COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions ©f copyrighted materials including foreign works under certain conditions, in addition, the United States extends protection to foreign works by means of various international conventions, bilateral agreements, and proclamations. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright irifriii^6rriGrit« The Columbia University Libraries reserve the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copvriaht law. Author: Governors' Tri-State Milk Commission Tri-9t;:itP Milk Place: mm • I Harrisburg Date: 1917 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DIVISION BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET MASTER NEQATIVE i OfUGINAL MATERIAL AS FUIED - EXISTING BIBUOQRAPHIC RECORD BUSINESS 310 674 1 1 Gbvemors' tri-state milk commissioii. ^ ... Beport of the (Jovernors' tri-state milk commission to ... governor of Pennsylvania ... governor of Maryland ... governor of Delaware by the Milk commissions of Pennsylvania ... Maryland ... Delaware ... Harrisburg, Pa., W. S. Eay, state printer, 1917. 70 p. fold, maps, diigrs. 23^. (Petuisylvania. Dept of agriculture. Bulletin no. 287) X Milk supply— Delaware, jl. Delaware^Milk supplvi 2. Milk suddIv— Maryland. [2. Maryland—Milk supplyj 3. Milk supply— Pennsylvania. iJ. Pennsylvania— Milk supplyj *^ RESTRICTIONS ON USE: TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA RLM SIZE: 3S>i^^ REDUCTION RATIO: IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA (Q IB UB DATE FILMED: lyitt^ INITIALS • U/.u/ TRACKING # : FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES. BETHLEHEM. PA. m mm mm 01 o ■lllllllllllll ^IhnHMT Sf '|T1 "O ^ r\3, CaI, CJl C3PIM iO CJl, 3 > CD o m (D O 3" X ISi 8 3 3 10 O1 o ^1^ 1^ j 10 1:^ 1^ 1.0 mm .0 mm 2.0 mm ABCOCFGHUKiMNO(>QltSTUVWXVZ «lK«tiWiPlnHiapqnliM«i)iyzt234567890 ABCDEFGHUKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ ABCDEFGHrjKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ abcdefghiiklmnopqrstuvwxyz 1234567890 2.5 mm ABCDEFGHUKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ atxxiefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 1234567890 4.- I ~ i O CD 5 in is ^^^^ CJl ^31 1^ 4 LIB RAH Y Commonwealth of Pennsylvania DEPARTXEITT OF AGRICULTURE. REPORT Tri-State l^JUk lllll ission HOirORABLE MARTIN G. I RUMBAUGH, GoYemor of Pennsylvania HONORABLE EMERSON C. HARRINGTOHt Govvmor of Maiylaad HONORABLE JOHN G. TOWNSEND, Goremor of D elairara MILK COMMISSIONS OF Morrb T. PUUlpt 0. E. Oarothen Bsrtsuui A> Oeorgtt H. KaU Harry Hayward Frederic Brady Officers of the Governors' Tri-State Milk CommiasioA OZiSSE LTHDOK unit 0. SBTOEBSON 8UmB OKMUOrOK Mg fyf HABBI8BUBG, PA.:, nAMUn BAT, STACT PBIlfini mwWilifmWiMfm School of Business Commonweaith of Pennsylvania DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Of HO^^^ ^ OF THB • ' Governors' Tri- State Milk Commission SO HONORABLE MARTIN G. BRUMBAUGH, GoYemor of PeonsylYania HONORABLE EMERSON C. HARRINGTON, Governor of MsrylAad HONORABLE JOHN G. TOWNSEND, Governor of Delaware MILK COMMISSIONS OF ranroTLYANiA mabtlasb muLWMm KmctIs T. FhilUps O. K. Alfwd §««i» JL BUI 0. S. Oarothen D* 0. Hany maxrf MasmtaA 0. Henderson Snpple« Hwrtman X. Vaxttam Frederiek Brady Clyde Lyaden Xiac Barry B^WItt(ur Samael M. Hamngton it' Officers of the Governors' Tri-State Milk Commissioii CLYDE LTITDOV JUOTO 0. HEHOEBSOV SVFPI£B OUL&EKCE SEABS KATES HARRISBUBG, PA.: WM. STANLBY BAY. STATB PBIinSB 1017 Summary. Page. Foreword, g Cominittee Governor's Tri-State Milk Commission 7 Production Costs: g Productiou Costs, 1916 iq Otiier Information Desired 12 The Increasing Costs of Production 14 National Factors in Ii OCill Milk Costs , 15 Costs Compared Prof. Basmussen's EstuH^^Vresent Production Costs 17 Price Beoeiyed for Milk ig The Tenant Farmer and the Milk Supply 2I Butter Fat Should Not Be the &6kt Test in Purchase PHee 22 Price to the Farmer and the Maintenance of Supply........ M How Ph>fitB Can Be Increased by Lowering Costs a| Statement by Fred Basmuftsen, , n Statement Made by G. B. Wolcott ay Distribution : * . , ^ |g Wilmington Milk Supply 31 Baltimore's Milk Supply 31 Cost of Transportation 31 The Cost of Distribution j|g Recommendations of Commission.. .r.. , |g The Alternatives, ' ^ Milk Distribution a Public Utility.. ^ Price to Consumer ^ Publicity of Receipts of Milk |0 Surplus Milk Supply: ^ Solutions of the Surplus Problem g| Grading: ^ Standardization of Fat ^ Proposed Law Relating to Milk and Food Products fl| The Food Value of Milk in its Relation to Price '. fl Summary of Becommendations m (8) FOREWORD * HOiJORABLE MARTIN G. BRUMBAUGH, Qovermr af PenmyilmnM. Sir: The members of your Commission met in Philadelphia on Oc- tober 24, 1916, on the call of Mr. C. E. Carothera. The chairmam of tlie commissions appointed by the Goy^ors of Matyland and Dela- ware had caUed the first meeting of their commisaions at the same place and honr. After reading of instructions and credentials and aftar the consideration of the identical problems confronting each of the three commissions, it was decided to effect a joint organiaa- H tion for the effective prosecution of our work. The officers choam . for the joint commission were: Clyde L. King, Chairman; C. Baider- son Supplee, Secretajy-Treasnrer ; Clarence Sears Kates, Honorary Financial Secretary. This joint organisation, designated as "The Governors' Tri-Stat€ Milk Commission," was decided upon as the most economical means and also the most effective method of carrying out the duties yon charged us with. All of our deliberations have been in Joint session and our investigations aU conducted undw these jMnt am^cea Your Commission has mm tie honor to snbnut this report, identical wiA the report concnrrwitly submitted to their respective Governors by the Commissions of Maryland and Delaware. Not 4 were the lowest we could find as given iPim any n^priment Station. We feel, therefore, that we m safdy wllhin the hounds in giving out the figures which we do. As a matter of fact, we have a feeling that it costs much more to produce milk in many cases than 'this ^ta would^ indicate. Very truly yours, (Signed) R. BRUCE DUNLW, Bztenslon Representative. Hot mmy daifyman answered question. The ararage of all answers to each question follows. These answers, it must be re- m^bered, are for the year ending September 30, 1916. Three col- nmns are given. In the first column is the answer to the questions submitted by Mr. Dunlop for the 101 fanners of Blair county. The Blair county report, it must be remembered, is based on actual racords for feed costs only. In tbe second column is the average of aM tbe answers to questions by all other farmers or dairym^. In tbe third column is the average of aU counting the Blair county report as 101 farmers. The total number rei)orting on each ques- tion in addition to the 101 is given in parenthesis in the second col- umn. These costs, it must be remembered, are those as reported by the dairy f armans. The figures can in no a&aae be taken as ^e exact cost of imdudng milh in the Btate of Pemiqrlvaiiift or la dther of the other two states because no one figure win ev^ represent llie cost of producing milk in any one state or in any section of a state. But that these figures are both typical and significaint there can be no doubt. ProOueHon Costa for Year Ending September SO, 1916. The 101 Blair connty farmers. ! • i < in Wlwt U mnmg0 nnvBl cost ptv earn to iraAm nuii 1166 <5 m 1128 34 m) Bll • TO 14 M («) U 19 m 9 04 (1«0) !•« 11 Production Oot$, etc — CotUinu^. ! s| 1 1 1^ (fl) Oott of tabor, (e) Coot of deUTonr to CO ) Special additional coato, or dailvwy p^t. (t) Wbot If tko •vocato yearlr lacome cow from .t C«) imk. croam. Hctoi milk and butter milk, ; OalvM, ••.••...•.*..........•...•.•• (e> Wamn, , (d) late of ofttflf vOm mtm mtvw. (S) Wbot la tiw aterage yeariy onlvut ptt cow In qto., (4) What la the average ooot wif 4t. of milk. It) What la the ai^waft ptlee foa reortve per qt. of nllk. (6) Loss per qt. of mllk.l 78 37 1 (SO) 71 08 (180) so u 19 2& MM mi m m -IS OBI 5 00 («) it! m 8 40 12 81 mi cut) 1170 42 m 1129 41 (Ui) n 59 115 56 («) 9S 13 41 (73) 7 97 (17a) » 42 14 29 (H) nm fiai sai 35 55 TH 0m 2.92& f») OK) .M .06S .Ml (86) (186) .MOT .00 {my .m .003 .ou .Off •Thip Is the srerage of the answers submitted by the dairy farmers to this particnlar ques- tion. The totals of the items following (a) to (g) inclusiTe would be as follows for each of ttiese ctAoauM: 101 Blair OBoatir fuaMm, imJI; an othari TSjarftag. Iin.ll, averago of an. 1135.36. tThia Is the ayerage of the answers submitted by the dairy farmers to this particular ques- tion. The totals of the items following (a) to (d) inclusive would be as follows for each of these columns: 101 Blair County fanners, 1105.29; all other reporting, $178.81, the average of all farmers reporting, $125.77. tThia Is the result obtained by subtracting the average of answers to question 5 from the avenisa of aaawers to question 4. As to the actual answers snbndttod by farmers to this question, the Of aaawers to question 4. as to tne actual answers suDminea ny farmers to tnls questton. the fa wMra of Blau County report a loss of I.00S; of all otiiers reporting (66 in nnmt)er) 41 reportod a 1MB m tto awcaM of |.0U aad m a« aTorage prott of LMI; coantUig the 101 Blair Covaitj faroicn »• miimm$ mm mmmn Mim9$ i»m m fwtt* other InfortmUm Desired. The 101 Blair coimty farmers. All others reporting. it} Wkftt Is tiie net price for milk jon or tlie members of your association recelTed at ^^ling or de* Uieif points for eacli mmth dnriaf die jreur eatd- ins iafl 30. im 1.043(801 .044(30 .040(30 .040(30 .042(30 ' .042(30 .041(301 .039 (oOi .0;8(30 1 .030(29 .040(20 .041(20 (188) .037 . .038 • (88) m 9m 4am It eommm wtHi tte mvmge price of milk lor tSm fooni': .037 .036 (44) .087 (») (44) thl nUMeni. Ml IS'JO^t* (3) WiMt turn been the Increase, If any, In tbe price of aiiijMf (40) 80% (80) 88% m n% (180) 80% (4) What has been the per cent of Increase In the cost Of Inbor cowMctad wl^ fttnn nnd dtiirjr wogk. 28.0% (3S) 46.97% (85) 1 28.8% (3B) (185) M% (6) What was the increase if any in the average yearly price of all grains and roQfflMfe per cow tor '191S compared with: 28.7% (a) II.QB% (•1) 18.7% (81) J8.4% am 131-3% (•) Give tbe fttods and itfoportlons used la your mtloas •facladliig gmins and lougliage. t t t fl| Wlii^jpittgKtl^ of the dftlrynen la yonr section s«% 41% (W) Ik 35.4% (102) •Terage of the answers submitted not of the inOBtMy Sforages. •Bswers to this questton w«re not coinpilabi«. 13 Other Inform^im DemreA — Contimked. K *» s 8 a m «» S' (8) Are you a nember of • cow tostlng- association: Yes No. (0) Do you keep a record of tb« ttUk prodnced eadi cow: Toil; No. 100% 100% (10) What Is ^ STerage annnal output per head of jour berd 2,266.7 qts. 50% (181) (lA) (Ml) 65% (201) 59% i (161) (11) What breed cf cows have yon in your herd One hondred farmers answered this question. The following single of breeds were given : Guernsey, 14 Holstein. 34 Jersey, 10 Jersey & Guem- Bey 2 Swiss. HoIstelB A Jersey t •••• 1 Bolotete A Swiss, sey, ......•••••••..•«.