I would like to see more authority in local 
school boards for the management of country schools, 
and myself introduced a bill this year which failed of 
passage to increase the proportion of State money for 
the support of country schools. 
Sixth—The whole trend of legislation this year has 
been in line with the improvement of the back country 
roads, and that legislation I voted for. 
Seventh—Your proposition here is a little vague, 
and not knowing exactly what it means, I would better 
answer neither yes nor no. 
Eighth—I am in thorough acc rd with, as I am with 
the ninth question. 
Tenth—I am thoroughly in accord with as to its 
general purpose, but the details are rather difficult to 
figure out. I should say the same as to No. 11. 
As to No. 12, if the Commissioner of Markets is able 
to devise such a system of distribution as you speak of. 
I would probably favor it. The only question in my 
mind is as to whether iti would be possible for the State 
to make a demonstration as to whether this was the 
most economic system, because it would be necessary 
first to build up an entirely new organization. The 
building up of that organization would cost a great 
heal of money, and if it was purely for demonstration 
purposes the money would probably be largely wasted. 
1 think I can say as to all your latter propositions, 
namely, 9, 10. 11 and 12, that I am very anxious to 
see some legislation looking toward the end which you 
desire. I am not, however, in favor of legislation 
which would endeavor to control the forces of supply 
and demand, because from experience of the past war 
.tears it has been shown in every case that such at¬ 
tempted control has been a failure. henry >r. sage. 
FROM ISRAEL T. DEYO 
Of course, I appreciate the compliment of being con¬ 
sidered as a candidate for Governor of New York this 
Fall. However. I am not a candidate, and can conceive 
of no consideration that would make such candidacy 
either possible or desirable. 
You have asked me to express my views, though 
rot a candidate, on 12 enumerated problems embodied 
in a questionnaire which you submit. In my opinion 
the public interests would be greatly conserved by *tbe 
adoption unqualifiedly of the program outlined in the 
first, second, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth 
questions. 
As to the fourth question, the game laws might well 
be amended so as to make it unlawful for anyone to 
hunt or fish on farm lands without the written consent 
of the owners, and to permit farmers to kill birds or 
wild animals when necessary to protect their property. 
1 question, however, tin* wisdom of permitting the sale 
and transportation of birds and animals so killed in the 
same manner as domestic animals, for the reason that 
if would encourage such killing for profit and not for 
protection. 
The tenth, eleventh and twelfth questions must in- 
velve serious problems for which there must be found 
some solution. What that solution is to be, I say 
frankly I do not know. Governmental regulation of 
business is one thing, governmental ownership and 
governmental management is quite another thing, and 
hitherto have proved disastrous. The State has em¬ 
barked in a good many experiments for the ostensible 
purpose of remedying real evils, with a multiplication of 
offices, commissions, machinery and expenses as the only 
tangible results to show for it. We should feel our 
' i av, make sure our ground, and proceed with caution. 
As to the third question, 1 am very strongly of the 
opinion that it would be a serious mistake to have 
'he Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner 
of Foods and Markets elected by direct vo*e at general 
•‘lections. The cities of the State now control the nomi¬ 
nation of candidates of both parties for State office, 
and largely control their election. The plan suggested 
would result in the naming of the Commissioner of 
Agriculture and the Commissioner of Foods aud Mar¬ 
kets by the cities and entrench politics in the adminis- 
tration of those departments more firmly than ever. 
1‘olitics should be eliminated from the administration 
°f those offices. I am a strong believer in vesting 
greater rather than les< authority in the Governor over 
tlo various agencies* of government, thus making him 
''• sponsible for results. That would effect a better co- 
ordmation of governmental functions. It would also 
ciakf for greater efficiency, economy, and a more direct 
responsibility. 
<>f the vast sums of money appropriated by the State 
mutually— this year. I believe, over three millions of 
dollars—for so-called agricultural purposes, too much 
is used for political fencing, and too little for genuine 
public service. ISRAEL T. )>eyo. 
The Cost of Marketing Milk 
’A hat does it really cost to mu a quart of milk in 
■t store in New York City? Can’t something be done 
that line? Our milk-receiving station closed 
, 91 >J.l. and men are driving from three to seven miles 
? llIH 8 milk here to have it made into cheese. Some 
our storekeepers say they have difficulty in having 
their orders for condensed milk filled, aud (he trust 
claims great quantities in storage. Just think, we who 
have the investment in land, cows and equipment, do 
not get over 38 per cent of cash in your city. Those 
milk trusts are so rich, why do they want to squeeze 
us so hard? For 20 years I have wanted to see our 
buildings all painted one color, the same season : guess 
I’ll never live to see it. producer. 
New York. 
