CORRESPONDENCE. THE DAIRY TEST.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LII, Issue 17058, 12 June 1926, Page 16

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE DAIRY TEST.

(To tho Edilor of the Herald.) Kir, —Kindly allow me to make a few corrections re the dairy cow test at the last A. and R. Show. There have been quite a number of letters appearing in your columns lately under various headings, but, as I am a disinterested party, I would like to make it quite clear as to what- I saw wtien I took the judge out to the show grounds on the morning of the Show, when this dairy test took place. When we arrived on the ground there were a. few competitors waiting; some had not arrived. After about. 20 minutes’ wait all had ! arrived and started to milk their respective cows. Some had smalt buckets and some had large. As they tilled their buckets the milk was emptied into a kerosene tin, ttiis same tin being used to weigh all competitors’ milk. Now, sir, 1 may state, without fear of contradiction that each competitor’s milk was not. weighed in one lot, as stated by some of your correspondents. I personally saw the milk from Carmichael’s cow weighed in two lots, and I will also vouch for the statement made by Carmichael, jun., that Ins cow went off her inilk on the show grounds to the. factory, and infers that year. Carmichael, sen. complains about the length of time which elapsed before the samples were taken from the show grounds to the factory ,and infers that they may have been tampered with. Well, sir, the test bottles were locked in boxes on the ground, in the presence of the judge and stewards, and were then placed in the secretary’s office, where they remained until about 12.30, when 1 conveyed and delivered them to the Kia Ora dairy factory. 1 did not see any cotton-wool, as suggested by Mr. Carmichael, nor was there any mention of it made on show morning. Carmichael jun. swears he saw all the milk weighed. Kir, this was impossible, as he was one of the last to finish milking, and could not bo milking his cow and seeing other competitors’ milk weighed at the same time. Mr. Holder says that it was lie who mixed and weighed all competitors’ milk, and that the weight was taken by Mr. Frank Gartshot'e. This statement is far wide of the mark, as Mr. Gartshore will not hesitate to say that be was nowhere near the dairy cows as stated by Mr. Holder. I quite agree that most Britishers resent off-hand and abrupt treatment, and also most Britishers resent a competitor acting in tho capacity of weighing steward in a competition in which lie himself gains second prize.— 1 am, etc., A. At. DES BA RUES. [This correspondence must now cease. Editor Herald.] THE DAILY BREAD. (To ibe Editor of the Heried.) Kir, —The Southland Times, in an issue of recent date, has been thoughtful enough to reprint a paragraph from your paper, quoting one Dr. Clark, school medical officer of your district, as stating in efi'ect that tho good, wholesome and nourishing white loaf of to-day is worse than the food we give to our cattle and pigs. Dr. Clark makes one of those absurd statements so characteristic of the average week-stomached faddist, namely that the majority of our children are fed on white bread and sugar. This is certainly a new one on the writer, but faddists so generally produce such novel theories that even the wildest would not surprise those who are acquainted with tlie carefully compiled evidence of authorities of real standing. If Dr. Clark will come forward with some evidence in support of his silly statement that the white loaf of to-day is devoid of all nutriment, 1 am prepared to destroy ids mere theories with evidence of a substantial character by scientists who possibly are in a better position to speak with more authority than a school medical officer. —I <ttm, etc., FLEMING AND CO., LTD. (W. H. V. Fleming.)