••*■• X Ayrshire, 1; Holstein & Jersey, 4 Native cows, preteeace given to Dnrhams, 1 Durham, Jersey & Holsteia, 1 BoMela. Jersey it Gnemsey, 8 Bolstein & Gnemsey, 18 Holstein ft Fresian, 2 Holstein St mixed, i Mixed 7 Mr. Donlop replied for the 191 fartters Of Blair oonatj "Uuvely grad^." (12) How do you apportion your overhead expenses as to bams, aad VOm ovilpaMBt: (a) To cows, (b) To horses ,., (c) To otbor anlaials, (IS) Do yon arraare to have joor 'cows Meat tiBMs of iho year: at dif- (14) (•) laa May. la Jnae, 1* doea yoBT herd prodaeos Qts. (1) In October, .. (2) In November, (3) la DecembCT, How Is your milk ddlvwed to shippiag or delivery poiat (whether yov take it yonrseif or do it coop- Oiatlvely) and what Is the cost. Three-fourths of the farmers take the milk themselves. For cost of delivery answers to questioB 1, " elivef7 see tto '■llpllip 3,093.9 qts. (H) 79% (261) 2,610 qta. (mi jygygiMltallll ' Ml" 84.4% 5,262.9(66) 6,015.7(67) h4 o 04»4(H 4,015.9(66) 4.810.4(61) «JM.t(ft) 5,262.9(66) 6,016.7jf7) 4.016.9(«8) 4.619.4(81) ''llll Cerimn items iii ike averages cali fof special comment In the ifst pace^ tiie answer to question eleven indicates that those raft- ing owned typical herds. Examples of variations in the items of cost and of income per cow per year are: The costs for "bams, lands and equipment'' ranged from $3 per cow to $53 per cow with lialf about |15. Depreciatiou cliarges ranged from $3 to |36, with one- third about #18. Cost of feed ranged from #20 to IllG.SO, one- third bdng around |80. I^abor ranged from a to 966.60, one-half re- porting around f 25. DeMveiy charges ran from #1.27 to |19 one-third "ffliliiieing around 910. Prelum and special costs ran from 91 to 910, the average being 9^ (6 reported on this question). Additional costs ranged from 9.25 to 9124.51, one fourth being around flO. As to income, milk and cream receipts ran from 940 up to $224.49, one-fourth* being around 9X25. Calves ranged from 92 up to 970, one-fourth being around ^W. Manuve ranged from 92 up to 9^.50, one-half being around §1^ The sale of cattle ranged from j|2 to 9SS00| one-fourth* being around 9^0. As to the average cost of producing a quart of milk, 19 reported it as 9.03; 33 reported it as 9.04; 22 reported it as 9.05, and 7 as 9.06. The Blair county farmers reported the cost as 9-04. There are many reasons for the variations in these costs. In the first i^ace^ it is evident that mme of the farmm who did not keep accounts had no definite idea in regard to the cost of producing mUk. One farmer reports 9^.00 as the labor cost of keeping a cow. It is impossible to take care of a cow, feed and milk her for J?3.00 per year. Secondly, to ask the cost of producing a quart of milk is much like asking the cost to rais^e a horse. All depends upon the horse. In the production of milk the costs vary not onlj with the conteit of fat and other solids and the care exercised in production but also with the cost of labor, the value of bams, and the cost and character of other equipment. The Increasinff Costs of Prodiiction The cost of producing milk has been steadily increasing. Thus the testimony of the farmers' estimates as given in the above summary is that the cost oif labor has increased 70% since 1910, while during the same period the cost of grain and rou^age has increased 36% and the price of cows 71%, These increases have occurred in the main in the last year or two. This autumn there has been an exceptional increase in feed costs and to a less extent in costs of labor. The increaseil cost of grains is due in part to the unprecedented demand from abroad, to short crops at home and to the industrial conditions that have led to •In arrlTliif at Uieae estimates the 101 Blair Countj Report was counted as one fanner. r ^5 * 1 "In 1 n \t\ 1 t:oy^er ^?7i/ A>sx i/ar^ c??/^ com/ CHAKT 4 15 rises in prices all along the line. So far as these causes are special, they will probably be remedied. Wages for labor are less likely to go down as labor wages are less susceptible to fluctuations. Chart ^o, 1 following shows graphically the increased costs to the farmer from 1900 to September 30, 1916, as reported in the ahove answers for labor, grain and cows. The relative proportion of the costs going for feeds, labor, etc., as reportcfl by the farmers is shown graphically in Chart No. 2, while in the Chart No. 3 is pictured the relative importance of the sources of income per cow per year and Chart No. 4 the relatiTe airemge lorn shown by the above answers. National Factors in Local Milk Costs The increasing costs as stated above by the farmers of these states are in no sense a local phenomenon. The average monthly wages paid to farm labor in Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and New Jeraqr increased from |21.81 in 1910 to |24.85 in 1915. The increase in 1016, due to abnormal labor conditions, is no doubt considerably above this average. Nor has this increase in monej^ wages kept pace with the increase in living costs as shown by the following charts. Chart No. 5 depicts the increase in living costs from July of 1914 to January ol 1917 as basM on the cost of twenty-five food commodities; CSiart No. € shows the rise in wholesale prices for all commodities from 1890 to 1915, and Chart No. 7 gives the trend in wholesale prices for farm products for food and for clotliing from 1890 to 1915. Estimated on the basis of these increased costs as compared Willi the increase in the money wage, the real wage of earners in the United States, as judged by what their mone^ wage will buy, has decreased from 1900 to 1912, as shown in Chart No. 8. The increase in the price of milk cows of all kinds in Pennsjyl- vania, Delaware, Maryland and New Jersey, is put graphically in Chart No. 9. The rising price of feeds for cattle during the present year can lie pictured by showing the wholesale price of bran in P^nsylvania from December, 1915, to Kovember IS, m6 as is done in CaMMfljll But that this is not the only year when we have had similar in- creases in the price of farm products is shown by Chart No. 11 giving the trend of all crop prices from 1908 to 1916. The dotted line for the year 1916, it is important to note, indicates wheoe prices would have been had they followed tiie average trend of the preceding years. 16 Cutis Compared The Commission Itas for compamtiTe purposes selected the follow- lug answers to the questionnaiijeB as filed with the OommisBioii showljig production costs and receipts from herda These answers w^ selected because of special evidence of careful records. No 1 is the report of Washington Cadwallader, Bucks county, Pa. ; No. 2, of J. E. Stevens, Sudlersville, Md.; No. 3, of D. O. Harry, Pyles- fille, Harford county, Md. ; No. 4, of the 101 farmers of Blair county, Pa.; No. 5, of Francis H. Williamson, Brandywine Summit, Dda- ware emmij, Pa. Production Cosfft and Receipts from Herds, 1 S t 4 i 1141 6» WOO 111715 nu 95 «$209 87 128 00 •87 00 1137 00 105 30 •153 54 2.920 $,im 2.seo 1.017 2,800 f.Otl 2.355 1.04 3.036.6 iOill .#11 .034 .003 .04 .001 .Off .002 .0386 .0188 t t 1 f 1. Wliat Is the ajtrafe annual coat per cow to produce milk, 2. Wliat Is the aireni* yearly Inooaie per cow tmm fonr liertf, i. Wliat la tlw wngmgrn yearly on^mt in qta. per cow, f-.H?** !■ •▼ttaio coat per gt. of milk, f. Wliat la tiie aterafe price yon receive per — ^^i.®^ milk, ...*•»...,.. i. PnHlt or loaa per of milk (loss). t. IL BvMd of cowB fLaifdty •This is income from milk only. All answers are for year ending Sept. 30. 1916 frTdi! iGiJdi ^S^Mns *° nwkams. fHolateltta and GaerMoy. tferaay. *TOl8 is the total of Mr. Harry'a SwM»i»~aot a ifwe ghm by Mm. Jgls la the total of e^aaea. ' Professor Fred Rasmussen stated in testimony before the Commis- sion that for a 5,000 pound cow it cost 1.0562 per quart to produce milk with the best balanced rations during the month of October, 1916. The details on his estimate are given on the next page. Folowing Is a comparison of the cost per quart of producing milk as found in stated investigations for given years: €h9i 0/ ProSmtkm. Oaet par Qmrt «• Pradiea Milk aa Vonnd in Oertalii Sfuidafd Xeporta by Experiment Statlona. Saport. Maea. Agr. Elzperlment Station. Bull. 145. Conn. Afrl. ■vpariawat Stattoa. II. J*. n^p a rlia'CT t Statioa, Slat Bapt.t '■■■fdfl Bainngiaa. laa. 10. IMS Mwm Bkmpahlre Bxperlmeat 8ta-l tioa, azteaaton BnlMtla 2. I ■tata Beard of A«rteiiltare. Boa-f 1HI9 iiaaa., drvnuuF Ma. « Ooat per Qnart Sept., 1913 Average coat f.0i4S Actoal coat at bam.... %Jtm Average of a grade herd of 124 eowa far i yaara, ISOf- 11. Onde iMd^ n aalaetid eowa inr IMi. Poraa afatafa irf 7.IW Ibw 9iiutM 'Itatfanlty. Briteite III 1II3, U19, 1913, Oaat at barn, f .0491 $.0481 Cow producing 6,540 |.0491 lbs. of milk per vfar. Cow producing 4,644 $.061 lbs. per year. *V^Vp ^^9m ^wHBId 17 Qosi of Production — Continued a. Cost as Eeported by Certain Civic Organizations Bapovt. Tear. OfiHliiiart.. Bapt. of Women's Civic League on Ooat of Milk Prod, in Frederick Ot^, Md., Miea Marlean Jaanea. ... Baatoa COMaabar of Goauaecee.. ...... 1915, me, % .m For cows averaging $.0832 5,293 lbs, per year. For tows averaging $.0237 6,590 lbs. per year. For cowd averaging 1.0385 8.010 Iba. par year. The cost of producing milk during the winter of 1916-17 as given before the Commission by Professor Fred Banuussen, Professor of Dairy Husbandry, State College, Pennsylvania, was as follows: Professor Rasmiissen's Esdmate of Present Prodnction Costs In ascertaining and estimating the cost of producing milk for seven months, October 1, 1916, to May 1, 1917, the actual cost of grain, labor and cattl% m prevailed in Montgom^ CSbester, liieks and Berks counties during October, 1916, has been used. Items for which accurate figures could not be obtained, except through' a time study for a year, have been calculated based upon data obtained from Farm Mlanagw^t surveys and cost studies. Considering that feed, labor and cattle represent 83.0% of the total cost of producing milk, and that these figures have been ob- tained on the basis of present minimum prices (October, 1916), this is a fair guaranty of the accuracy of 5.62 cents a quart as the mini- mum price at whidi milk can be produced in Montgomery, Chester, Bucks and Berks counties during the seven months, October 1, 1916, to May 1, 1917, from a cow producing 5,000 pounds of milk per year. Since these calculations were made, there has been a further i-i- creaae in the price of and cost of feed for cattle. Figuring the cost of production on a yearly basis, calculating tl 3 cost of pasture and grain for summer feeding, the total cost of kee v ing a cow per year is |133.93. Creditiug the cow with flS.OO, tl 3 value of the calf and the manure, leaves a balance of |115.93. The average cost of production for ttie year of 6^000 pounds, r r 2,325 quarts, is 4.98 cents per quart. In tiiis cost, no allowance 'n made for supervision, profit, or a number of minor factors enteri.^ t into the coat of producing milk. The farmer has received 16.7 cen ' ? per hour for his labor, and has marketed his crops to the ^ows at farm prices. 18 Itemized Cost of Producing Milk^jm Pounds of MUk per Cow^ PremiUmff Prices on Feed, Lahor and Cattle, October, 1916 DB: Buildingi, ., DeUvery, Beddiat Ice, cosl and wood, . VeteilMiy mrviWB, ., Rull Cmt ^ cow s 4 IMS shows an increase to the producer of over |c. per quart without any increase in the retail price from 1901 to the autumn of 1915. Mr. 0* Henderson Supplee gives the following prices "paid at milk stations in Pennsylvania/^ To this should be added the cost of milk station and freight to get the price t o. b. Philadelphia. Prices per 100 Potmda Pmd 6y Supplee, 1900-1916. Ymr. Year. llB©i H 28 1 33 1 42 II » Iff , in^'., ....» inir' "' ^ * • (t.* The prices f. o. b. shipping station for the Baltimore market from 1899 to 1916 for three year averages were: Mtatimore Milk Prices, 18991916. ■ m ^BW, ,.,,,,,'1 ijij, ••♦»•••«••••••»».,,,,,,,,,,,, , \ "•wi* »■••••••••••••••»••••••««•..♦,,,,_[ MM, ••••••....•.....,....»,,,,,,,,,, 1 MM, •••••t«..... »»..•,..,«»■,,,,,,,,», J 190*>« '*"*'"**'''****■*■***•**•*••■ •••1 IWj, •-••••••...•.•....••*•,.....,...> P»r 0«lliin. 1.14 .131 1808, 1 «Qna' I ♦ .\ •••....«.«.., ^^J ] iaif' **■ i ^**» .....J 1914 % m tSfs* '*'"' ,.| IS* " I ••• J Per QaUoa. 1.14 .14 The following table^ give the yearly average market price of milk and butter in the New York market from 1864 to 1915 InduaiFe. *ftf lUNW tftkCB fMMB The Milk Reporter. 21 Average Market PHce*for Milk per Qmrt, New York City, 1864-1915. Year. 1884. 1865, 1886, 1867. 