MILK-TESTING AT PUKEKOHE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9696, 17 December 1894, Page 6

MILK-TESTING AT PUKEKOHE.

A few weeks ago wo published a letter from Mr. Williams Morgan, representing the Pukekohe East milk-suppliers, and fchs reply thereto by the manager of the New

Zealand Dairy Association. Mr. Morgan's letter set forth the resolutions passed at a public meeting which had been held to consider the low percentage of cream obtained this season from the milk supplied. Mr. Spragg's reply dealt at considerable length with the question, and showed that the cream was of such a poor quality this season that the associations had been considerable losers upo6 the October supply of milk. Since then Mr. Morgan has written the following letter to Mr. Spragg, and appended is Mr. Spragg's reply :— Pukekohe East, December 4, 1894. To Mr. Wesley Sprang. Dear Sir, —I beg to forward for your information the report of a meeting of milksuppliers held this morning;, for the purpose of hearing your reply to th« resolutions passed at a meeting recently held here. Your reply was freely criticised and discussed, certain facts elicited, and various resolutions proposed and carried. In regard to your remarks about the low condition and mortality of cattle during the late winter season, it was stated at the meeting that there had been no mortality as a result of starvation among the cows of Pukekohe East milk-suppliers. On the contrary, with one or two exceptions, cows had been well fed and cared for, and, as a consequence, were mostly in fairly good condition in the months of September and October. One rather singular fact was elicited, namely, that the milk from cows not overburdened with flesh appeared to give a higher average of cream than the milk of cows fed on the best of fodder, which, to say the least, was a rather curious result. In regard to the mode of sampling milk aud corking of bottles, which you challenge us to prove had not been correctly done, several suppliers are prepared to vouch to the truth of the fact that they had noticed a waste of cream from bottles to an extent that might have affected the butter-fat average of the owners of the cream. The following resolutions were passed :— 1. " That unless the tube in the spout receiving the milk be made flush with the bottom of the spout, so as to allow all the milk, even to the last ' dribble,' to have a chauce to drop through, suppliers would prefer a return to the ' dip' system of sampling" 2. " That suppliers would again urge for a weekly return of the averages, to be supplied to the creamery. They cannot, see where the ' cause of offeuco' you speak of would come in."

3. " That, on the supposition that suppliers were disposed to appoint and remunerate a chemist to act as a check upon the work of the expert employed by your Association ; as, according to your remark, there would be no finality in regard to the tests of the suppliers' man. it is cousidereii that no practical result would follow such appointment." 4. "That for next season suppliers strongly advise that each creamery be furnished with appliances for testing milk, in order that the work maybe done on the spot. Managers of creameries, if properly instructed, could do the work just a§ well as experts. Apparatus is not very expensive; and if testing were done in eacli locality it would be far more satisfactory to the generality of suppliers, and would have a tendency to do away with the friction occasionally arising on this question between suppliers and the Association. In fact, it is just as necessary that suppliers should be able to have some check over testing as they have now over weighing milk." Allow me, in conclusion, to sincerely sympathise with your Association, if, through the " unkiudness " of their Babcock machine, they have already snlTered a loss of £117 sterling.—Truly yours,

Villiam Morgan, Chairman.

Auckland, December 7, 1894. To Mr. Wm. Morgan, Dear Sir, —Your second letter, dated the 4th instant, is before me. Respecting the alleged loss of cream, resulting from the method of sampling, and also at the time of corking the sample bottles, I would ask your attention to the argument of my previous letter, which deals with the almost perfect agreement between a month's average as shown by the Babcock aud as shown by the churn, phis the loss borne by ourselves, which, I advised you. totalled £117 for the month in question. I did not expect it would be needful to repeat that if this agreement exists it is positive proof of the correctness of the system, aud of the care with which our own men do the work. I say that the papers are at your disposal for the purpose of verification. Am 1 to understand that

your meeting overlooked this important portion of my first communication.

