The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1889-02-20
The Hanover Tests.
THE CHEMICAL ANALYsIS-THE BEST CREAM
RAISER AND SEPARATOR.


Mr.. Editor We have noticed in most of
the accounts given in the papers of the So
called test made at the New Hampshire Ex-
pertinent Station at the time of the Farmers
Institute at Hanover, January Sth, 9th and
10th, that only partial accounts have been
given The analysis of the skinned milk
from the different apparatus has been
omitted This analysis shows that the
Cooley did its work more thoroughly than
any of the other apparatus, having less fat
left therein, the Stoddard having 12l per
cent, the Centrifugal Separator 32f per cent,
the shallow pans 10 40 per cent and the
johnson S75 per cent more fat left in the
skinned milk than the Cooley.
Every experienced person knows that the
analysis of the skinned milk is the crucial
test of cream-raiser or separator The APP
paratus that gets the most fat out of the
milk must necessarily make the most but
ter, provided il is handled with equal skill
with the others.
The question has been asked why the
Cooley Dreamer was not represented by the
manufacturers at this so-caled test, We
reply, because we We're Il barred by the
printed rules issued by Professor Whitcher,
the director of this station. The rules pro-
hibited il. Again, these printed rules were
so framed as to put the Cooley at "a disad-
vantage, and, as we believe, were made for
the purpose of defeating the Cooley, be-
cause, AT tHt meeting lnt year previous,
when Professor Whitcher attempted to
force through similar test, but failed, we
gave our reasons at that meeting why tests
under his rules handicapped the Cooley, and
supported our reasons by the best authori-
ties in this country and Europe, and offered
to have tests any time, using each appa-
ratus as it is used in everyday practice,
Thereupon an agreement was made and an
nounced to the meeting that the tests would
be made at Mr.. l.. T. Hazen's creamery
among his patrons, beginning when the
patrons began to bring in the milk. We
notified Mr.. Hazen and the officers of the
association four different times in writing
that we were ready to carry out our agree
ment. Excuse after excuse was made and
we were unable to get the tests as agreed.
The reason is plain the friends of other
apparatus did not propose to have fair tests
with the apparatus used as in dairy prac-
tice, but to have tests under arbitrary rules,
handiCapping the Cooley.
Then again this year Professor Whitcher
issued printed rules still more arbitrary
than last season. We entered protest and
kent out of the contest, as we knew the
Cooley could not do its best under such
rules. The professor had Cooley Dreamer,
but did not use it. He took out four of the
cans and had them set in box with the
Johnson cans, which Johnson cans came
out of the test the poorest of all. While
Professor Whicher would not allow us to
run the Cooley, he did allow the expert
of the Stoddard Creamery to operate that
apparatus. allowed him TO ice his creamery
two hours before the milk was divided or
before the Cooley was iced and allowed the
StOddard to take all of his portion of the
milk for the first setting from the top of the
large can in which the milk was stored. 1t
was stirred with a stick about an inch in
diameter around and around, but not from
the bottom. AT the second setting the
Separator was allowed to take the top of
/ a.. . Il
his expert assistant, Every experienced
person knows that the top is richer in cream
than below, and stirring around and around
will not overcome it, There is abundance
of authority on this point Did any one
ever know fair test to be made in this
way? Each apparatus should have been
allowed to take out a small measure full at
a time, alternating with all in the test until
the full amount of milk was divided and
evened up on the scales
His method was unscientifc and unfair,
but bear in mind that, Notwithstanding the
professors arbitrary rules and unfair
methods, the Cooley did raise and separate
the cream the most thoroughly, and would
have been still further ahead if it had been
run according to its published rules
The question arises, Why then did not the
| Cooley make the most butter at the So
called test? The answer is, Because the
cream was not properly handled. 1t was
| not ripened and Went of in the butter
milk, as the analysis of the butter.mllk
plainly shows, there being 800 per cent of
lat left therein This analysis has also thus
far been omitted from the publications.
The analysis of the whole milk before
setting showed only 1896 per cent of fat, so it
will he seen that the butter-mik from the
Cooley had almost as large proportion OF
| fat as the whole milk and proves that the
cream was not properly handled and that
a large part of the butter went off in the
butter-nilk, which was no fault of the
Cooley Dreamer. The Cooley got the cream
entific handling of the cream did not get
what butter there was in the cream Had
he handled it properly the Cooley Creamer
must necessarily have made the most but