1868. 186», 1870, 1871. 1872, 1873. 1874, 1875, 1876. 1877, 1878, 1879. 1880. 1881, 1882. 1883. 1884, 1886. 1888. 1887. Milk. 4.83 8.88 4.8 1.76 1.83 4.ff 4.8 S.76 3.83 3.7 3.58 3.37 3.27 2.60 2.33 2.88 2.84 3.26 3.26 3.00 2.79 2.80 2.81 2.83 8.18 Batter. Gts. 43.7 38.4 43.4 31.7 41.6 39.6 34 21.8 28.7 83.3 37 33.2 33.2 26.8 23.3 21.3 26.4 27.5 32.5 26.3 25.8 23.0 23.5 23.5 24.4 18.7 Year. Milk. Ota. Bttttw. Ots. 1890, I 1891 . 1892, 18!)3, 18u4, 18l)5, ........».....•....•.••....•• 1896, ..«•.•..•....•.•.«...••.«...• 189 (, 1898, 1899 , .,.•....•••.••...•.••»••.•••« 1900, ....... 1901 , 1902 , 190->, ..».•..... .....«•.«•••»••..•• 1904, ...,.................••••«... 1905 1906 1907, 1905, 1SK)9, ..... 1910, 1911, 1912. 1913. . ...... ... ........ ...... ..... 1914, .,..................••«...••• 1816, •• 2.CS 88.4 2.88 28.0 2.68 8.78 18.7 2.63 88.8 2.62 Z1.8 2.34 18.4 2.3S 18.9 2.38 19.6 2.63 21.4 2.74 22.4 2.62 21.6 2.88 24.8 2.88 23.48 2.16 21.75 2.89 24.64 3.01 24.67 3.86 28.14 3.29 27.0 8.38 2».a 3.88 38.12 3.36 28.77 3.68 31.38 3.63 32.28 3.6 88.88 2.6 11.81 The Tenant Farmer ani ^ Milk Supply The tenant farmer is more likely to go on producing milk at low price than is the owner farmer and his si^^ply has a great effect on the total producti(m. The usual tenant farmer arrangement is for the owua? Mid tenant to furnish equal shares of grain and share alike in the sales from grains. But the tenant farmer has all the hay raised on the farm and gets the proceeds from all the milk. To the owner of the farm this means increasing fertility and hence increasing yields. There are a number of reasons why this arrangment is made but the result is that the tenant farmer feels whether he is wrong or not that his cost to produce milk is lower than those of the man who owns Ms own farm. The tenant's capital is furnished to him. For his pasture —often one-third of the farm— he pays nothing directly (its rental really being included in the division of grains). But all in all the tenant's overhead expense is little— at least he sees it «)~and he will go on producing milk so long as he is repaid for his labor and feeds. This class of farmer produces a considerable portima of the milk used in the cities of the three state co-operating in this iimsti- gation. In Delaware for instance the tenant farmer constitutes 55% of the total number of farmers. As reported to the Commission by our special investigator, Mr. Rex Tugwell, about 50% to 60% of the farmers in Western Maryland are tena»t farmers. These farms fange ip sisse from 60 to 125 acres. Few are larger ^im this. Tl^ 22 kePds ate usually above twenhr rn„»i„» * . head. Dairies on tie«e far,:: IrS;"*^^^^!^^ times one third of the fam and RompZ,-f • ^^"^ laud. Where 60 per cent ™ Je f^'T^IS oTerr?,::: • ' ^1" «f adequate pasture wUch means that tbTcowrmnstl^ k * pn»cti«Uly during tte year, greatly 100^111 ^ ^ milk, ' *>'^^*"y increasing the cost of producing Maryland. m VanMi Operated Ifw Per Cent, of Tottl. All land la itraiM; Innroved land 1 n Utmm. Value of land and building*. int 1900 1910 1900 INO' IMO TMiaati. : ::; • Mmmm, III I..;: 100 68.5 29.5 t.1 100 «4.1 ; 33.C 2.4 100 57.4 S8.S 4.1 100 64.3 41.9 4.0 100 66.1 40.0 3.8 100 53.7 42.4 ) 3.8 100 54.9 34.9 10.1 100 66.0 37.8 7.1 rams Operated Ifw- t. of Total. fanaa. All land la farma. 1 IntwoTed laad f in fami. 1 Valae of land ( and bniidiim INI mo / 1900 1910 1 j 1900 1910 1900 ,*•• ■ ,, 100 100 100 ' 200 74.9 72.4 69.4 •7.6 100 •7.7 JOO 100 100 Maaafttn, , 23.3 lt.O 27.1 28.4 65.9 «3.7 •8.1 *r«Mmfv; man + sliare-€i 1.8 lah. . . . 1.7 3*5 t.t 2.i 81.6 I.S 30.3 •••, 83.4 4.6 •Tmmmtt: mmp + ahare-Caali. + aon-apecuied. .10.1% of tMrmm. BeJaware. ffenBa Oftmted By- Number of fafais. Tbtal Owners. .. Tenants, Haiafwi, 1910 100 57.0 41.0 1.1 1900 Per Cent, of Totmh All land la itama. Improved land in farms. Value of land and buildlBsa. 1910 1900 1910 1900 100 48.3 60.3 1.4 100 45.9 ! 52.1 2.0 100 39.7 68.7 1.6 100 45.1 62.4 2.6 1 100 38.1 60.3 1.6 1910 100 61.1 $.2 ISOO 100 41.5 64.6 8.8 23 Butter Fat Should Not Be Sole Test in Purchase Price The Commission feels tiiat it is unfortunate that the butter fat test has been made the sole or primary basis for tlie purchaae of whole or market milk from the farmer. We fteel that 86lldB oth«r than fat and the cleanliness of milk should both receive attention in the purchase price as well as butter fat. The grading of milk from the consumer's point of view is emphasissed in the report on Grading and Btandardisation. Following are tables, taken from the C»su8 of 1910, sliowtng the percentage of tenant farmers for 1900 and 1910, in Maryland, Ptou- sylvania and Delaware. Price to the Farmer and the Maintenance of Supply 1. The supply of milk must he permanent €nd adequate to all community needs. The price, therefore, cannot be aUowed to go so low that farmers will be convinced that no profit is to be made from the production of milk. Dairy herds cannot be rehabilitated in a tew we^s or in a season* 2. The price for milk cannot permammtly go below cost of prom^ duction; and tmdetmes m thM direction ought to he forseen amd forestalled. The price ought to be stabilized by agreements between producer and dealer. The consumer has a direct interest in these agreements. As explained later, this does not meau that this price should be the same in summer and in winter. The dealer's price to the consumer ought also to be a stable one. Temporary losses ought to be equalized in the long run with steady profits. To be sure the price cannot be so high as to compensate fully the inefficient Ittrmer just as the consumer's prices cannot bo high enough to keep in busi- ness the poor managers among the dealers. Any dang^ of shortage of good milk ought to be foreseen and tiie crisis prepared for before its arrival. , 3. In determining the priee that dairffmen ought to receive or ask the following facts and conditions umm* be taken into consideraUon: (a) The possibility of extension to further fields of supply. An examination of the sources of the supply of milk as given in that part of this report dealing with distribution costs will reveal that the supply of milk for cities in these state&H-as elsewhere— is coming further and further from the cities. (b) Those farmers who produce milk as a ^'side issued' and es- pecially the tenant farmers as described above often fe^ that they are producing milk at a lower cost than do owner farmers Milk will be produced most economically on lauds peculiarlj ZSiv . , detemiBiiig what lands are es- peciauy litted for dairying pnrposes are: the value of the land • its Be^atiTO iHttductivily; its usefulness for other purposes; its special adaptation to dairying and the character of the labor supply Milk ^L"*! "'"^ economically on land of high raiue for tracKing or suburban purposes. Whim milk is produced and dairy cows kept on hijsli priced land or on land tliat can be used for money crops, the e^t is to bring milk into direct competition with other crops that mi^t be raised on the land and sold for money. If the milk does not bring sufficient return to take its place among the other money crops, it will be dropped from the production list of the farmers. Hence mUk raised on land worth #200 an acre ^er things being equal carries heavier charges than milk produced on land worth |50 an acre. The 960 land on the other hand may be further fnmi the mrnksft and Its products therefore subject to heafier freight barges or it may be iesd pi^uctiFe. The lands in the states cooperating in this investigation that are producing milk are the moun- iain lands of southern New York and northern Pennsylvania and the lowlands of Delaware, New Jers^, Maryland and Vir^nia. Hwr Proito can be Increased by Lowering Costs The Commission has from the first given careful consideratioB as to the means by which the cost of produdng milk can be lowered and hence the profits to the farmers increased while the total amount con- sumed wiH ateo relativdy be increased because of a fair price to the consumer. Among the means of loliMg production costs most of wiiidi am now being practised by progressive dairymen are the fol- lowing: — 1. Definite and drastic steps to eliminate **boarders" and increase the yield per cow, per herd and f>er district. The following table showin- the lower cost of producing milk from gd cows was furnished by Ohio State University and is the result of a very careful study of conditions surrounding milk production. Table mimcing Lower Cost of Producing MUk From Good Cows. Ctow prodiiciiif per year. Cost per taUra. ' »«»™™. |».jc. 25 This table shows the v^ry great importance oi keeping only high producing cows in herds. Of course the butter fat content of the milk should also be considered as well as tiie quantity of milk pro- duced. The enlargement of output per cow and per herd and per district will in the following ways tend to lower costs, (a) By adjusting the dairy to the other factons in fxem manafeniieiit which has not always been carefully done, ^b) By the increased knowledge of tiie dairy business that would permeate the community once the dairy had a real place eriences fredy in meetings and other- wise. 26 Tnd wfrriT • "^P^*'"" «« to cooperative «eameries and with buU assomtiOM is the cooperetiw* Grove City Creamerv and the coopoative methods adopted by its patrons. 3 Throngh Cow Testing Associations. Tliis is one of the most «ta8farto,y and inexpensive methods ot learning one', herd In a sden- 4. Tbrough cooperative action witii governmeiital authorities in maintammg the aanitair standards far milk production outHned in this report in the section dealing with the grading of milk Undean milk should no more be sold in a community than any other dangerous or unclean thing. Unclean milk can never hav« the confidence of consumers that dean milk will have. It is in the larirer Mse ol milk by the dty dwellers that the larger demand for milk and hence the larger sales by farmers is to come. Clean milk and stabilitv and growth in the dairy industi^r go hand in hand. 5. Scientific feeding. Grater attention to the use of the feeds lowers production co«ts. 6. Keeping accurate cost records. In making up the cost of pro- ducang milk home grown feeds have sometimes been charged at market price and sometimes at cost of raising. Feed^. raised ought to be thou#it of as being marketed through the cow and ought therefore to be charged at the selling prices at the bam. Feeds purdiased should also be charged at their cost at the bam. If home^grown feeds are diarged only at what they would cost if purchased, costs tend to become uniform throughout the state and country to the extent that wholesale prices of feed are uniform. Tlie Commission especially i^ommends the system of cost accounting recommended by the National Department of Agriculture. 7. A more extended use of county farm agents. The Commission in making the statements as to means of lower- ing production costs has made free use of the testimony of the following witnesses: Mr. Fred Kasraussen, of State Colle-e Penn i^vania; Mr. G. E. Wolcott, As^sistant Dairy HusbandmaiC Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, and John Rosenberger, Dairy Farm Adviser, Pennsylvania State De- partment of Agriculture. The condensed statements of Mr. Ra» mussen and Mr. Wolcott are hereto appended: I c Statement by Fred Rasmussen How the farmer can decrease the cost of' producing milk: A. Increase production of milk per cow by use of pure bred sires from cows of known production. 1. M individuals, or by 2. Cooperative ownership, or by 8. Forming bull associations. B. Keeping records of production of tbe individual cows. 1. As individuals, or by 2, Cow-testing associations. C. Proper feeding and management of cows. 1. Feed protein and net energy in proportion to weight of cow and. amount of milk produced. 