South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1915-05-19
TWO MiLKMEN WITH BUT \
SINGLE TYPEWRITER.

| The old love sOng.--"TwO minds
with but a single thought; two hearts
| that beat as one. has found It's
, sequel under the spy-glass of our
| office Sherlock Holmes. within the
past day or two. through two letters
defending Health officer Bosenbury's
milk ordinance. The letters written
on the same quality OF paper, with
the same typewriter. as Mr.. Holmes
makes out. though over different sig
natures, very naturally affords Us Oc-
casion 10 pause. We would, indeed
dislike 10 be confronted By such an
outburst Of criticisms, separated in
source, and free from connivance or
understanding. OF course, we give
the correspondence publicity. We al
ways do that when it keeps within
reasonable bounds. but we beg our
readers to understand that the letter
from the South Bend Sanitary Milk
company. Monday. and the one from
Harry Millman, today, bear all the
earmarks of a mutual composition.
| However. this is only secondary.
1 /
he will effect, through Dr. Bosenbury
and the council, slight amendment
to the ordinance as now submitted
and then assure us of a rule Of rea-
son in the ceruications of the st.
Joseph County Medical society, we will
lend him our little comfort
We will admit of all the terms of
the ordinance except section 19, which
after the other sections have outlined
certain requirements as to the clean
illness of COWS. barn-yards, milk stor-
age, cans. bottles. etc. and GOODNESS
up to the time of delivery, requires
that the milk be clarified and pas
teurized or certified" We will even
admit of the terms of this section. if
it will be made to read that all milk
shall be clarified and certified" be-
fore being offered for sale for human
consumption, whether raw or pas
teuTized." This Is admitted upon the
theory, supported by a considerable of
authority. that pasteurized milk of the
quality prescribed by the ordinance,
no difference how clean the plant, is
not a sufficient guarantee of freedom
from germs-since that is what they
are after.-to justify a community in
turning over to the pasteurizing plants
monopoly Of the community output.
In other words there is reliable
backing for the opinion that the raw
milk delivered TO the consumer under
the conditions required of the dairy
man by the ordinance, up TO the time
that he would deliver it to the pas
teurizing plant, is better for the gen.
eral health than it would be after pas
teurization. Certification merely goes
70 prove that those conditions have
been lived up to, and pasteurization is
no safe substitute for certificatiOn. 1t
merely affords the dairyman a poor
excuse for sighting the requirements
made upon him as TO cleanliness and
cooling on the theory that Qualification
and pasteurizatiOn take the place of
it, and that is the experience, at least
in a great many places, where pas
teurization has been given this OPP
portunity.
And what is the need - all this
cleanliness program If pasteurization
will accomplish all that is claimed for
it? When the ordinance says milk
must, in addition TO this cleanliness
and GOODNESS, be clarified and pas
teurized or certified" there can be
but one construction and that of pas
teurization serving as a substitute for
certifcation. hence virtually casting
the cleanliness and GOODNESS program
70 the winds We speak for people
who prefer raw milk. Perhaps they
are "old fOgies" and maybe SO are
we. but remember. dear ones, that
"old fogies' at least have the disunc-
ton of having grown dry behind the
ears" We are less interested in pas
teurized milk than we are in raw
milk. or in any program of monopO-
lization that leans toward an excuse
for another cent quart-because of
the expense involved in providing a
larger market for the manufacturers
of the pasteurizing plants.
such is the almost invariable sequel;
it is the argument OF the manufac-
urers' statesmen. that pasteurization
tends To wipe out the independent
dairymen. and centralize the milk
market. after which the manipula-
ton of milk prices becomes an easy
matter