Tito cost of putting milk in the stores after it 
leaves the farmer’s wagon is about SO cents a can, 
or two cents a quart: 
Pasteurizing, per can..$0.15 
Freight, per can.38 
Cartage, per can, city.20 
Overhead, per can.07 
Total .$0.80 
The stores sell for a cent, profit, so that three 
cents would cover the spread between producer and 
consumer. Nothing can be done along that line so 
long as the milk trust dominates the city markets. 
The milk trust does not care whether your build¬ 
ings are painted or not.' It is doing business to 
make a profit Tf permitted to do so, they will 
squeeze hard enough to get it. 
The Southern Dairyman’s Problems 
Will The R. N.-Y. tell us what the matter is with 
our Southern dairymen? It is possible to grow green 
stuff during nine or 10 months of the year. Corn grows 
luxuriously. There is no necessity for expensive barns; 
grazing can be bad for eight or nine months. Is it that 
our dairymen do not try to produce at lower cost? Is 
it due to the grade of cows? It would seem that we 
should be able to produce milk at as low a cost as is 
done by New York farmers, who are now receiving con¬ 
siderably less per quart than our dairymen are demand¬ 
ing. 
I shall be very glad if you will bring this matter to 
the attention of some of your correspondents who will 
study this matter and tell us what is wrong. We do 
not want the farmers underpaid. Neither do we want 
the price of milk so high that people cannot afford to 
use it. 1 do not.feel competent to judge this matter now. 
though many years ago I kept a dairy on the east end 
of Long Island, and made money retailing very high 
grade rich Jersey milk at six cents per quart, and I had 
to give my cows all their feed for at least six months 
each year. Howard egleston. 
New Orleans, La. 
We assume that Mr. Egleston refers to Southern 
dairymen who supply New Orleans with milk. What 
lie did years ago on Long Island has no bearing 
whatever on the subject. Times have entirely 
changed since then. There has been a figlir over the 
price of milk in New Orleans. The distributers offer 
38 cents a gallon for milk which they sell at 19 cents 
a quart! The milk producers in Louisiana and 
Mississippi stand out for 40 cents wholesale. 
In theory it would seem to us that milk should be 
produced cheaply at the South. The Southern dairy¬ 
man does not need expensive buildings. He can 
pasture his stock eight to nine months of the year, 
and can buy cottonseed meal at a fair price, besides 
producing clover, velvet beans, Alfalfa and cow peas 
cheaply. He seems to be saved many of the terrible 
expenses which the Northern dairy farmer must 
stand for. Yet here is a statement made by John J. 
Gruchy, of Wesson. Miss., which seems to be typical 
of others: 
Returns for milk shipped to New Orleans in the 2*4 
months. 5.837 lbs., were $298.71. Disbursements were 
as follows: 
Railroad tickets for shipping milk-. $34 90 
1.000 lbs. wheat bran. 29.05 
200 lbs. wheat shorts . 7.00 
1.800 lbs. cottonseed meal . 73.15 
2.240 lbs. cottonseed hulls . 19.08 
1.000 lbs. beet pulp . 30.00 
272 lbs. gluten feed . 10.88 
200 lbs. rice polish . 7.00 
500 lbs. mixed sweet feed. 17.50 
100 lbs. corn chops . 4 50 
50 lbs. salt . .80 
Seals for milk cans. 2.37 
Paid for delivery of milk to railroad. 0.00 
Sundry stable supplies. 2.50 
Cost of two milk cans lost in transit. 14.04 
Total cash outlay.$206.57 
This leaves a balance < t>1?27.14 for 2*4 mouths, which 
does not suffice to pay the actual value of the Lespedeza 
hay. corn fodder, corn shucks and other roughage, 
raised on the farm, but consumed by the cows during 
that period before grass came, nor for the grazing since. 
Also it leaves nothing to pay for the daily labor of 
the children in milking and taking the cows to and from 
pasture; nothing for the daily labor of nay wife in wash¬ 
ing and scalding the milk cans and other utensils; noth¬ 
ing for our labor in hauling the milk daily to the point 
whence our neighbor hauls it to the railroad; nothing 
to pay the hauling of feed from town to farm. 
It will interest our Northern men to read this fur¬ 
ther statement from Mr. Gruchy. Wherever the sun 
shines the dairyman seems to have his troubles: 
The decreased cost of producing milk iu Summer is 
largely offset by the increased risk of its souring in 
transit. After the milk leaves bis hands the shipper 
lias no further control over it. If it is allowed to stay 
a while in the sun on a depot platform it is quite apt to 
sour, entirely without fault on the shipper’s part. Does 
the distributer stand this loss? No, sir. lie either 
ships the cans right back to the shipper, entailing return 
freight charges of eight cents per gallon, or else, if not 
too sour for use. pays the shipper for it at 18 cents per 
gallon, from which of course the regular freight of four 
cents per gallon must be deducted. 
To get the milk off in time we must get up at 4 a. m.. 