2. Use concentrates which furnish digestible protein ttid net energy most economically. 3. Gradually weeding out the largest producers. 4. Raising calves from highest producing cows. 6. Good care and sufficient feeding of calves and heifers to assure maximum development. 6. Raise clover hay and alfalfa where possible. 7. Provide com silage for winter montlis, and whm pasture Is limited, or has a tendency to dry up, additional silage riionld be provided for summer montlis. 8. Improvement of pastures. ♦B. Keeping invesitment in buildings and e;iuipment as low as possible con- sistent with sanitary requirements and durability. E. Good management. 1. Diversified farming, with some cash crop. 2. Rotation of crops so as to utilize man and horse labor to the greatest advantage,^ and to assure cn^s above the average produetleii. 5. Slae of businesar Statement by Mr. G. £. WdleotI "Complying with your request of Monday, November 20th, I am suggesting briefly some practices of dairy farmi^ which in niy opinion should materially increase the profit from the dairy herds in Maryland. "First. — All unprofitable cows should be ^minated from the herd 1^ an adequate system of yeariy records which will show the value of the product, and the cost of the feed. There are some hundred and fifty herds in Maryland which by taking advantage of the records of cow testing associations have increased their average production, in 26 ic) HauliBg milk, grain, feeds, etc. A Bigumcaiit estam]^ of wliat farmers can do hf cooperation both as to cooperatiyie creameries and with hnll associations is the cooperative Grove City Creamery and the cooperative methods adopted by its patrons. 3 Through Cow Testing Associations. This is one of the most satisfactory and inexpensiTe methods of learning one's herd in a scien- tific waj. 4. Through cooperative action with gOTemmental authorities in maintaining the sanitary standards for milk production outlined in this report in the section dealing with the grading of milk. Unclean milk should no more be sold in a community than any other dangerous or undean thing. Unclean milk can never have the confidence of consumers that clean milk will have. It is in the larger use of milk by the city dwellers that the larger demand for milk and hence the larger sales by farmers is to come. Clean milk and stability and growth in the dairy industry go hand in hand. 5. Scientific feeding! Grater attention to the use of the feeds lowers production coats. 6. Keeping accurate cost records. In making up the cost of pro- #iti».d%@a||ti< from a station about 50 miles from that city, 436,114 quarts of milk and 10,810 quarts of cream, shipping on one day in May of 1016, 2,300 quarts of milk and 46 quarts of cream. From three points about 40, 45 and 50 miles, respectively, from Philadelphia, two ship- pers during this year (ending December 31, 1915) shi|)pe(l 2,712,464 quarts of milk and 53,054 quarts of cream to Philadel})hia and on one day in May of 1916 sent in 7,310 quarts of milk and 1,440 quarts of cream. Two shippers during the year ended Becemher 31, 1915, sent in, by niptt service, from two points about 60 miles from Phila- delphia, 2,141,126 quarts of railk and 92,068 quarts of cream, and on one day in May of 1916, 4,002 quarts of milk and 320 quarts of cream. During the year ended December 31, 1915, one shipper shipped to Philadelphia, from a station about 35 miles distant, by afternoon service, 516^200 quarts of milk and 63,960 quarts of cream, and on am day 1,400 quarts of milk and 440 quarts of cream. / REDUCTION RATIO PM-MLAi 32 "x45" METRIC LARGE AREA PHOTOGRAPHIC TARGET (MYLAR) V3 V ■ ■ '^Forter. fSharpsrflto k>nai ■'4 50DU8 P01N' IKC SNOUK nOCHCSTEl viMlK ccnthm. R. R. ]farioo< ■s S: Ins Centre talciana lurich rUCKAWAWWA- of Attte MtMorn; Silver Lake Jeia^l^^ cCJLl Portagevillt Blue Stono^ SHORE Newark I Ortaanii PENNA a. aK»y«atelct Je. Lubum I Sugar MMN VA Union Sjpttect L. »5i Prattsbw '*^*^*"« , Xockvi Ithaca^ [omeUsviUe :an ■ Ceres [oiitour i'iiUa iiM Borsehc a. Speaoer kWeU8Till« IRABKI irtwell [NewMdJe. Valiey 'Stoethpcrt Burbank *oiat >nT AUJraAMV lOBW YOR K PENNS Y L V AnTa esNTWU. /^Wastlleld Henry Stred f LawreaceviUe lemung^ :lmira taasett AVaverly BCUMI^aK BOUND ABY^ R. V Je. vWrighte couociiMoaT ytiiberty jicATiiittmMiiiffr Sweden Yallaf I OUT rCroMflorlc Je. Morris Run Anti Line 1* /4' NLaetoDla ^] |rk m PORK) I IMPORIUM lUNCTION (teriing Bun ^LATelKSl&te Run Jo. ^VSlateBini Balstoi »Okon»e mrrWyOOD ti'ant . Mill Hum "^iWk^inn Medijt llll^ ledikttt Roadtf Bridge >y Jowley Llba Riinnequa Canton. (edar rrover ynbryn line Tiwanda Long Valley tMonroetdn ^SatteriWi ore >pes ccr iteiiie r' O itkii ftVbetham ^Icn Union i'emey Irry J'owya_ laleeka Laporte bu Riclcetta >gan Valley [epIboniTine QkaogaLake >Janu8on Ctt.T Cana.stoti|> CUntoB Ulica a. R. Wonrichi lNcw Berlin Jc. Sidney' Deposit ,Jeff«raoa Jo. le. /HMMock Je. lancock i> 1L^ *\0 ERIE rruukluMinock CBrtmidalei HoMefldale Harvey* Lake (wMbhiKtou Jc. lu ^^^^ Port ^. LA W A R BAT ANNAPOLIS^ I Hall ^ J*' >^iCi«llikte , ^lieltcnhiira Talbert .f WUK^ AHtUrilf » litO Pf#ln S'ltt^*' DARES OOVeRNOM^ M(v liaukntrllle^ *iS^*5j»OFES TRENT H* BLACKWCLkSI BAVPORV «MTfllVieW RICMIMMV 3City Point Clat-eiiiT 8 I -w.-> ^/Keller ^y -M{/ , , ,^ :ir(l'8 Nest' 5 CAPE JU^ charI; ^iNTcoMrofir SO / L Rock land .Dotur AOeglMiiy iFozlrars |Pftrken Laoding vChuroh HQl «|QWeit Honteref pper HOlTina I rtiiiM nni-nii Brc^kvMle^ Opal Glen^ M^cMiiuis tu'irnnitj Harve ^ 'Major ' ^BaunOKtr Dubois^ [Diamond^ jc. v.. •9/ K. A. [Ellwood • winp BUTLERj^ ^BrlnkMr Hooks Mahoning iTempleton ^CowaiMtaMoe •Run :M.Jc. Echo jOstend /KerrmcK)r DiUreV LRochester >Y«teftboro*> •*eNCAIiPBEl-«- WeatWinfleld -I UekT "Monroe^ "WinlieldJc.^ •Harbiso^ Jc. TManorriUa ^Ford City o Kanu •« ''a Wf lApoUoi Apollo Msmx Jo. si 4} ilina iAvomiiore FEdri Salisbury DlsxmTille'^ Rembrant .Ernest Clymer fReed Two Lick jTHomer City idraoeiUm Run Five Points\^ 'WelshdaleV Sterling No. 10. •tfOMA smoke AVON A cO>lt^ lam City MlftES^ Heve.iv "Lovcjoy Va^^*, C04I. iShanktowu ^t** */ |^<^' Hastings^ Itt Walter's MilT'*" V'^r/"'"V^^ Fallen TimberV " QOKE'^ rhonias Mill OV£hS tUTHEB/ 1" H^-'Vrti/ I ' Jfi«f « UoydvfHt Eckenrode j Curto Oysart^ 3t St.* Moon&ua 'Andi-ico vTunnelitoii OU^ TYROI ^ AUTOONi ^1 Ha] ivermore ^Ale^lSdriaSod^^ ^y^Lennotfo °'>,V\nlbrop 3^ Lilly, MO, aianlta Oaarri Peters Ci West. Etizaoein, Floreffe, Shlce Buston Ran, Courtney | River View^ MONONQAHELA CITYV Cereal j Rlllton/ T^'m^ ^/County Mom« Jc. ^'s*^ °' " Mutual*®. « Manlto Palme * OS c: 31 |^-*»Tler ^^iP-coTf en. XriiffTllsV 5V> COALMINES .Beaveidaie Salix Dunloi Iilanfairl Sui MB i>nora »^est Colu •^1 I* Im y^Ht Vanon ^rSs ^ rr '^o" >o AnioliJ City irt MO-^nyotte CMgr WhftiwttAl SpOTTOALEj Oreenle*> .^c' GuaI Centre^ Calill House^A (Tilliyitwi pose LCLLEFOj ceoman dM.'LLVILlC West MUtonJ lilton Buckhoi Vicksbur; HiflUnburg Kapi 5^. w. >Vi?a „ , J^jfj* ■^>#^ Martha^^^ ^^Sandy Bidge Rttem Jo. 1 ^> MOIItMUIIMIIIJ^fM SCOTIA J la Walter's lolP^' V»ti.£H TiwcyX Gardner^ rowie^^^ TFigart if«U ^/^W Eagle „ iLloydYiUa ^ ^iu^^^ -"^^ SEtlNSdROVE kKreamer *' \^ '^'^ j|Sb«jnrock Waigli Scales/f a ferry 3bI >1 rerSpriaga ^^^^ COAL o 2 o Doan Ccndroi ^1 K.T\ roue iTYROI ^oenbergdr >k»a ^f?// ^^1^ MT " ^liiH Water atwet_ IcChare rSybertf Siitarariior KldK* >ntli Altooiia A -Mjf - "» « Honey OiieeJ »wer Manl T««tC»'Vlowl Buniha„ Menzie, Walnut St uwrsTowl llainScJ LCWiSTOWN Ji hanville kindle iintervUle ^ lillerstown ^Id Forty wit" ; o GOAL MIHEa t^t. COAL muss iverdala ' T'loydaQ 7oiinellslowa liU Creek »xigfeUoNv Pornlnitoid /* [cVeytown Newrport} icCIellaa Oniftoa f^riUQlMMISll Qiitaeni "*!i^H III i.Koe 4 Op* HiN 9 S^',os«ler' ClUTV Jfattlieini Soimnn I'ag* HCIimCTT] Mapleto lyda ' Montour Jc. •*e«a Juniata BHdgc Com ItMLKII rOaterbiirg ^^^^vdsIenocOc H>oweir8 Greet lark^s Ferry ' BVUlo lai ni S|Nringf MaiyBvillfi Snolai ckriDe BOW imelstowB ^WakottTille Tkindle Springer Wingert Ci • Lisbura RoadVc Williams Grovel* Williams Road iny Tborndaif) Harvey* LftiM Serairtc 11 s I'pr U:t«lli« laleeka ];..*B.Jc1 ^epjbamTille 8ooesU»wB> 4 ^em«y^^ Jlortln Forlc [leens Kun "^^^fc— .JLjm. Jk«B Ho&tfomer; o- "1 MUtooJ lilton ^ Buckho ILLVIUC »P^N E8COPECK |5^^ Zenith Button /oiW*" lanticok* ,Xiz)e St. ^ 'Wllte*-Barre^ Fainriew Bear Creak USOmBrnmiilt ^^^^ iRV ...«...ni^ *^^/e.a ^ ^ ^- Freeland *^ ' Drifton <^<;t»ii5iii iear Craek Je. k White HaTeo mekabi o Kapp'^ nOMtHVllMIILANl ''es Grove (cn»Ii2i Humboldt 80* 5 ?/lPa Vj^ ^jM'Shamrock l/fe Upp|brI^high/:S^^^ -iJa^^Drifton Jc. l> risbmi r«r8prliigt ■f**^ alfMorrl* Jo. SttvOT ft » * >^^t. Olair Slatfaigton) a. >TT8ViLLE Hon«y OweeJ < iwer Mani Menxit. WalnatSt Main Sr.j LCWISTOWN J I nterriUe Granville illerstowa »ldFiMETy lorningfoid IcVeytowtt Hi Middle Creek '"«'»10|rt Lorberry Jc ... ^^^^ Rausch's Blackwood Jipiteff GardflB Je. kai Ironton ersville Orefleklo Auburn' 'a* Lubum cGleUaa vPine Grove >rt Clinton laMMd^ ive Locks Iboemikennrtllft lohrsville sport WallnM*. Btttodiouae Gap ^ n^lenook 'Owen's Owek lark's Ferry ville SchuyDcin /ReAOINQ / ^Naalyma \ LtsbumRoad| 1 Williams Orovsl 1 Williams RoadQ Oakviltef^y St.Peter8, ioversfi-'rd ttS AV Harreyvill Pickerin I M I I I I I I I I Uurveyfl Lake Co, •'e */ >7 Toim>klnEvUlef ^yBrown _ ClWwopdVl %d Bri.lge East Spotst / D.&R Caaai jML / Draw bridge * f .lor St.. ^«^>^yKt>hhIni«vllta ^i|f<^ Trenton ^Hoffman Tnicy Red BaakTsT-f Uttle SUt Braochpoit (I^Ji./ Eatootown Howelf Shrewalmry fmlaystown (91 ifASBURY PARK OCEAN QROVE «riMER CR. Jfauns Choice, oi Sulphur Spi-togsi Smitlis Ci eyaoldstlale si^ HOLOCRaHUII lYountit BEDFORO Biillalo MilU PENNS V I. V A N I A Finksburg ( Green Sprii^ liunmey Pennsylvania Railroad AND ITS CONNECTIONS CORRECTED TO MAY St, t916 / / ■ Fiwcii Cr. J J /ers PielM Drmul V -cr , OreUuid . 'ort Kerine<1y 4^ UaniJ „ *v>/ Newtown Squart^ *«<\*f5^ >r> Ho< k ChetUut Miii ; Lirii,^' Mill •k^ Uijhl»'i.l1k\' Siiawiiio Cinnaini 'fukiu(o« It r, INKORA "•A <'A • ^Arp iveniile WESTCHtrrci Newtown Stuart ^ f o' 1^ JUuiint in.v »'iiI«Tort/,j.- nuieiioldeiyV _.iorwooa loore 1 ^ ■ elalr — "^Ou- Oil o6«* Street 'New £gypt Cookatmni rightatowB iiwfccnni iian lUaiichester % Girt iol1« 5 Pb l NT PV !Bay Heaa mM . Gtiadvicfc Lfilrtirootl P'Cuthbcr i.Otouce&U'K Srown 9 ^ves >ievui ITeatmiui Ittvr T}i*>ut: %1 New Castle R near It Kfybuhl T »ra>t*0M ^^:fr^A Vov-i^vA^ ^lah . ...fcni Ki«**, ...UlMtuWQ ^^^^^^^ ^ Joupers ^^^^^MMuen . JridKeport ^^Kl^fonm 1 oirMt ltfvKphniitt\P [ X "Woodcitsf lUiWwtrliie forth W.ctabury^^.j^^ NCOAT CITT Miilinciown CITY WdM SALE II ljownscnd vBlackbird Biter Kent cmuMrTOM V^^reen Sprine Mtley iTyoiniag lema ITreMuiboro -^.j^ It ite .VP' ^valktte .jTtler jVkeiey Lisidefiulc 6^ Side tec«» Inlet ;i:LAiinccitir D B Z A W A R B r^^mRjfi**^ HARBOII (STTN •TNKCT) MmNaToi I Lo|>eft Tborad»1«> ranton N F CftmpbcU Hall^ |PitUtoA J'ort Jorvi GC!liestw iJc. ^ .Morriatown C. UC«D jepcribars , Clinton Fleiuingtcn tianc* liddletowm '•»r *T n •■«b/nroV Bin* MAP No. 1 iffr Park Fkrminfdalel SHOWING TanniY on nilaoelpiua & ieaoui6 mm PROM WHICH MORNING (OR PiCK-UP) MILK TRAIN SERVICE IS OPERATED DAILY TO PHIUDELPHIA, PA. I IfMiGalM liain Mvvica to Milk Tarminals in Philadelphia at Sicond ami Bailit SIS., and Twfiflh and WUtow Sts. IndMM train sarvice to 24th and Clitstniit Sis., PMIadal- pMa.Pt.. (B.ftO. R. Ra Oxford Of- 1 4* Grace TnckertoD < MilmayU'^ Deraiby' Delawaofc City BonAarHookj ^ Green wick^^ Ormoifdi^ Baltii t Clayton J Morrill Run/ TowHn•*•■••••••■•»■«••*•••«•"•••* stony Creek B. B Wilmlnf^ton & Northern R. R. (Note 1) .nn n. yw Wilmington & Northern R. R. (Note 2) Beyond Reading, Penna., ...