The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-05-20
Social Survey Report ON To-
peka Conditions.
Inspector Criticised for Loss Of
Records.
IT IS HANDLED CARELESSLY
As q Result City Is Drinking
Dirty Milk.
Supply Is Good, but Inspection
Is Bad.

Harsh criticism of the city's milk
ordinance and milk inspection is
made in the social survey report OF
Topeka's milk supply by Franz
Schneider, Jr. The situation is de-
scribed as shocking" The report
states that Topeka is drinking dirty
milk as a result of defects in the or
dinance and careless handling in the
inspectors Office. The clause specify
ing that the inspector shall be a vet
erinarian is criticised; also the lack
of application of worthy portions of
the ordinance. 1t is stated that Is
per cent Of the samples of Topeka
milk contain over 100000 bacteria
to the cubic centimeter.
The report follows:
Topeka's milk problem centers In
the inspection Of some III dairy
farms, some Z depots (Which handle
about two-thirds of the supply. and
q large number of grocery stores.
The railroad shipment problem Is alb
sent: and, with a proper inspection
service there is no reason why To-
peka should not have its milk supply
in excellent condition.
To protect the supply the city has
passed a milk ordinance G91O) and
provided milk inspector.
The provisions of this ordinance,
which was passed in October, 1910,
have not been observed in any ade
quate way. Registration of produc-
out, nor has the requirement of tu-
bercu1in testing of cows been en-
forced. No dairy score cards are on
file as is required by ordinance. the
inspector stating that he has made
inspections but has thrown the cards
away, nor have the required annual
reports been filed.
Producers Are ssV-- e."
The actual milk tests employed
are, furthermore, not such as to ade-
quately determine the sanitary char
acter of the city's milk, having been
limited to fat determinations to de-
termine watering, and simple strain
ing through cotton filters to detect
visible dirt. Such tests are quite in
adequate from a sanitary standpoint.
Producers quickly realize that it is
necessary merely to use cotton filters
themselves, whereupon their milk,
which originally may have been very
The best indication of the sanitary
character Of milk can be obtained
only by means of the meteorological
examination, an. operation calling for
some laboratory equipment and some
| skill on the part Of the inspector. It
is the test employed. however. by all
up-to-date milk inspection systems.
and it's use in Topeka is strongly ad-
vocated.
Samples Of milk were taken from
stores and delivery wagons by state
food inspectors, and were subjected
| to chemical and meteorological anal
ysis. Most of the meteorological
! samples were analysed in Topeka by
Prof. L. D. Bushnell of the State Ag-
ricultura1 college, although some
were taken in sterile tubes. properly
| iced, and sent to him at Manhattan.
The chemical samples, twenty-seven
| in number. were all analysed at the
exception of one sample that indi-
! Gated added water, proved satisfac-
| tory.
A Shocking Situation.
The figures represent a shocking
| situation-15 per cent Of the samples
containing over 100000 bacteria to
| the cubic centimeter, and with dearly
months Of November and December.
In Boston nearly two-thirds Of all
these samples would have been illegal.
and Boston's maximum 600 per
cubic centimeter is liberal as COM
pared with other existing municipal
| standards-such as 100000 and 100,
900. The plain indication is that To-
peka is getting dirty milk-some re-
markedly dirty milk; the visible 6lrt
| may be removed, but the milk has
| eVlOentIy Dcen very CdTelcSSly ndnQlcO,
| or Is very old, or both.
| Middlemen's milk. that is, milk pur-
chased in mulk and bottled at depots
and creamerieS, made a poorer show
ing than that sold direct by the pro-
ducers
counts indicate that Topeka has a very
real milk problem; and that a proper
be ginning toward it's solution remains
to be made. Under the existing in
srection many of the producers (and
| some actually within the city llmits)
are unregistered and unknown to the
inspector. Others probably receive 9
| superficial examination, although
| there Is no record on file to show thai
they receive any. In fact, if the only
month to month in the newspapers
| are to be taken as an index, the IN
spection has consisted chiefly in tax
ing samples from pedlers for fat ant
visible dirt determinations.
1t is only fair to say, however, tina
the salary paid the milk inspector
800 a month. is inadequate recon-
peDse for a trained and experienced
man, and that the inspector has beef
made to furnish his own equ:page
The idea of monthly newspaper pub
licity of inspection results is also good
and its continuance is urged. Sucl
consideration cannot, however, bllnt
us to the fundamental inadequacy O
the inspection system.
Suggestions Are Made.
| In considering improvements, GER
tain changes in the milk ordinance ar,
to- be advocated; as for example, tn,
removal of the clause specifying tina
the inspector shall be a veterinarian
provision which is no guarante,
whatever of familiarity with modern
methods of milk inspection, and which
Is very likely to be an embarrassment
III securing a suitable man. This pro
vision is especially worthless if, as ha
been the case, 1t is not intended t,
enforce the requirement of tuberculi1
Testing. 1t is sufficient to point ou
the necessity for more complete regis
! trstion of producers and dealers; 70
the systematic inspection and scoring
of dairy farms; for the institution o
archaeological examination, with tn
provision Of more laboratory facilities