The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-12-10
FAJJLTS IN SYSTEMS
 OF MILK INSPECTION.
Address by Ernest Kelly of the Market Milk Investigations, Department of Agriculture.

l U. S. spoke on present systems Of milk con- l trol in the United States, before the l Massa chusetts Milk Inspectors Asso- 1 citation in Springfield, Mass. The fol- flowing are extracts from MT, kelly's address:
 What is the most efficient system of milk inspection and how may it be in stalled and maintained? A novice will find that one city requires pas | teurization, while another does not; that one city allows bacteria count of 5OO,OOO, while another has a limit of 1000; that this city requires four per cent. fat, that one only per cent. and so on. In collecting data aIong this line last year, I found the fol- lowing surprising variations: Stand ards for bacteria ran all the way from 25,000 up to 100000 per cubic centi- meter 5OO,OOO per c. c. seemed 10 be
 the most popular, thirty-three cities out of sixty-six reporting this figure. Fat standards ranged from 3 per cent. to 3-4 per cent, ffty-one cit les out of one hundred and twenty-two requiring the smaller amount. Total solids showed an even greater Var1a- ton. running from 10.62 per cent. up to 13 per cent.
 No sane minded person would claim that three per cent. milk IS more valuable as a food in Boston than 1t is in San Francisco, or that milk con-
 tainfng 100000 bacteria is harmless in Florida and poisonous in Maine.
 Less Than Carfare For Inspection.
 To carry on this jmportant work, the average city is poorly equipped. Pitifu11y small sums are appropriated
 by city councils and state legislatures to push this campaign of education. Last year received from one hun dred and sixty-two cities letters giv- ing the amounts spent for dairy and milk inspection. These figures ip- clude country and city inspections, the taking of samples, laboratory work. supervisory and clerical work, in fact every item connected with milk in- spection. Twenty-two cities reported that they spent absolutely nothing for such work. One city spent one-tenth of a cent per capita per year, while the highest reported was little town in Georgia which spent nineteen cents per capita, per year. Only forty three of the one hundred and sixty 1 two cities spent five cents or more per capita and the average in cities spend 1 ing anything al all was only A. cents | per capita, per year. Each indivfd- | ual spends less than one carfare, or the cost of a glass of soda, every year, l to protect the most important food | in the world. Is it surprising that | so little interest is manifested by the l average consumer2
 Milk Inspectors Poorly Paid.
 In many places, the position of milk | inspector is so poorly paid that it at !! tracts only political ward hee1efs, hun | gry for any crumb from the loaf of | the commonwealth. I wish to say ent- | phatically that there must be 8 radi- | cal change in he manner of appoint | ing milk inspectors throughout the | country, before the highest degree of | efficiency can be attained. Political domination must cease in public health work, the hands of the life-sav- CT must be free if he is to battle successfully with the waves.
 Not all appointed inspectors are un- fit, by any means; many of them are efficient and conscientious, but the general system is wrong for two req sons: First, it allows the selection of men without any regard for their fit ness, and second, it usually means short terms, so that men are constant ly taking up the work, creating a, 3cate l of chaos by the introduction of difeer- ent systems and ideas.
 Dairy and milk inspectors should be most carefully selected. They should combine at least four qualifications; knowledge of sanitation, know1edee of dairy practices, common sense and tact. Armed with these weapons, ~-v are fully equipped. to conquer the hosts of ignorcnce and prejudice.
 Needed Laws.
 The laws that are enacted should up to certain standards: First, they should be uniform. Laws should be simple. Laws should be enforceable. Lastly, laws should be just and necessary.
 Bacterial Count Not Safeguard.
 There are many adherents to the belief that meteorological examiua- ion of milk is sufficient. cannot agree with such a view for two req sons:
 a ifcaI-x ion iTs 1I1e l utely necessary in order that a defn- te knowledge may be obtained con-Nl 'erning sources of contamination. The character of the contamination can often be more accurately analyzed by l survey of the dairy operations than oy a bacteria count alone.
 Second, the farmer needs instruc- ion in improving conditions his arm The report of bacteria count will show that something is wrong, but will not point out the defective meth 'd responsible for the trouble.
 Undeniably, system of inspection $ pest which combines a sanitary in- pection and a bacteria count, used as ,hecks each on the other.
 From somewhat wide experience
 feel very strongly that the score card S the best instrument for carrying on m efficient sanitary inspection.
 The Sediment Test.
 The sediment test consider most 'aluable as a means of demonstrating \ arelessness in milk production. But s armers may learn to strain their t milk carefully so that it shows little t ediment and still the milk may be [ very bad. Or a milk ( lean in the beginning, may be so poorly refrigerated that it has high acteria count. Sediment is a proof carelessness, but the absence of sed- nent does not by any means, r-ean hat the milk is clean and fit for use.
 City Inspection Needed.
 In concluding, 1 should like to say ust a word to inspections in the lty. No matter what safeguards dis ensed in the city, the good may all pc ndone. A frequent fault is to ex- end so much energy on country in