^ Total 1.445.694 2,450,000 5,004,304 3,268,616 6,114.062 3.647,130 2.144.460 3.034,310 3,862.240 1,589,070 469.810 5,364.426 4,734,340 12.024.196 10.810 53.654 92.068 63.960 103.718 366.858 55.152.658 691.068 Note (1) Intrastate via Birdsboro, Pa. (2) Interstate via Blsmere Junction, Del. (3) Famished by the courtesy of the Reading B. B. Co. (4) Data as to cream shipments have been shown only when available. Ib some tftstance* movement of cream is not segregated from the milk. It is to be noted from this table that twelve of the fifty-five million quarts of milk and three hnndred and snxty-six of the six hundred and ninety-one thousand quarts of cream shipped over the Reading Railroad came from points beyond Reading, Pa. The milk carried by the night trains is collected from as far distant as Gettysburg, Pa., (172 miles) and as near as Kimberton, Pa,, (41 miles). In general the night trains serve the territory not reached by the morning trains.* These facts are typical of the morning and night train service furnished by the Pennsylvania Kailroad and other lines. The following table gives the milk shipments recei\^ at Phila- delphia, Pa., T>arby, Pa., Chester, Pa. and Wilmington, Del., from January 1, 1916 to January 1, 1917, inclusive, over the Baltii Ohio Railroad Company: *Bnt there are a few instances south of Beading, Pa., where the two services overlap, there belitK Iwtli momtnf and night movements (for example from the Colebrookdale and Pickering Valley Branches). On the Wilmington & Northern Branch, (between Birdsboro. Pa., and Wil- mington, Del.) two distinct services are operated to Philadelphia, moving in opposite directions. One Is the morning train which travels southward collecting milk for Philadelphia at rnanj points in Chester Coanty. and at some few stations in the State of Delaware. This train moves over the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad from Wilmington, the milk being delivered at 24th ft Ohestnat Streets Station, in this city. Practically all of the milk carried by tliis train is shipped direct by farmers, and goes to dealers in South Philadelphia and West Philadelphia. The second or night train operates in the reverse direction, moving northward from Wilmingtoa. DeL aa4 handling milk from several Chester County "milk-shipping stations." These cars axe taken to Birdsboro and thence move to Philadelphia via the Main Line, delivery belnc made to •tgnees eitlier st 12tb 4k Willow Streets or at Second A Berks Streets as dealzed. 31 Following is a table showing the amount of milk and cream shipped into Philadelphia over the various branches of the Philadel- phia and Reading Railway^ Quantity of Milk and Cream Traffic Originating on PhMadelphia 4c Reading Railioay During Year Ending December Slst. 1915 for Philadelphia/ > > From— Milk. Cream.* Quarts. Main Line 1,445,694 2,450.000 6,004,304 3,268,616 6,114.062 8,647,130 2,144,460 3,034,310 3,862.240 1,589,070 469,810 S.384.4» 4,734.310 12.024,196 10,810 New York Branch Ill -1 ""^ " /-"""v 11, m, ........ , riiila. & Newton & New York B. B Bethlehem Branch Aorth Bast Pennsylrania B. B 53.654 ie.06S Stony Creek B. B '. Wilmington & Northern R. JR. ■(Noto i) ••* Wilmington & Northern R. R. (Note 2> Beyond Beadiiig, Penna., ' ' * ai • ♦ 103.718 966.858 Se.152.658 691,068 Not© (1) Intrastate via Blrdsboro. Pa. — ~ (2) Interstate via Blsmere Junction. Del. ill the courtes.v of the Reading B. B. Co. turJov^ml^ shipments have been sh«p9 »niy when availaWe. I. soine iiista»c«« tiie movement of cream is not segregalii Ifcom the milk, «i«i«bcw« It is to be noted from this table that twelve of the fifty-five million quarts of milk and three hundred and sixty-six of the' six hundred and ninety-one thousand quarts of cream shipped over the Reading RaHroad came from points beyond Reading, Pa. The milk carried by the night trains is collected from as far distant as Gettv»burg, Pa., (1.2 miles) and as near as Kimberton, Pa,, (41 miles). In ^neral tue nijyht trams serve the territory not reached by the mominir trains.* ' ^ These facts are typical of the morning and night train service fumidied by the Pennsylvania Railroad and otiier lines The foHowing table gives the milk shipments received at Phila- delphia, Pa., Darby, Pa., Chester. Pa. and WUmington, Del., from January 1, 1016 to January 1, 191T, inclusive, over the Baltiniore and Uhlo Railroad Company: belSf lSrmo™i2g'!:i*":£hT;orments ??o"''°^' *^<» -r^*^- o'^^lap, there Valley Branches). On the W InZJLT & Northe^^^ Colel»K,kdale and Mckerin^ mingrton, Del.) two distin- t sorXf are oiSraJ^^o PhCl^ ^"'l Wil- One is the morning train which travels wuthward coliert ' Tl''^ in opposite direction., points in Chester Ootmty. and at f^e flw^?Xns in ti r^VTt "^y^.^'' PhUadelpM. .t ma., ?rr' J*'! J^**"*"*^ and Ohio Railroad f^^m Wirmin" ton thf n.nir'^^'^'!; ««»^ Chestamt Streets Station, in this city. PracticaUy ^^ll ^f tt^ delivered at 24th & aiwct by farmers, and goes to dealers In Suth kua^,-^^^ ^^is train is shipped or night train operates in the reverse dfrw.«o« «iItJf *^ * Philadelphia. The second handling milk from wveMl Chrater^unTv -^^^^ northward from Wilmington. Del.7i!S Blrdsboro. and thence m"e to PMla^elpJia v""^he ^Ya'^n r?n"'°H"H a^e tokens •tgBe«. eltiier «t 12ti» * Willow Streets or at Second VLerks S^^^T^^ Wmmher of Oallofit jteceived % MmtM—Baltimore and Months. Pblladelphla. Darby. Chester. Wilmington. 231,404 222,814 253.281 II3.M1 228.514 327,386 299,822 285,746 245,977 212.460 193.412 201.497 4,255 2.810 4.156 4.281 6.004 4.348 3,546 3.332 3.356 3.809 3,480 4,764 2.S60 2.145 1,946 l»1Ef l.tI6 Lies 2.832 4,771 5,709 6,536 5.315 725 670 3.3»4 2.946 8.IM B.8lt 2.M8 2,044 2.80T 4.630 6.051 4,47« 3.083.942 48.117 41.124 38,072 The milk i^ipiiieiits for one day in Jnne, 1915 and one day in Kovember, 1916 liased on first 15 days of each month received over the lines of The Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company were as follows: Milk Received Over P. JB. T. Lines. lteceiv«d at iwS* (Inarts. MwreiaMr ]fl8 Q«art8. D^lestowB— P.Jk B. InterUne Milk receivatf hy P. ft M. at various points 146.887 189.000 1.34,800 203,000 118.467 103,133 2.733 138.800 207.200 89,200 180,667 79.122 86,087 •Doylestown to Edi o ta CO < s « a s 1 o S a . > K a to

«-> 4-> *-l +J -fcJ CJ w - caches. E'S'S' OkCk mmm « « od 60 C3 C3 C3 C3 aBDDflBaBOBia ESZ eo «j 4J 4J 4^ -fS -w "Ttitl t4 yt U U DB csescsaesos SSS a a aw 9 S 9 S S 3 O" C O* C 9 O* S 9 9 e>4esi CI CO ^ ^ * a CD OB afi m 009009000005 OJQ^^) 9} c a a c a a CE « a oa as till a i I a o 9 M s a • <• * • • • • « « • • • # w • * • • « • * « 1* * m • • 4 • • • • • * 6tb Zone. Over 500 mile L. C. L. C. < 23.4 29.2 39 22.3 26.7 26.1 30 33.4 1 • B W » >■*•'* ■ • • • « '* • • ft • » • ■ • ft • 5tb Zone. 191 to 500 mih L. C. L. C. < tin u a o e s « o i m 4 o d »4 I § t 4 m O 4 d 4 ft w ft ft ■ ■ ft ft • 131193 „ai8 a« 811 ss m s u 4 d 4 d 4 w « • 4 o 4 d 4 'Sfts ss u * I'" C O b u « « C< to 4) a o 2 s CO o C O a o Q so 00 to •aiBsaioqAi (D CD \ 'SnflpusH 000 CM 00 o o 00 Oi eg 9 r-l IS o 00 00 U3 10 8 ■00 5 s 3 to 10 10 OO oo '00{;BJOdBAa mi 'paipovq -sjb jo -ox t 00 c-j o CO u 9t S c S3 at "3 (0 CO 9 ft is ■** A V V o ZD » u 9 m ■I I— a u I I 10 CO CO i 5 «l la n CO 00 00 CO •«r 0> CO 283, 0> CO 01 u o a n 1^ .a es o S 2 a •o 5 u « to o 9) "a 0) O CI a n 0; a u o u "3 Q >» 9 «2 e a o si .5 a es M e as M -I 11 ^ a 3S ..a *wipid»S|J!]aa i I n

  • & s" 09§ (OO too OC4 » til e Q S 03 o i3 £ o u o Li 9) Q £ o e 43 a a (4 (8 o 03 Q e ?! a a IS I ■ v|0|wiiai|p v| ' s a a M H o I I i \ 43 Your Commission recommends tliat milk distributors and milk distributive plants be hereafter regarded as quasi public businesses and subject to governmental regulation the same as are other ouasi public concerns. The r^sons in actual fact lor tiiw leoommenda- tion are: 1. There are economies necessary and essential to lai^ setle dis- tribution of milk,^conomies that mal^e for large tfaed bnmiiesfles as compared with anall sized bmmmsmm. Among these economies are the following: (a) The cost per quart for pasteuriaing milk induding the investment for plant and operating costs decream with increase in the size of Ihe idant, and in the amount of milk handled. (b) There is also a decreaae p«r unit in the cost of bottling milk mduding the purchase of stoppers, and the process of bottling i1»elf . (c) There are economies in route service certainly up to the point where the route is as heavy as one vehicle can serve Herein lies the greatest single economy in large scale service. (d) There aie further economieB in motor track distribntton ftom fr^t statiositlon to utilize surplus, but it is the smallest industry too. In the butter industry, although the men do not work so steadUy as in the condensed milk industry, they work above the average of all manufacturing planta Of course, even the conden- sories take some extra milk at certain 8ea8on% Jmt not enough to affect the snrplns problisn. . 51 Solutions of the Suri^iis Problem 1. Iliere are cMy distributors, who not only make ice cream, but who ahM> make butter and cheese during the sui^lus season or Btim the cream for later use. Thus one firm testified tiiat it has success- fully stored cream for six months. This storage of cream with the Sl^ ""i « ^"^^ to feed o^ his own farm is one of the SLS'^k'^ .1 T?^"" '^'^^ distributor is also relieving the situation by establishing, in connection with his busi- nes^ milk manufacturing plants, either ice cream, butter, cheese ih> condensed milk. This is done, if done at all, in the f«U knawledtt that manufacturing costs Avill be higher than those of liie mai^ facturer m the remoter dairying districts, for tlie reasons pointed out above^ with the exertion of ioe cream. 2. Farmers' cooperative creameries as wdl M «miMi«ial ckrib- enes can store the cream dnriag the «irplm mmm, tiiniii« ike akinuBad Bulk back for growing animala 3. But the real solution of the turpltu problem i» to get rid of V'^^S^uTT" ""^^ ikrougnout the year A ^^J2f * '"'^ P«»«rti«» 0/ ww» freshen, in and around Augu^, September and October. <^ouna r«L ^-^ if dairyman mast receive a much higher price rdativdy m October, November and December than in slay, 5un^ and J,ay. This same end can be accomplished by contracts ^ving to the dairyman a steady price throughout the year for that ammurt of milk delivered during the seasons of scardly. tht T^. """^ <^«^« especially during GRADING COMMITTEE IN CHARGE: Dean Harry Hayward, Delaware, CMirtmn; Hon. George H. Hall, Delaware; Morris T. Phillips, PeunsylTaiiia; Hartman K. Harrison, Maryland. One of tlie important dnties of tke Tri-State Milk Commission was to study t!ie quality and wholesomeness of the milk supplied for direct consumption to tke various mnnicipalities of tlie states concerned. It is generally recognised that the food value of milk is based upon two main factors: the nutrients the milk actually contains, and the care that has been exercised to obtain milk to be oflfered for sale from only healthy, normal cows and to keep the milk free from contaminating influences of every character during its transpor- tation from the cow to the consumer. To determine the food content of milk, certain generally accepted chemical and physical tests are used. Tliese are comparatively simple, eamly made and are fairly accurate. A determination of the amount of sediment the milk carries, as well as the number of bacteria it contains, gives a reliable incHcation of the samtarj con- ditions under which the milk is produced, cared for, and of its gen- eral wholesomeness. None of these tests is sufficient in themselves, but all should be used in determining the value Qf milk for human •Phe main reasmi for grading market milk is that the consumer may get what he pays for. Standard grades are now quite gen- erally recognized and the following): recommendations of the Commisi- sion are in harmony with the grades advocated by authorities on this subject and are used by many cities in adjoining states. It is important that these grades be uniform among the states. The inadequacy of milk inspection even in cities is shown by the following tables submitted to the Conmii.ssion by Dr. Neva Dear- dort showing the amount now spent on food inspection in Philadel- phia and the amount necessary to spend in order to have adequate milk inspection. 