Evening star., 1939-06-16

the report says, tnaC the DOttle loss
to the distributor might be elm
mated by some form of bottle deposit
which would permit substantial
reduction in the price as this is
very important item in the cost of
distribution. 1t was testified that
the bottles cost the distributor ap-
proXimately 51a cents each and that
losses run to many thousands of
dollars each year"
After citing the net profits of
various distributors, the report
said:
From the record 1t appears that
the large distributors enjoy a very
substantial return on their invest
ments and yet it appears that they
would suffer very material loss in
the event they were compelled to
reduce the price of fluid milk cent
quart. This, however, may be,
and in all probability is, attributable
to their methods of bookkeeping.
The adoption of a standard method
of accounting for all distributors
seems highly desirable
Books of Five Examined.
The report pointed out there are
13 licensed distributors serving milk
to consumers in the District, but
that committee auditors had time
to examine the books of only five.
An effort was made, however, it
said, to select those whose activities
would serve as cross section OF
distributors.
The examination of the records
of the Chestnut Farms-Chevy Chase
Dairy" the report declared, showed
that the president received salary
of $4,000 for the year of 1898 and
the four vice presidents received
combined salaries of $500. Their
net profit for the year of 1888 was
S462, ,205 so, which represents a net
return of 1858 per cent on capital
investment of $2946,3 ,37282. This
profit is figured at one-fifth of a
cent per quart under the present
method of bookkeeping employed at
the dairy
After paying its president $50, 900
for the year of 1888 and its vice
president $4,000, Thompson's Dairy
showed net profit for the year of
$82,817.15, or 9.08 per cent on its
capitalization and 1852 per cent on
its invested capital of $661 ,425. This
represents net profit per quart of
milk sold of approximately one-half
cent.
The Embassy-Fairfax Diaries,
while being separate corporations,
are under the same ownership and
management. For the year of 1888
they each paid their presidents
salaries of $4,000, and the Embassy
Dairy paid its field men l cent per
gallon for all milk delivered or a
total of $l1 ,295.68. and the Fairfax
Dairy paid S6,7O4O2. This latter
dairy had net income of $19,47914,
or l6 per cent return on capitaliza-
ton of $119 ,295.51 or a net return
OF 26 per cent on capital invest
ment of $75,668.71. There were no
records from which the auditors
could ascertain that net profit per
quart of milk sold, and the actual
net profits of both companies were
difficult to ascertain because the
audit disclosed that $17,012.47 of
profits were transferred from the
Embassy Dairy to the Fairfax Dairy,
thereby decreasing the Embassy
profits by that amount.
Model Farms Profit.
THE net profit of the Model
Farms Dairy was $5,133.51, or a
return of 1853 per cent on a capital
investment of $35,958.7S."
THE records of Highland Farms
Dairy were such that the auditor
was unable to ascertain the cost
per quart of milk sold. However,
the net profit for the year of 1888
amounted to $23,004.04, or a return
OF 1898 per cent on a capital in
veStment of SGT ,694.75, without with
drawal of any sum for the payment
OF officers salaries. AS previously
indicated, this distributor sells its
fluid milk through Highs Ice Cream
Co. at II cents per quart, with a
bottle deposit of cents Appar-
emily the distributor accepts the re-
turn of all milk and cream which
IL not sold by Highs Ice Cream Co.,
and this probably has the effect of
reducing the profits to the distribu-
tor and increasing those of Highs
Ice Cream CO..
The report also contains a note of
criticism of the milk inspection
force of the District Health Depart
ment and said that from the testi-
mony OF certain witnesses some of
them have been derelict in their
duties land have not obtained the
results which were expected of
them"
In this connection the report
said:
"A representative of the United
States Public Health Service testi-
fled regarding the United States
Public Health Service code which
has been adopted in 2,100 COM
munities in 80 States, ranging from
communities with a population of
under 1000 to cities the size of
st. Louis and Chicago. This wit
ness testified that the health reg
ulations of the District of Colum-
bla compare favorably with the good
regulations in force throughout the
United States, but he recon-
mended the adoption of the
United States Public Health code
by the District of Columbia as well
as by all other communities in the
United States. This witness further
testified that certain details of the
local health regulations make it
possible for the inspection force to
show preference to one individual
over another and did not permit |
Of proper discretion on the part of |
the inspectors. In this connection
1t should be noted that the testi-
mony of certain witnesses points to
the fact that some inspectors have
been derelict in their duties and
have not obtained the results which |
were expected of them.
10 ~,