288 
American Agriculturist, March 31,19?1 
Editorial Pa§e 
of the American 
Agriculturist 
American 
Agriculturist 
Founded 1842 
Henry Morgenthau, Jr .Publisher 
E. R. Eastman .Editor 
Fred W. Ohm. Associate Editor 
Gabrielle Elliot .... Household Editor 
BiRGE Kinne .Advertising Manager 
H. L. VONDERLIETH . . . Circulation Manager 
CONTRIBUTING STAFF 
Herbert E. Cook .... Flow Handle Talks 
Jared Van Wagenen, Jr. . Van Wagenen Corner 
Herschel H. Jones . . . Market Department 
K. J. T. Ekblaw . Farm Engineering Department 
Paul Work .Vegetable Department 
George T. Hughes .... Investment Adviser 
Dr. S. K. Johnson .... Veterinary Adviser 
OUR ADVERTISEMENTS GUARANTEED 
The American Agriculturist accepts only advertis¬ 
ing which it believes to be thoroughly honest. 
We positively guarantee to our readers fair and 
honest treatment in dealing with our advertisers. 
We guarantee to refund the price of goods pur¬ 
chased by our subscribers from any advertiser who 
fails to make good when the article purchased is 
found not to be as advertised. 
To benefit by this guarantee subscribers must say: 
“I saw your ad in the American Agriculturist” when 
ordering from our advertisers. 
Published Weekly by 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST, INC. 
Address all correspondence for editorial, advertising, or 
subscription departments to 
461 Fourth Ave., New York, N. Y. 
Entered as Second-Class Matter, December 15, 1922, at the 
Post Office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879. 
Subscription price, payable in advance, $1 a year, 
Canadian and foreign, $2 a year. 
VOL. Ill March 31, 1923 NO. 13 
System of Dairy Recording Needed 
N ot the least of the many things that 
the war did to the dairy business was 
the elimination of a large number of suc¬ 
cessful cow testing associations. Some of 
them had some difficulty in maintaining the 
full quota of dairies and all found it hard to 
keep a good cow tester on the job for any 
length of time. Nevertheless, the interest 
was continually growing and on this in¬ 
terest it would have been possible in time to 
have increased the pay for the cow tester, 
so that better men could have been secured. 
But the war came and many of the testers 
enlisted, most of the associations disbanded, 
and have never been reorganized. 
There never was a time when this work 
was needed as badly as at the present. 
When times were fairly good, farmers could 
manage to get along by having their good 
operations support their poor ones, and 
their good cows carry the boarders, and 
still leave a profit; but when things are bad, 
the poor cows, of course, make them worse. 
The cow-testing association enabled a 
man to put his dairy on a business basis. 
No other business in the world, except farm¬ 
ing, could long endure without a system of 
accurate records that show where the profits 
and losses are. Cow testing brings out the 
relation between what the cow eats and what 
she returns in milk. It determines the 
amount of butterfat in the milk, and not the 
least of its results is that it checks the 
weights and butterfat tests of the milk 
dealer. It is a well-known fact that members 
of cow-testing associations have little diffi¬ 
culty with the milk weights and butterfat 
tests given by the buyer. 
But the old cow testing association was in 
some ways awkward and difficult in its ad¬ 
ministration ail'd maintenance. It took too 
much energy to keep it going. It would seem 
that there is a real opportunity for somebody 
to come forward with a simplified plan, 
whereby dairymen could get a practical check 
an their dairies without quite so much bother 
and energy as is required in cow-testing as¬ 
sociations, Perhaps there is an opportunity 
for dairymen through their organization, 
the Dairymen’s League Cooperative Associa¬ 
tion, Inc., to form, at very little expense, a 
great dairy improvement association, to 
which all its members could belong, working 
on a simple plan and at little cost, to help 
farmers test their cow’s and keep simple 
records of results of the whole dairy and of 
the individual animals. 
Taxes and the School Bill 
N O class of people in the world have more 
reason that farmers to know that there is 
nothing surer in the world than death and 
the taxes. Those who live on the land have 
always paid more than their share of taxes. 
Land and buildings are tangible property. 
They never escape the eye of the assessor. 
Yet in spite of this injustice of too large 
taxes, the American farmer has always been 
the first to vote taxes when he saw the real 
need, and when he was sure he got value re¬ 
ceived. His willingness to pay school taxes 
proves this point. School taxes in America 
have always been large, compared with those 
in other countries, because from the date 
when the first settlers landed to the present 
day, the American farmer has looked upon 
money properly spent for education as an 
investment and not as an expense—an in¬ 
vestment in the future of America. 
Because the farmer is particularly hard 
pressed at this time with heavy taxes and 
other expenses, considerable propoganda has 
been circulated, causing him to believe that 
if the School Bill now in the legislature, 
which contains the suggestions of the Com¬ 
mittee of Twenty-one, is passed, it will mean 
heavy additional taxes for him. What are 
the real facts? 