53 Present and Proposed Milk Inspection Budget for Philadelphia, Submitted 6y Dr. Neva Deardorff. Details. Present Budget. VmS. for milk and other food inspec-tion. Total. Cblef milk ins^tor, AMlatai^ Milk iaipeetor. Clerk Printing, atotlonwy «ad oOm snp- pUea. Oar fan, Upkeep of aotomobiles PvdMaa af aaaplaa of milk. Parchase of automobiles , Nomber A aalarj. 1 @ $1,900 IS 9 !.(«» Amonnt. 118,620 1,900 1«,3» Recommended Badget. For milk Inspection excln* sively. Number * aalaryv 1 9 «i.9ao 18 e standard- ised salariaa. 1 ® 1900 PIILmt.' 1, 1,' 15 inspectors @ |60 per year each. 3 automobiles & $15 per iMtttt 10,000 samples at average of $.05 each 3 @ $500 to f800« < *Noaatoinobiles owned at present; first year will, ibeiefore. antttt gnalar ngmmm %m The question of grading milk has been discussed quite genmOly during the year. The producers are in favor of it because filiffy be- liere hi^^r prices can be obtained for the hi^er grades at milk. The eommm axe anxibiis to obtain milk of differmt known reliable grades for children, adults, cooking, etc. The Commission feels that grading milk will be established slowly, and it recommends the adoption of standards without delay; that is to say, after a thorough study of the local conditions, and with the cooperative effort of producers, distributors, consumers and health officials. As to its Sanitary Charact&, ihe Committee recommaids in addi- tion to certified milk, three grades of milk, the first two of whi(^ would be for use as milk, the last or lowest grade for cooking and manufacturing purposes: Grade "A," Grade "B" and Grade "C." As an indication of the general plan suggested for adoption, the following outline is given. / Certilted or "AA" Milk. ••A*' Tuberculin Test and Physical Examination. Physical Examination. Physical Examination. Medically Bzamiaed. Sickness to be reparted. ' Sickness to be reported. 10.000 to 60,000. 10,000 to 200.000 As determined by proper board.* Farm aeora,' 80 6S BottUag, BcQntred. Seqnired. Bottles or cans. Beqoired. Beqnlred. Bacteria immedi- ately after pas- tanrlaation. , 10,000 to 30,000 55,000 to 75,000. Physical Sickness to be reported. 40 Cans only. Heqaired. 6%000 ti> lOO.IM. •The Commission believes that the standard for bacteria in erado "B" milk sliniiM ha 200.000 to 2,000,000. but the difficulties in the way of the immediate adoption of this ' aw!k nmt tha Mtter ahonld l» laft nt Ika dlaewtleB vt tha prapar pJSUe avtUtiS. 54' .■V The ham scores sn^ested are to be taken as something to work to rather than as an arbitrary standiM;d« When milk is aoM as certilled under the reqniremeiits of the AjpMTican Pnhlic Health Association, ike grade lettering ahonld be optional, not reqnired. In order to get the hcneficial rr suits of grading, grades should be established, so that a reasonable amount of the total supply will be III 0rade ''A." This can be done by a careful study of the eating mnMHtms m the locality under considmiMon, m suggested. In grad- liig milky the grades aball be established after fhre torti taken owr a period not exceeding seren days* All grading shall be establi^ed after at least five bacterial tests have been taken over a period not less than a week nor more than a month, and at least 80% must fall below the limit set, for the grade for which the daaaiiication In 'desired* Chm^i I iniraSnil Reguirement Recommended Ml^ J«o«^ not M in ^ n^, ^ wlUk, and adjusted or siandardhed mUh should be 8.26. Minimum requirements for fat in milk not labeled and guaranteed to be BM. Standardlzatioa of Fit The Commission favors the immediate altering of laws, ao that the fat in milk can be bon^t and sold with regard to the true yalne— in the same manner as the purchase and sale of cream is now done. In this way the consumer will more rapidly appreciate the true food value of the milk he buys.^ The standardlBation of milk should bo allowed by the addition of milky skimmed milk or cream. When labeled and guaranteed as to its fat content, milk testing 1% or more should be allowied to be sold. Present Ijegal Standard* • 'Slate. Milk. • Skte mP^ CKani* Total MOlids. Soli'ls not fat. Fat. aot'ftit. 'Vat. 13.00 S.2S 9.25 liJ 11 •lf« state ttaadards. *mmm **OfmdlBg aai Lalialias of Milk aatf Cteam,** iaraad kr Baatim Chamber of Conumfca^ IS. 1]^} Staidatda t§r pttifj Prpducta, U. S. Dept. qi Affleiiytara. 6& ttinimum BequkremenU Beeommtmdei for The$e SUttet. Sliitei Milk. Skim adlk Okaaak ' Total SliUds solids. aot fat. Fat. SoUds not fat. , . .„ . .jiMiltlil^ 3.S [ "■ - II In some localities there is dissatisfaction with the metheida of tart* ing for butter fat. To overcome thh» eon^tion^ in a large measim^ law0 should be panrtd granting liccsnses to cteasMrieB, milk reedv- ing stations, and establishing rules and regulations for persons mak- ing tieets for fat.* As a means of assuring proper standards in the production and distribution of milk and in the purchase and sales price for mill^ tlie Gonuuisaiim makes the foUowiiig reeomm^datioDs: 1. As the only adequate means of controlling the sanitary con- ditions under which milk is produced permits should be issued to producers. This permit should be issued by the appio^iate StatO Board and tiie fee^ if fee Itase be> shaold not be In excess of one dK^lar. 2. Permits to be issued to aU producm, distribatom and ro- oeivers of milk. If the same perscm or firm carries on mum t% iii one d these buttnesses, then he shall have a licensie for each. 3. All milk, skimmed milk m cream not eovmd the aiiovo pennits must be brought into 'te State^ inspected, and siAMiliir the profhrions ei a special permit to bo issued by the prop» state authority. 4. Tlie basis of inspection should be the gomnment score card, or its equlvalait system. 5. Producers' yfgmAam lEiiould be inq^iected as to sanitary condi- tions, at least tiinee times a year. 6. All animals producing milk for sale should be physically ex- amined by a C(»i^tent veterinarian, and these veterinarians should work under the direction of the livestock sanitary boards or bu- reaus of the respective states. These veterinary inspections shall be made at least twice (2) a year. 7. Dairy and ftirm inspectors fihould be appointed by the State Board of Agriculture or Agricultural Commission from a list of H>tac«lir 4L Fattoo DklvenUy, imrieidtwal aapwh tat Btotiea. 50 men sQlmiittod by the »tate (College. Said eoUege ta make up thw list from the men who have taken iad iiaased competitive e x a mina - tions. The inspectors appointed shall inspect all places producing, receiving, or handling milk. 8. Milk testers shall be licensed after proper examination. The Committee cannot offer definite rules for preventing dishon esty of testers, but if a tester should be found to have knowingly nflMMj calmest test, his license should The Commission has read the following proposed inspection law drawn by th^ f^tate Livestock Sanitary Board of the Departmwit of Agriculture ii? enactment in Penn^lvania and approves its general principles. AN ACT Relating to milk and milk food products; providing for the licensing of certain estaiblisliments producing, handling or manufacturing milk or milk food products; providing for the licensing of perwms shipping or bring- ing milk or cream into this State; prescribing certain powers and duties of the State Livestock Sanitary Board, its officers and agents and pre- Mibing a penalty for the violation of this act and of the rules and regu- lations of the State Livestock Sanitary Board. . Sectiim 1. Be it ^cted by the Senate and House of Represen- tatives of the Commonwealth of Penni^lvania in General Assembly nuet, and it is hereby enacted by the anthority of the same; Thattlie following terms wherever used in this act shall have the following meanings, respectively, designated for each, viz: The terms "milk" and "milk food products" shall include and ap- li^ to cream, wIm^ milk, skim mUk, butter milk, butter, cheese, con- densed and evaporated milks and food prodncts made from mUk or creanL The word "establishment" shall include (1) any building or structure, or any place, or any vehicle, or railroad or railway car where milk or milk food products are produced, stored, handled, tittnsported, sold, offered for sale or exposed for sale; (2) the ground npon wiiicii sndi bnilding or stractnre is meted, and so mach ground adjacent thereto as is nsed in carrying ont the basiness (rf sndi es- tablishment. The term "unwholesome" shall include all milk or milk food prod- ucts which are obtained from animals that are afflicted with anthrax, blackleg, contagions pleura-pneumonia, rinderpest, hemorrhagic sep- ticemia, Texas fever, foot-and-mouth disease, rabies, mastitas, septic- metritis, pyania, septicemia, advanced cases of actinomycosis or ftctinomycosis of the ndder, advanced or generalized tobercalosb^ tu- berculosis of the udder, or any other disease or condition rendering milk produced from animals afflicted therewith unsuitable or dan- gerous for food. 6T The term "unwholesome" shall also include milk or milk food products which have been placed in unclean vessds or exposed to unsanitary conditions, and all other milk or milk food prodncts which, in the opinion of the Btate Livestock Banitary Board ate un- fit for human food. The word "equipment" shall include all cattle, machinery, fixtures, containers, vessels, tools, implements, and apparatus used in and about an establishment. The word "person" sliall include individuahs, co-partnerships, cor- porations and associations. Masculine words dmU include the feminine or neuter. The singular shall include the plural. The word **Board" shall mean the "State Livestock Sanitaiy Board." Section 2. Every establishment, including all equipment thei^ or thereon, shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. Section 3. It is unlawful for any p^*8on to prepare for food, or sell, or offer for sale, or expose for sale, or have in his possession for the purpose of sale, as human food, any unwholesome nulk or un- wholesome milk food i}roduct. Section 4 It is unlawful in an establishment for any person other than the owner, lessee, or manager of such establishment, or the agent or employe of such owner, lessee, or manager, to touch or handle any milk or milk food products, or for any one to permit any milk or milk food product in an establishment to be- ^] sects, animals o? fowls. This section lEdiaU not apply to any agent of any of the Boards of inspection now authorized by law. Section 5. It is unlawful for any person, his r^resentative or agent to advertise, sell or offer for sale milk as "certified milk*' unless such milk has actually been certified under authority of a duly organized medical milk commission recognized by the American Association of Medical Milk Commissions. J anuary, one thousand nine hun- dred and eighteen, and before the first day of each succeeding year, everj'^ person operating any establishment where milk or milk food products are sold, or produced, or prepared, or manu^ctured, or col- lected, or any two w more of them, shaU r^^«* each such estab- lishment operated by him' with the Board giving the location and the name and address of the owner thereof. No such establishment shall be liceiis^ed which has been found to be unsuitable for the purposes for which the license is sou^t. 1!1ie form of such license certificate shall be ^^leribed 1^ the Board. m ThB ie^ imid to the Board under the provisions of tliis section sliail be immediately paid into tbe State Ihreasnry for the use of the Com- numwealtli. SeeMon 7. On and after liie first day of Jannaiy, one timisaad nine Inndred and ei#teen, it shall be unlawful for any pmon to i^wate any establishinent where milk or