190 _ QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Ave., 1899. 
enterprise in dairying, the system of inspectorship is evil and unnecessary. If we are 
' going to have State socialism, the inspectors and experts instead of inspecting ought to 
actually do the work, manage it, and overseer it. If we are going in for profit-sharing 
as a step towards true co-operation, then the business of the Government is to legislate 
with a view to this, to educate dairymen for co-operation when Government interference 
would cease altogether except with the industry as a whole, and to legislate, if necessary, 
so as to compel the private owners of factories to take those who supply them to some 
extent into partnership by means of profit-sharing. When we turn to the Act we find 
that does none of these things. It retains private enterprise while it gives to inspectors 
and experts such extensive powers of interference as to amount to a proof that private 
enterprise has completely failed. It does not allow the experts and inspectors to 
become fixed and actually do or manage the business. And it is legislation rather in 
the interest of private companies and against the interests of small dairymen. It is a 
piece of legislation guided by no definite principle, and likely to prove unsatisfactory 
to everyone who is affected by it. A proof of its purely experimental power conferred 
on the Governor in Council—practically the Minister and expert —to make regulations 
which on mere publication in the Gazette have full force of law. Regulations may be 
thus made with regard to the powers and duties of experts, analysts, and officers; the 
registration of dairies, brands, marks, &c., of owners and consigners ; dairy ventilation 
and drainage; the situation of water-closets; the keeping of swine and the construction 
and situation of pigsties ; the inspection, cleansing, and disinfecting of dairies, utensils, 
machinery, works, carriages, and everything in connection with dairy produce ; the use 
and treatment of stock diseased or suspected to be diseased ; the application of tests—eg., 
tuberculosis; the preparation and manufacture of milled butter; the disposal of condemned 
dairy produce ; the aeration and cooling of dairy produce; the use of preservative and 
colouring matters; notices to be given under the Act; payment and recovery of expenses; 
imposition and collection of fees; the qualifications of experts, inspectors, officers, and 
—as if this long list was not enough—all other matters and things necessary for the 
efficient administration of the Act; and a breach of regulations entails a penalty of not 
more than £50. Now, when everything is controlled from one centre, as under this Act, 
uniformity makes administration much easier. There is a probability, then, that the 
department will prescribe definite methods of doing everything; it certainly will haye 
the power. We may be compelled to erect dairies and pigsties on one plan, have one 
style of cart, one sort of cooler and aerator, and one description of machinery. This 
would entirely destroy individual initiative and remove the incentive to improvement. 
An inspector might come along and say—“This new process and machinery of yours 
is not that prescribed by the Minister. I cannot allow you to make butter in this way; 
I shall be in danger of losing my billet if I do not stop you.” Suppose the Department 
prescribes a definite plan for a chilling-room and a particular kind of refrigerating 
machinery. ‘The use, say, of liquified air, might at any moment make the whole thing 
obsolete. Suppose the Government lent money to dairymen for machinery and works, 
and suppose the experts knew of a cheaper method of production, the inertia of the 
Government would have to be overcome, money voted in Parliament, and all the rest 
of it, before an improvement can be made. Meanwhile individual enterprise in some 
other countries, not hampered by Government interference, would drive our products 
out of the market. To come to the powers and duties of inspectors under the Act, 
an inspector may at all reasonable eae enter and inspect all dairies, examine 
all utensils, machinery, works, carriages, store-houses, and ships used in connec- 
tion with dairy produce; and, if he thinks fit, by order in writing under his hand, 
order the cleansing and disinfecting of everything or anything; forbid the use 
of anything and the removal of any produce for such time as he thinks neces- 
sary. And a dairy, it must be remembered, is defined as any place where dai 
cows or other animals are depastured or kept, or where dairy produce is stored, 
manufactured, or sold or Sree for sale. Under definition, an inspector might enter 
any private premises or paddocks. Any old woman with a goat might under the Act 
be ordered to stop milking and clean her billy-can. An inspector may demand samples 
of dairy produce or water for analysis. An inspector may at any time open any keg or 
a box or vessel which contains, or is suspected to contain, dairy produce. “Thus a 
dairyman in a hurry might lose a train, or have his cart stopped anywhere at any time 
because an inspector, who might have a down upon him, suspected a box to contain 
' dairy produce. If any inspector thinks any stock are diseased, he may exercise the 
powers conferred under the stringent Stock Diseases Act of 1895, or by undefined 
’ regulations, or by the provisions of the Dairy Act, which requires owners to isolate 
diseased stock, to keep their produce separate, and to discontinue the use of it as food 
for man or for any other animal. An inspector may order the water supply to be 
discontinued and a pure supply found ; and after reference to the Health Officer of 