The bill provides for two general financial 
changes. The first is equalization of the tax 
rate, and the second is more State aid for 
rural schools. The present unit of taxation, 
the district, is so small and the valuation and 
wealth so great that it is a common thing to 
find districts that have a true tax rate that 
is many times as great as the rate in other 
districts in the same coipmunity. These dif¬ 
ferences are general throughout the State. 
Their cause is the great difference in the 
value of the property that different districts 
have for the support of their schools. To 
meet this situation it is provided in the bill 
that the unit of taxation be changed from the 
district to the community so that the poor 
and wealthy districts will pool their re¬ 
sources in their efforts to provide their chil¬ 
dren with schooling. 
This change will not mean that any more 
money will need to be raised than there is at 
present for the schools. But it will mean that 
some farm people who have been paying alto¬ 
gether too much for their schools will pay 
less, and that some others who have not been 
paying their share will have their rate 
slightly increased. However, even these will 
not pay much more taxes because of the 
features of State aid for country schools 
which we explain below. There will be those, 
of course, who are now paying very little for 
maintaining the country schools who' will 
object to the equalization, but we are sure 
enough of the sense of justice and fair play 
among farm people to believe that very few 
of these will raise any objection to a move 
that is absolutely just and fair. 
The changing of the tax unit from the dis¬ 
trict to the community does not mean consoli¬ 
dation, nor change in the boundaries of the 
school districts. They will remain as they 
are now and can only be changed by a ma¬ 
jority vote of the rural people who live in 
the district affected. 
The other financial change proposed in the 
bill is a larger feature of State aid. The 
present system of distribution of State money 
for school purposes is such that the rural 
districts, are placed at a disadvantage. It 
costs more to maintain the same grade of 
school in the open country that it does in the 
centers of population. The farmer should 
not be penalized because it is necessary for 
him to carry on his business under these con¬ 
ditions. To meet this condition, the bill pro¬ 
vides for a. State fund to help the rural 
schools. In the raising of this State fund, 
which would be entirely for the benefit of 
the rural schools. New York City and other 
centers of population, which would receive 
no benefit from .’t, would pay at least 85 per 
cent. 
Statements have been made that the cities 
were trying to put this bill over on the farm¬ 
ers. Some of the city legislators have stated 
that the success of the city depends upon a 
well-educated countryside and that, there¬ 
fore, they would favor a bill which would 
help the rural schools, even though the cities 
had to pay for most of it. But we certainly 
fail to see any argument that the cities were 
trying to impose this bill upon the rural dis¬ 
tricts when in the first place the recommen¬ 
dations in the bill were made by a committee 
the majority of whom were farmer repre¬ 
sentatives, and when, in the second place, 
the cities would have to pay 85 per cent of 
the tax for the State aid to the rural districts. 
Treating Seed Pays Dividends 
OME years ago when the thought was new 
about treating farm seeds before plant¬ 
ing to prevent disease, we urged a neighbor 
to treat his seed wheat with formalin to pre¬ 
vent smut. Like most of us with anything 
new, the farmer hesitated because he did not 
understand just how to go at it, so we volun¬ 
teered to help. 
For days after that seed was treated and 
in the ground, we did a lot of worrying and 
lost some sleep for fear that the medicine 
had been too much for it, and that it would 
never come up, and you can be sure that it was 
w'ith a good deal of thankfulness of spirit 
that we watched that seed come through the 
ground with a good stand. It eventually 
grew into a fine crop and was so clean of 
smut in a neighborhood infested with it, that 
the farmer finally sold nearly all of it in the 
form of seed, considerably above the market 
price. Since that time, most of us have come 
to realize that a little labor and attention 
given to the seed before it goes into the 
ground may mean a considerable difference 
in exra yield at harvest time. 
It will soon be time for the oat seeding 
and not long to potato planting time. The 
process of treating these seeds is very simple 
and returns often make the small effort re¬ 
quired the most profitable work of the whole 
. season. Your county agent or college of 
agriculture will gladly furnish you with the 
few simple directions. 
What Shall We Do For Blacksmiths ? 
HERE is a bill in the New York legisla¬ 
ture which would, if passed, require a 
blacksmith to have a three years’ apprentice¬ 
ship and to pass and examination for license 
before he could practice his trade. This bill 
might do some good in providing better 
blacksmiths, but we fear that it would have 
the effect of greatly lessening the number 
of which there are not nearly enough now. 
The coming of the automobile, with the ac¬ 
companying need of garage service, has 
taken the services of hundreds of men of 
mechanical turn of mind and inclination, who 
might have become blacksmiths. The farm¬ 
er’s need for the blacksmith is just about as 
great as ever, yet it is becoming more and 
more of a problem for farmers to get good 
blacksmithing service reasonable prices. 
A farm shop and a is one, way of 
partially meeting the ^Hkem. ' 
