THE DAIRY INDUSTRY.

Waikato Argus, Volume V, Issue 376, 6 December 1898, Page 2

THE DAIRY INDUSTRY.

M R R. R. HUNT'S VISIT. Me R, R. Hunt was to have addressed a meeting of the suppliers to the Te Awamutu creamery at, Te Awamutu last night, but our representative wired us at 8 o'clock that as the weather was so wretched, and in consequence only a poor attendance, it was decided to postpone the meeting imtil 9,30 this morning. The meeting at Kihikihi will be held at 7.30 this evening.

THE BABCOCK TEST. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Iu Thursday's issue you copy a paragraph from the New Zealand Dairyman. The following reply has been sent to the Dairyman. Kindly print it as you did the Dairyman's remarks : Editor New Zealand Dairyman, —The '•named authority" which I quoted in my circular to milk suppliers which you have reprinted in your November issue were two : First, John Oliver, late Principal of the Wester Dairy Institute, Berkley. Published by Crosby, Lockwood and Son, Ludgate Hill, London, 1894. Chapter on testing aud analysis, L : ster - Babeock apparatus, page 345. The quotation is as follows :—The figures on the graduated tube are estimated to show the amount of butter realisable from milk by separation, and it it is desired to know the full proportion of fat in the milk "4 of 1 per cent, is to be added. The second authority, which agrees with this, is the Table issued by IJster and Dursley, the makers of the Lister-Babcock machine. This table appears to have been compiled by G. Embrey, F.C.S., public analyst for the City and Couuty of Gloucester, England, but the important thing to remember is that it was sent out with the testing machine by the people who made the machine, and that it is their statement of what the machine was intended to do. The table is for calculating the total solids in milk for use with the patent Lister-Babcock milk tester. lii using this table it appears that the first thing to be done is to ascertain the total butter-fat contents of the milk. To do this it instructs: "Determine fat by Lister-Babcock tester, add 0.4 to observation/' It then gives an example. It says : " Suppose fat by tester shows 3*2 per cent., by adding o'4 we get the actual amount contained in the milk, viz., 3"6." I content myself with supplying the above, which it appears from your remarks is not generally known. Will you kindly note and publish for information of those who have read your comments. —I am, etc., Wesley Spra.gu, Manager.

MILK TESTING.

TO THE EDITOR. Siu,- I contend that it is through the low percentage on their milk the suppliers receive which has brought all this trouble about. There would have been no thought of co-operation nor anything else if Mr Spragg had advanced us a little more for our milk. The bone of contention has been the low testa, and not without reason either. Now, Sir, I am going to convince Mr Spragg and everybody else that we are not getting fair play. Since this trouble between Mr Spragg and the Union 1 have fought for Mr Spragg. My principle to try a man before hanging him, prove first that the tests are wrong, and then we shall know what to do. If they say there is no other way of testing our milk, well, then, co-operation is the only way to get all there is to be had out of it. On Saturday morning at Mr Spragg's meeting I told several of the suppliers that I was going to test my own milk and that I would publish the result in the Amies. My 36 cows gave for Saturday evening's and Sunday morning's milking 9901 b ; result, 391 b butter without any salt. The milk was skimmed on Monday evening and churned on Tuesday morning. lam certain that the factory would have made at least 41b more butter than I did. For instance, after churning I emptied Saturday night's milk into the pig barrels ; I had no room for any more. Sunday's milk was sweet and was left in the pans in the dairy until next day. A_ friend came into the dairy, and on seeing the pans of milk asked why I did not skim them. On being told that that cream had risen since I skimmed it before he was very much surprised. I contend that I did not get all the separator would get. Some will say who is going to believe him ; we don't know him. Now, this is my proposal. I will take my milk to the factory. Let them take the usual test ; let another be taken and sent to Mr Pond. Thcu put my milk through the separator by itself and churn it by itself; that will prove who is right and who is wrong. 1 am convinced that the testing of Mr Stevens or Mr Pond is correct, but it is in the taking of the sample ; that is where the secret lies. If the Dairy Association will not do this, I will send my milk to anyone who has a separator of their own. I think this is a question that oualit to be settled'above all others. There is one thing, however, 1 would like to mention. 1 had 224 gallons taken from my last mouth's milk. According to the churn test I ought to have 224 added to my month's cheque. When Mr Reynolds had the business Mr Christie tested all my cows separately, twice over. Last year at this time my percentage was 3'4 to 3'6 ; this year I have dried all the low percentage cows, with the result that I am lower than ever—3d to 3'4. According to the churn, my cows are averaging over lib each ; my pasture i« as good as any iu New Zealand. 1 would like to know the reason.—l am, &c, T. James. Waipa, Ngaruawahia, December sth, 1898.