Summer and Winter, rain or shine, Sundays or week¬ 
days, and holidays. It is usually 0 p. m. in Winter and 
7 p. m. in Summer before we are through with the 
evening milking. TIow about those hours, you city 
workers, who kick about working over eight hours a day, 
and want increased pay for overtime? 
Good dairymen of long experience here say that a 
dairyman shipping milk the year ’round does well if he 
breaks even in Winter, and must trust to what he can 
make in the five Summer months to come out ahead on 
the whole year. Dairymen who stick to the business 
over a term of years usually improve their financial 
situation in the long run, but it is only by capitalizing 
ihe labor of themselves and their families and enduring 
hardships which would appear intolerable to most city 
workers. 
So Ave cannot answer Mr. Egleston’s questions. Tf 
any of our readers can, they may have the floor. 
Connecticut Court Upsets a Milk Law 
The Supreme Court of Connecticut has just declared 
unconstitutional a State law which provided for 
licensing dealers in milk and cream. This law went 
into effect last July. It required all dealers to pay a 
fee of 50 cents per month, and no license Avas to Be 
issued until the applicant could furnish the Dairy and 
Food Commissioner proof that he Avas financially 
responsible, or he was to furnish a bond satisfactory to 
the commissioner. The laAv was carefully drawn and 
approved by the Attorney-General, as well as by the 
Governor, the latter being an eminent judge. The law 
was easily enforced and was generally regarded as fair. 
The Supreme Court throAvs out this law because it con¬ 
fers judicial powers upon the Food Commissioner, and 
also because it attempts to turn over the property of the 
licensee to his creditors “without a day in court.” The 
Supreme Court also thinks that the Iuav cannot be 
justified as necessary for public health, safety or wel- 
tare. The members of the commission and milk pro¬ 
ducers’ association are greatly stirred up over what they 
call ’’this hair-splitting decision.” Secretary Howard 
II. Meyers says of it: 
‘Tudor the conditions which are restored by this 
judicial decision it will be possible for any Rus¬ 
sian, Greek, Polo, Slavonian, Italian, or other immi¬ 
grant who can slip through the bars at Ellis Island to 
arrive iu Connecticut, and begin business as a milk 
dealer aud peddler on the day after his arrival, provided 
he can borroAv the use of a horse and wagon from some 
compatriot who preceded him. Scores of men who can¬ 
not speak a word of our language find the milk business 
their most attractive opportunity, provided the State 
asks them no questions when they first come here, and 
iu recent years the business has been very largely in the 
hands of these unassimilated foreigners—in Connecticut, 
at least.” 
At the next Legislature a new law will be drawn to 
cover the objections made by the court. In the mean¬ 
time the members of the association will have to take 
The R. N.-Y.’s advice and do it themselves to obtain 
protection against irresponsible middlemen. 
Milk Situation in Madison County, N.Y. 
The situation in ihc dairy business is certainly in a 
A ery serious condition, aud unless things change within 
the next feAV months Ave will see a milk famine before 
next Spring. Farmers have produced milk all of this 
past Winter at from 40c to 50c per cwt. tinder cost 
of product, and then Avheu April prices were agreed 
upon Ave found we were at least in the hole $1 per cAvt. 
May prices arc figured to lose the farmer 05c per cAvt.. 
being that much under cost of production, using the 
Warren formula as a basis. 'What business can stand 
up under such conditions? 
We have in Madison County perhaps as fine a lot of 
dairy cows as are to be found in the Avorld today, and 
it is the only branch of farming that does not rob the 
soil, and that is one reason Avhy so many farmers are 
’Oav milking coavs. Take cows off an average New 
York State farm for five years and you have a farm 
producing about half the former crops. Do AA*e AA*aut 
such conditions? The Avriter thinks not. What is bet¬ 
ter than plenty of good milk, cream, butter and cheese? 
i lave Ave got too much of these products? The dealers 
say yes. They toll us to produce less, while the con¬ 
sumer has never paid so high for these products as at 
the present time. Do we want the consumer to pay 
more for these products, which he certainly will have 
to if less is produced? The writer feels that the con¬ 
sumer is paying plenty high enough at present. He 
aiso knows that he cannot produce market milk long 
under present conditions. Since April 1 I have seen 
several dairies right near by sacrificed because farmers 
became discouraged and sold their milch cows, and then 
sold their hay. for Avhich they received big prices, and 
1 do not knoAV but what they were about right. Had 
they kept their cows, they would have had a big feed 
bill to pay. and now their hay has brought as much as 
the milk would. In conclusion would say that inas¬ 
much as the dealers have refused to buy our milk under 
the conditions that were used last year, and which did 
not bring us cost of production, we should at least insist 
on “cost of production.” and think before the milk is 
sold again for such ruinous prices the farmers of each 
branch of the Dairymen’s League should be consulted 
to find out just Avhat their feelings are. 
EDWARD T. DUXX, 