milk food products are sold, produced, prepared or manufactured, or collected, without obtaining a license for tiie current year from the Board. Section 8. If, at any time, after the issuance of a license, and within the period for which such license is issued, it is found that the condition of any licensed establishment is not such as repreeented in the application for a license, or if within sadi period its c produced, or collected, falls below the standard required by this State for similar establishments. This section does not apply to any establishment producing or col- lecting milk or cream in any Stsute where this act or similar pro- visions are adopted and enforced and which allows like i>rivilegei to the citizens of this State. Tliis section shall not be constru^ in case an unforseen emergency arises ci eating a shortage of milk in any part of this State, to prevent tJie shipping or bringing into this State of any milk or cream for a period of not more than five days, in order to relieve such milk shortagfe. Section 11. The Board may classify aU establishments whwe milk or milk food products are sold, produced, prepared or manufactured, with a view of making such classification the basis for the issuance of the licenses provided for in this act. The Board may also fix standards for grades of milk and cream to apply to milk and cream produced outside of, and shipped into the Commonwealtii, as well as to milk and cream produced within the Commonweidth. Section 12. The Board, in enforcing the provisions of this act, may assign any employe of the Board to perform duties as agent under this act. ^ach wnploye assigned to serve as agent under tliis act shall have knowledge of the diseases of milk producing animals, and shall be versed in the conditions that alfect the wholesomeness of milk and milk food products. An appropriate standard of ntnesalMm^h agents shall be maintained by the Board. '^^llBr The qualification, powers, and duties of each such agent shall be gov^ed by the provisions of this act, and by such rulef? and regu- lations for the enforcement thereof as are adopted by the Board. Section IS. Any duly authorised agmt or employe of the Board may, at any time, enter any establishment and examine the same, to ascertain whether the provisions of this act are being observed. Section 14. It is unlawful to hinder, imjiede, or prevent any dulv authorised agent or employe of the Board from entering any estab- lishment in the performance of his duty, or from making any ex- amination ordered in enforcing this act m Seetioii 15. If, upon ezaminatioii ot any estaUirfuBent anj mi- idialeBOine milk or milk food prodnctB is found, mA milk or mUk food product sliall be condemned, properly marked or designated,^ and treated in such a way that it cannot thereafter be used for human food. Section 16. If, upon examination, it is found that any estaWisfli- inent, or any part thereof, or any equipment, is iji an unclean or un- sanitary condition, or is being conducted or used in such a manner as to make it probable that the milk or milk food products therein, or produced thereiii, may be rendered miwholesoBie, or if it is found that sack establiitment or any part ihmwd or any eqnipmeiDLt is being con- duced 4>r used in ?iolation of this act, or if milk is being produced from animals affected with any of the diseases or conditions enumer- ated in section one, clause three of this act, the agent making such examination shall report such unlawful condition to the Board, aad iftall at the same time in writing, notil^ the ownor, lessee, or manager of flm establiflhnmt. Upon DBcdpt of such r^rt, tlie Board, by its ex«cnMTe officer, or otherwise as it may direct, shall notify the owner, lessee, or manager, of the result of the examination, and direct that the unlawful con- dition be remedied within the time specified in the notice. The time so specified shall be not less than twenty-four hours, unless the un- lawful condition mentioned in the notice can, in the opinion of tiie Board, Its ^xecutime officer, or its agent, be remored immediately. If, upon the expiration of the time specified in the notice, the con- dition so reported to exist is not remedied, the Board, by its executive officer, may order the owner or any of his ajorents or employes to dis- continue the use of such establishment for preparing, tranefporting, selling, offering for sale, exposing for sale or giving away any miUc or ndlk food products to be used as human food, or any milk or cream for tlie p«r^Niiiitiou of mOk food products. It is unlawful to use such establishment or any part thereof for transporting, selling, offering for sale, exposing for sale or giving away any milk or milk food products to be used as human food, or any milk or cream for the preparation of milk food products, until the unlawful condition reported to edst hm been remedied to tiie satisfaetiiHi of the officer of the Board. The closing of an establishment, or any part thereof, for the pur- poses enumerated in this section, shall not preclude prosecution for violation of this act. Section 17. It is unlawful for any ag^t of the Board: — 1. fo approve or piss aiqr milk or any mUk food {miuct found to bo uswholeBoine: 61 2. To fail to condemn and mark, and treat in such a way that it cannot thereafter be used as human food, any unwholesome or unwholesome milk food product, found on ezaminatiou' of an en* taUishment to be unfit for human food; 3. To fail to report as required any violation of this act; 4. Directly or indirectly to accept or agree to accept anything of value, monetary or otherwise, given or offered to such agent to influence him in the discharge of his duties; Section 18. It is unlawful for any person to give or offer to give^ directly or indirectly, to an agent or employe of the Board, anything of value, monetary or othenvise, with intent to influence such agent or employe in tilie discharge of his duties under tiie pTovisions of this act. Y Section 19. This .act shall be enforced by the Board through its officers and agents. To that end the Board shall adopt and promul- gate sudi rules and regulations as are deemed necessaiy for the en- forcement l&ecseof. Section 20. Any person violating any of the p»y?isloa0 of this act or any rule or regulaticm . lb. lb. lb. lb. lb. 1 lb. 1 lb. 1 lb. Protoin per cent. 10-11 14-ie 8-9 6-8 0-10 24 19 3 1.6 Fat per cent. 29 3 Calorlea. 300 i,m-i,m l.fOO 1,209 tm hm l.SSO 1,600 1.900 1.4O0 350 4 A striking fact that confronts us when we attempt an analysis of food consumption is that as a people we are, next to England, the heaviest consumers of animal products in the world. Another equally significant fact is that, at the present time, we seem to be the hiirjiest consumers of fats in the world. The following table* sets forth the average conmimption of protein, in grams, per capita per day in the various countries, the grams of protein that are derived from animal sources, ihe grams of protein from plant sources ; the consumption, in grams, of fat per capita per day in the various count) ios, the grams of fat derived from animal sources, the grams^ of fat derived from plant sources, the carbohydrates supplied nnd the calories. 19^''^ ***** BaMo«*« for 2S10-1?14. Tbey appear in Smaller'a Jahrbndt. 1 fie Fmd Bowrm% of ike Natiom^ Halted States, Butlaad, ..... ^^IdHMUBiy J, • * • * ' rnwce, ▲mtilft 100 101 ff? TO flO # 62 m 32 B 3S 57 M 43 It 63 M 62 11 59 1 S i I; 2* n u 44 27 26 62 14 76 62 56 30 22 16 12 3 I *H 2 I & X) Z 4 10 5 14 5 10 « 11 HO 440 385 420 400 450 430 490 2,960 2,900 2,700 2,780 2,500 2.425 2,600 2,360 2SL.hTi* "^.*!Li!?'1fui^^Ll-"J«^^"S<*'i. 1910-1914. Thej aroear In Smaller'* to nlHal dMMcneca te 5. That the high food value of milk as compared with other animal products has been recognized in the past is reflected in the following table wMch shows that thf per capita consnmpticMi of milk In Phila- ddpMa hm on the whole been steaiily increasing from 1887 to 1915. Tim basic price of milk has been nniform from 1901 up to the in creases in price necessitated by tte advance in prices to farmers made in the antumn of 1916. It is to be noted that the per capita con- sumption increased only and most rapidly during this period of stable prices. Per Omimtm OommmpUm of MUh lii PhiladeljMa, 18871916, I I I 1M6 ! 1916 1914, 1913 1912. 1911 Mm, IVIM, 1907. 1906 'i^B* •»••• iMi. , . 19ttl, 1::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::: j. nn Mw, I!"*!! 1890 , 1889 \ 1.907.518 1,683,664 1,657.810 1,631.956 1.606,105 1.580.250 1.549,008 1,528,540 1,502.685 1.476.830 1.450.976 1,4?.8,318 1.408,154 1.378,624 1.349.712 1.321,408 1,293,697 1.267,464 1.242.964 1.218.464 1.193,964 1,169.464 1,144.964 1,120.464 1.095.964 1,071.464 1.046.964 1,022.464 997.964 973.4641 178,428.898 173.735.846 173,418,806 163.. -^67, 091 162,500.579 I50.fi:;8.sis 144,T94.S6i 140.:i62,996 l.'^5.931.188 129,651.082 120,400,970 111,897.365 111.243,033 104,720.142 103.437,344 102.966.S06 99.680,074 94,n9.082 93.959.340 96,478.913 96,219.884 98.539,164 94; 5.39, 994 91.278,774 88,594,420 89.257.884 85,635,162 82,212,160 78.178.712 105 104 106 101 109 97 94 96 92 89 81 79 80 n 78 79 78 76 77 80 82 86 84 74 SS 86 83 lEW5 An analysis of these factors leads inevitably to the condnsion that Increaaes in the price of milk to the consumer will lead in time and especially wiien living costs pindi to the snbstitiition of othar kinds of food for milk and milk products. This snbdtitntion neces- sarily takes place among those of the working class who must get their foods from the cheapest sources. These other foods are just as valuable for adults. That this competition is actual and not the- oretical is shown by the decrease in sales by dealers when prices have gone up. Thus when the price of milk was increased from 8 to 9 ceits per quart in Philad^phia in the autumn of 1916^ the sales by seven large Philadelphia dealers fell off 20% at first and after three montlis came back to a steady loss of tive per cent. It is, therefore, important to the farmer, the dealer and the con- sumer that the price of milk should be kept as low as is possible in view of a fair and economic price to the farmer and reasonable proftti to tiie dealer und^ most c^^l management. Only on such a basis can tlie entire dairy industry be at once developed and sta- bilized. f 6 m SUMMARY OF RECOMMEHDATIOHS Prodttdioii Costs The Coiumissiou lield public lieaiings in PhiladelpMa on November 3 and November 20 and in Baltimore on November 15. At tbese bearings evidence was taken from dairymen and farmers as to pro- ductions costs as well as evidence on other matters such as distribu tion costs. In addition lettery wore sent out asidng farmers to send in on enclosed I'ornis the itemized cost of producing milk. The re- sults of this investigation aie recorded (pages 10 to 14). As to tiie average cost of producing a quart of milk (page 11) Mr. Dnnlop re- ported it as f .04 for the 101 farmers of Blair connty, Pennsylvania. All other fanners reportiiig (86 in number) gave the cost of pro- ducing milk as f.05a per quart; counting the 101 farmers of Blair county as 101 (making 180 in all i the cost of producing a quart of milk was |.046. An to the average cost of producing a quart of milk, 10 reported it as |.03; 35 as $.04; 22 as f.05; and 7 as f.06. It must be renembered that these costs of producing milk were for the year ending September 30, 1016. Charts and figures are given (page 15) showing the general increase in the labor cost and other factors in milk production as revealed hy figures from the na- tional census and similar state and national reports. Items in jm)- duction costs and in receipts per cow, as evidenced by special investi- gations (pages 10 and 11) and as given by a selected list of those farm- ers repljring to the Commission's questions (page 16) are compared and the estimates