I notice that you do not attempt to prove the lack of care which you reoorted. On further consideration, I see how difficult it is for you to give proof even if your statement- is one of fact. You do not even mention the names of the persons who you say are in a position to give evidence. I assume that you have accepted the statements of only such as are of exact habits of observation ; for I need not remind you how untrustworthy are the honest but hastily and imperfectly-formed conclusion of the average observer. I do not feel at liberty to deal with the local manager upon the bare information which you have furnished ; but, as I am able to remove him without doing him injustice, I do not think we need to further discuss the point. I will take care that his successor shall possess the requisite abilitj and method to do the work in a careful anci skilful manner.

1. I ain sorry that you have not understood my explanation of the "drip" arrangeinenr,. I am sure it is not the general wish of your district that a sample which would be unfair to us, any more than yourselves, should be taken, and yet that is, I think, the expression of your paragraph numbered 1 The objection to the " dip" is that, by it it is impossible to get a reliable sample of a previous evening's milk, and the admitted faillings of here and there one person makes it undesirable, in the interests of all the rest, for us to allow milk upon which cream has once risen to pass without examination. I mention this with some misgivings, because I want to avoid giving " caube of offence" in any manner.

'2. One of the many objections to the return which you ask for is, that we have in most of our districts one or more suppliers, who, we believe, to be honest people, and yet whose milk is so poor as to invite suspicion. I know how righteously jealous some of onr friends are of their reputation. I have before now been the innocent "cause of offence," which I have regretted, and I cannot undertake to make public information which is not of a public nature, because I believe I should hurt some worthy people, and should thus do injury to our business. 3. If suppliers will appoint a competent chemist of acknowledged reputation to test milk for them, his test shall be "final," and we will iu every case pay according to his award.

4. Testing apparatuses, comparatively, inexpensive. The operation of testing is a simple one, only requiring only ordinary ability to comprehend its theory, but demanding perfect genius of care and exactness in its practice. This "genius "may be expected to be developed by constant repetition of the delicate manipulation. Our policy has been to give all the special work which we can concentrate to specially trained " experts" in that work. \ou know that "butter," for instance, can be made by anyone, and with the rudest appliances ; but we believe that our system of making butter at one central factory, and with the most perfect plant, avoiding makeshifts, and under unquestioned " expert" care, instead of at each creamery, has been in the true interests of the settlers and ourselves alike. Some proof of this may be found in that " sincere form of flattery"—the adoption of our method throughout Australasia. The same rule holds with the testing. An intelligent man, who has a thousand and one other things to do, might, perhaps, measure, allot, time, read, and record with accuracy, but, again, he might not. On the other hand, it becomes second nature to the man whose sole occupation it is. And to exchange the perfect for the possibly imperfect method is opposed to our ideas. There is another objection, and it is that the creamery manager who did not always find a large percentage_ of fat _in milk would have au unhappy time of it. I have often felt sorry for the men who have to bear the worries incidental to the management of a creamery, and I have thought that to needlessly add to their difficulties would be little short of a crime. The main reason for my objecting is that we should run the risk of imperfect work.

Are you rot a little bit inconsistent when you say " managers of. creameries, if properly instructed, could do the work just as well as experts," while a portion of your letter is devoted to show me that one of these " managers," properly instructed, mind you, cannot cork a bottle properly. I am sorry that friction exists ; I will do anything reasonable to allay it; but I cannot adopt a plan which, I am sure, would intensify and perpetuate the evil. I think my previous letter suggests the remedy. I remind you that we always have a difficulty over the low percentages at this time of the year (I knovr that, for reasons exthe difficulty is greater this year). Would it be worth while, while adopting the check suggested, to have patience and see how the season averages out. And don't forget that this trouble, whatever has caused

it, cuts all round. In the meantime, it is hurting mo worse than it is you. and I just have to bear it as best I can.—Yours, faithfully, Wesley Spraqg, Manager New Zealand Dairy Association'