Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1901-12-13


people to lose their tempers and call
names because they have no good argu-
ments and must depend on bluffing.
Our "would-be competitors" are squirm-
ing terribly because the United States
beat the DeLsval In the Model Dairy at
the Pan-American, and are resorting to
all sorts OF schemes to break the force
of the victory of the United States over
the DeLaval Separator.
They say we put out "what purports to
be skimmilk record of the work done
by the U. s. machines in the Model
Dairy" We gave the exact statement
signed by the Superintendent of the
Model Dairy, namely: Average test of
the U. S.-.Ol38.
They published astatement also signed
by the superintendent of the Model Dairy
showing average Of 0l61. The Superin-
tendent afterwards found he had made
an error, and stated over his own sigma
ture the correct average for the DeLaval
was .O172; but these "would-be Compel
itors" do not correct the error, but con-
tinue to advertise the figures which they
know to be wrong.
The DeLaval Co. published their Sec
ond period of running, which was in the
best season of the year, from August 9th
llshed our second period from September
Goth to October Both inclusive. All ex-
perenced dairymen know that the u. S.
had the hardest milk to separate, as the
cows were longer IN milk, giving less
quantity, and colder weather coming on /;
yet, with all these conditions against the
U. s., it excelled the DeLaval, as the
superintendent reports show. ct also
beat the DeLayal in the first period, after
adiustment.)
The DeLaval statement reads: "Tests
were from August 9th to September
2Sth," but the record books of the NJ odel
Dairy show no record was made until
the 1lth of August. This gives them
two days to adjust the machine under
the friendly expert operators before any
tests were recorded.
Our statement includes the first run of
our machine with no time allowed for
adjustment.
The records after adjustment of the
first period show that the United States
beat the DeLaval on these runs also.
The DeLaval Co., being aware they
were beaten in the first period. sent their
machine back to the factory to be fixed
over and improved, if possible, for a Sec
ond trial. Their machine was one made
special for that work. The L. $. was
taken from regular stock and was re-
turned to its booth after the first run and
remained there until we were requested
by telegraph from the Superintendent of
the Model Dairy to put in the L. S. to
the necessity for telegrapbing such re.
quest, but telegraphed back we would
comply with the request. We learned
later that the DeLaval was shaking SC
badly that it was not deemed safe to run
it longer, therefore the necessity fol
arranging by telegraph to replace 1t with
the u. S.
The DeLaval Separator is top-heavy
machine filled with 40 to so metal discs
and when they get out Of balance, cause
trouble If continued In use. Therefore
the necessity for immediate change wher
it begins to shake. They claim to run or
slow speed, but always, when in compe'
titiOn with the U. s., attempt to run al
very high speed-sometimes more than
80 per cent higher than they advertise to
run. They know that their separator
cannot run at high speed long, so run il
at high speed only in tests with the L. 5
The u. S. is made more substantially
and does stand high speed, and run:
longer and easier at its speed than the
DeLaval does at its claimed lower speed
The DeLaval Co. advertise a "volun
tary" 90 statement purporting to be
from the engineer of the Model Dairy il
which he says sit took but one-fourth a;
much steam to do our work with it de
Laval as the United States used.
Such a statement is so ridiculous on its
face that no experienced dairyman would
doubt that it was voluntary on the par
of the DeLaval Co.
We have hundreds of statements from
dairymen, who have used both separa
tors, that the u. S. runs easier than tn,
DeLaval and wears much better.
The truth is that Engineer Downy wa
never present when the U. 5. was run
ming, with one or two exceptions, whel
his Department was unable to get sufli
Fer proof Of our statements