as to the costs of producing milk during the present winter as given by Prof. Fred Kasmussen are included (pages 17 and 18). Prices received for milk over a term of years and at present are also given (page 12). The tenant farmer who plays a very vital part in the total amounts of milk shipped into the cities concerned usually considers his costs to be lower than does the owner farmer (page 21). The Commission feels that the sanitary condition of milk and the per cent, of solids other than fats should both receive attention in setting the purchase price for milk as well as the content of butter fat (page 23). The supply of milk must be permanent and adequate to all community needs and to this end the price cannot permanently go below the cost of production and tendencies in that direction ought to be foreseen and forestalled (page 23). In determining the price that dairymen ought to receive or ask such facts and condl- • G7 tions must be taken into consideration as the possibility of extensimi to furthei- fields of supply; the production costs of t^iant fanners and others who produce milk as a "side issue^" and lie lower costs of producing milk on lands peculiarly fitted to tids industry (pages 23 to 24). Profits can be increased i. e. production costs lowered: (1) by taking definite and drastic steps to eliminate "boarders;" (2) by in- creasing the yield per cow, per herd and per district; (3) by co- operation among dairy farmers in. cow testing and bull aasMMdations; (4) through cooperative action with governmental authoriiaes in main- taining tlie sanitary standards for milk production as outlined in this report in liie section dealing with the Grading of Milk; (5) through scientific feeding; (6 ) through the keeping of proper cost records and ^ (7) through a more extended use of county farm agents (pages 24, 25 and 26). The testimony on this subject of the dairy experts, Prof. Fred Basmussen of State College of P^uDUBylyania, and Mr. G, £. Wol- cott, Assistant Dairy Husbandman, Bureau of Animal Industiy, United States, United States Departm^t of Agriculture, are given in condensed form (pages 27 to 28). Milk Distribution A study of the sources from which in flie main the cities of the •IHI^ three states concerned draw their milk supply (page 29) clearly in- dicates that all the cities of these central Atlantic States get their milk from practically the same territory and that this territory is getting to be at ever increasing distances from the city. PkUadel- pliia, for instance, gets half its milk from a distance of 50 miles or over, and 60 per cent of it from a distanee of 40 miles or over. Inasmuch as cases are now pending before the Interstate Com- merce Commission for interstate rates and before the Public Service Commission of Pennsylvania for intrastate rates, the Commission decided it was inadvisable to make a special investigation of exist- ing milk rates. On pages 35 and 36 are given tlie present rates and on page 37 the rates proposed 1^ the milk dealers of Philadelphia. While passing no judgment on the reasonableness of the rates that now exist or are proposed, the Commission does call attention (page 37) to the importance of the rates to the farmer, the dealer and the consumer, and emphasizes (pages 37 and 38) the relation of the zone system to prices farmers in all the sections get for their milk. When, as is now the case, the price of milk is f. o. in tlie dty, as it must be to get a common baMs for rates among the formers, the rate ques- tion becomes one that the farmers primarily are concerned with. Tile Commission presents (pages 3942) the itemized elements of cost in distributing milk as presented by certain dealers of Balti- more and l*Mladelphia. These co»t itemsy based on the number of quarts handled and sold, includ© tte cost from and of the re- ceiving stations for pasteurization and bottling, of route delivery, of stable expenses and of ottice expenses. The tables also present the amount of milk delivered per day, the total amount handled in 1916, and loss by evaporation and handling, the number of quarts handled by each of these dealers and the economies, if, any, these dealers see in the elimination of duplication of delivery. The Commission recommends that the milk distribution business be regarded as a public utility, giving its reasons therfor (pages 43 lo 44) discussing the alternatives thereto (page 45) and giving the new duties and privil^^ that will devolve upon the dealers and the state if this principle is recognised (pages 45 and 46) . Tke Oommisfflon points out the value of a steady price to the con- sumer (page 46) and recommends (page 46) that the common carriers centering in the leading cities of the states concerned make available to the press each week the total receipts for milk for the current week. The afreement made by the carriers when this recommenda- tion was submitted to them is given (page 40). f%% Sinr^us MiOi Supply Surplus milk, that is the excess of milk produced at certain seasons of the year above the normal consumption, has a very definite re- lution to the price that is and can be paid to the fanners for milk not only in the months of surplus but also in tiie months of scarcity. The Commission has given (page 47) careful consideration to the possibilities of getting rid of this surplus. These possibilities can be reduced to two: first, storing it for several months; second, special demands for milk at the time of the surplus season. The irst can be effected by changing the milk into butter, cheese or condensed milk or by storage of the cream. The possible special uses of milk during the surplus milk season are for ice cream, for confectionary for condensed milk and similar purposes. After consideration of the facts as to the manufacture and pro- duction of butter, cheese and condensed milk, the Commission finds that in these forms there is little hope for the disposal of the sur- plus. Likewise the use of whole milk for ice cream, for confectionery and for similar special uses, does not come at the time of greatest surplus but as is the case with confectionery at the time of greaitest scarcity or as with ice cream right after the season of greatest sur- plus. Moreover, both of these are year long industries and not essentially seasonal industries. After consideration of these matters, the Commission concludes (page 51) that the principal factor in solving the surplus problem is to reduce the surplus as far as pos- sible by a greater proportion of winter dairying—In other word»— m by having a large proportion of cows freshen in and around August, September and October. To accomplish this purpose, a much grater dillereuce must exist between summer and winter prices for milk than now exists. Gxades of XOk One of the important duties of the Commission has been to study the quality and wholesomeness of the milk supply for ditect con- sumption in the various municipalities of the states conwmed in Its relation to wholesomenesB as food and as to prices (page 52) The main reason for g rading of milk is that Ihe consumer may get what he pays fo^||||i|at the producer may get a price based on what he really seUs. The present inspection of milk, esr)ecially as to its sanitary condition, is entirely inadequate as evidenced by the situtation in Philadelphia (pages 52 and 53). The Oommisffloi lecom- mends the adoption of uniform grades of milk. In addition to cer- tified milk, the Commission recomm^ds thiee grades, grades A, B and C. Standards for each of these grades are given (page 53) as are the recommendations for soMs oter than fat and for fat (page 54). Present legal standards are corapareil Tsith the minimum require- ments recommend (pages 54 and 55). As to the Ucensing and inspect- ion of milk, which is the only means of assuring proper standards in the production and distribution of milk and in the purchase and sales price for milk, the Commission recomm^ids (page 55) that: (1) permits should be issued to producers and (2) to all distributors and receivers of milk; (3) that all milk brought into the state from outside must be inspected and sold under the provisions of a si)ecial permit to be issued by the proper state authority; (4) that the basis of inspection should be the government s scoie card or Its equivalent system; (5) that producers piemises ^ould be inspected as to sanitary conditions at lea«*t three times a year; (6) physical ezaminatlmi of all animals producing milk for sale at least twice a year under the direction of the proper state board; (7) tliat the in- spectors shall be appointed by the State Board of Agricultui-e or Agricultural Commission for a list of men submitted by the State Agricultural College and (8) that milk testers shall he Uemab^ after proper examination. The Oommls8io& apimves in gimeral principles a law (pages 56—61) incorporating these various sugges- tions as drawn up for enactment in Pennsylvania. The Food Value of Milk in its Relation to Price Milk is an absolute requisite for children (page 62) and as com- pared with other animal products (page 62 ) it is relatively a very cheap food. A quart of milk is the equal in food value of eight eggs. Thus with mUk at nine cents a quart and eggs at forty- fl?e cents a dozen, the consumer pays 3J times as much for the same food value when buying eggs when buying milk. With round steak at 28 cents a pounds the consumer pays 2.3 times as much for the same value as is found in a quart of milk at nine cents. But when milk is compared with foods available from plant sources (page 6S) it is found to be not as cheap a food as are plant foods. And in spite of the fact that we as a pei^Ie are, next to England, the heaviest consumers animal products in the world (page 64) the lower food value of milk as compared wilh vegetable sources does lead to a diminution in the amount of milk actually consumed when the price is distinctly raised. This evidenced by the falling off of consump- tion when the price of milk was raised last autumn in Philadelphia (page — ) Moreover, the per capita consumption of milk increased rapidly during the years from 1001 to 1015 when the price was stable at ei^t caits per fuart (page 64). IlMiMlttportant, there- fore, to the farmer, the dealer and the consumer that the price of milk should be kept as low as possible in view of a fair and economic price to the farmer and a reasonable profit to the dealer under care- ful manag^ent Only on such a basis can the entire dairy industry The Commission does not at this time name those institutions and individuals to whom we are and have been under special obligations for assistance of all kinds and for the splendid spirit of co-operation that made it possible for the Commission to get facts from whatever source it desired the facts. Farmery iealers, ^pert% common car- riers, educational institutions and the individual members of the staffs of educational institutions, have all responded to every re- quest of the Commission lor assistance or information with rare exceptions. Moreover this *jP||erous response was made despite the fact that it was often accompanied by no little money cost or personal sacrifice. Acknowledgment is given in most cordial terms for aU this amstance. Bpedal credit must be given to Instructors Bex !Pugwil, E. H. Lansburgh, C. E. BdteU and Bruce B. Mudgett of the University of Pennsylvania who gave largely and freely of their time in compiling data and tables and making charts. Special ack- nowledgment is also due to those who, through Mr. Clarence Sears Kates, gave the financial assistance necessary fo rhaving stenographic records taken of public hearings an^ special investigations made without which the Commission's work would h^?e been unavailing. Acknowledgments Date Due ^ i " - - 1 i 1 * ■ ! \ 1 1 1 1 1 f COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 140381 . JAN 3 li3B i^V*vW;e