EXPERIMENTS WITH MILK TESTERS. 
the Babcock is necessary, and, in addition, for the Coch¬ 
ran examination acetic acid of a specific gravity difficult 
to procure, and ether, which is highly explosive and must 
be handled with care. For the Shorts method, besides 
that necessary for the Babcock, caustic soda, caustic potash 
and acetic acid must be used. 
The apparatus of the last-mentioned is not more 
breakable than the Babcock, but that of the Cochran is 
much more delicate, the most careful manipulators often 
breaking testing flasks. 
Rapidity .—With Shorts’ method, about five hours are 
necessary for the analyzing of one set of twelve flasks. 
This condemns it for the farmer’s use. 
The Cochran requires, for heating water, transferring 
from bottles to fat indicators, cleansing, etc., from three- 
quarters to an hour for a set of nine samples. 
With the Babcock, and without assistance, I analyzed 
ten samples in thirty-nine minutes, being about four min¬ 
utes to the sample, and, with assistance, in thirty-three 
minutes, cleansing the entire apparatus in the time. 
Alone I tested two samples in duplicate in eighteen min¬ 
utes, and thirty samples—three sets—in one hour and 
twenty-two minutes, only cleansing such of the apparatus 
as was necessary between sets. It is claimed that analyz¬ 
ing can be done in half the time with the new Curtis’ 
Babcock tester. 
Simplicity of Structure .—All are simple enough, so 
that the ordinary farmer will experience very little 
difficulty in handling them. He may break more, per¬ 
haps, than the trained chemist. The glassware of the 
Cochran is the most complicated and easily broken. 
There is very little, if any, difference in the other two 
methods in this respect. The Babcock is a centrifugal 
machine, and requires no heating, and less hot water 
than either of the others. 
