Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub
[graphic]

Building:

Location: Free from contaminat

ing surroundings.....
Arrangement.---

Separate receiving room.. 1
Separate handling room.. 2
Separate washroom. 1
Separate salesroom.. 1
Separate boiler room. 1

Separate refrigerator room. 1
Construction.

Floors tight, sound, clean-
able.

2 Walls tight, smooth, cleanable..

1 Ceilings smooth, tight, cleanable.

1 Drainage..

2 Floors..

1 Sewer or septic tank.. 1 Provision for light.

2 (10 per cent of floor

space.) Provision for pure air. 2 Screens

1 Minimum of shafting, pul

leys, hangers, exposed
pipes, etc.

1 ApparatusBoiler.

2 (Water heater, 1.) Appliances for cleansing utensils and bottles.

2 Sterilizers for bottles, etc.. 2 Bottling machine.

1 Capping machine

1 Wash bowl, soap, and towel in handling room.

1 Condition..

6 Milk-handling machinery 3 Pipes, couplings, and pumps.

2 Cans.

1 Laboratory and equipment. Water supply Clean and fresh

1 Convenient and abundant. 1

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

2 Freedom from undue exposure

to air Cooling

5 Promptness

2
Below 45° F

3
(45° to 50°, 1.)
Capping bottles by machine... 2
Bottle top protected by cover.. 1
Storage; below 45° F.

4
(45° to 50°, 3; 50° to 55°, 1.)
Protection during delivery - 2

(Iced in summer.)
Bottle caps sterilized

1
Inspection.
Bacteriological work.

3
Inspection of dairies supplying
milk

3
(2 times a year, 2; once a

year, 1.)
Miscellaneous.
Cleanliness of attendants. 2

(Personal cleanliness, 1;

clean, washable clothing,

1.)
Cleanliness of delivery outfit.. 2

Total.

Score for equipment
plus score for methods

equals total score NOTE.-If the conditions in any particular are so exceptionally bad as to be inadequately expressed by a score of “O” the inspector can make a deduction from the total score.

HARRISONBURG, VA., May 24, 1926. Mr. CHARLES W. HOLMAN, Secretary National Cooperative

Mille Producers' Federation,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Referring to your inquiry, with reference to the keeping quality of cream for table use and for the manufacture of ice cream :

Our experience has taught us that sweet cream from milk produced under sanitary conditions and delivered to our plant after same has been properly handled on the farm can be held in storage from two to six days (in some

cases longer) and we can ship this cream to distributors, where in some cases three days will be consumed in transporting and no doubt held for several days before it is served in the various hotels at the markets that we are serving. All reports have been satisfactory from the trade on our cream that has been handled in this manner.

With reference to cream for the manufacture of ice cream : In our judgment
cream can be held for several months if necessary under proper refrigeration
and be satisfactory for the manufacture of ice cream. As a matter of fact,
a number of ice-cream manufacturers that we sell our cream to prefer cream
with some age.
Trusting this is the information desired, I am
Yours very truly,

D. E. SHANK,
Manager, Valley of Virginia

Cooperative Milk Producers' Association. Mr. TABER. Beyond that, I simply wanted to call your attention to regulation 13 of the sanitary code of the State of New York, which applies, by its term, to all municipalities--not only cities, but villages—in the State of New York, where the barn score required for all cities and municipalities of all description is specified for the different grades of milk.

There seems to have been some question in the minds of some people as to whether or not this was in the record, so I made it my business to look that up last night. The scores are different for different purposes. I am simply calling attention to evidence that is already in:

For grade A certified milk, the barn score required is 90; for grade A raw milk, the barn score required is 75; for grade A Pasteurized milk, the barn score required is 68; for grade B raw, the barn score

, required is 60; and for grade B Pasteurized, 55.

I was in hopes that Mr. Parker might be here to-day. The CHAIRMAN. I thought he would be here. He wants to be here on Friday.

Mr. TABER. He was sent a telegram yesterday afternoon, but probably did not get it in time to get here.

The CHAIRMAN. He would like to be heard Friday. Will that be agreeable? Mr. TABER. It will be agreeable so far as I am concerned.

The CHAIRMAN. We will adjourn this hearing then, until Friday, and try to finish it Friday. I would like to get through with it.

(Whereupon, at 10.35 o'clock a. m., the committee proceeded to the consideration of other business.)

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

TO REGULATE THE IMPORTATION OF MILK AND CREAM

FRIDAY, MAY 28, 1926

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY,

Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10.30 o'clock a. m., in room 326, Senate Office Building, Senator George W. Norris presiding.

Present: Senators Norris (chairman), Keys, Gooding, Norbeck, Ransdell, and Heflin.

Present also: Representative Taber, of New York.

[ocr errors]

FURTHER STATEMENT OF CORNELIUS A. PARKER, BOSTON,

MASS.

Mr. PARKER. Mr. Chairman, it has seemed to us that if we could talk this matter over informally with Representative Taber and yourself, there being no other members of the committee present at this time, we could possibly work out some amendments of the bill which would meet most of our objections.

Mr. TABER. As I understand from our informal talk here before the chairman came in, your main objection is to the barn score.

Mr. PARKER. No; not to the barn score. My personal objection to the bill is that it provides definitely for the exclusion of all milk that has not been inspected and does not come within a certain bacteria content. It makes the importer liable criminally for any cream or milk crossing the border which is above that bacterial count.

Now, as to that proposition, we want that matter of the bacteria count amended in such a way as to protect us, because we do not want to be arrested, we do not want to be fined, because some milk gets over the border that runs above a certain bacterial content. You realize that there is no board of health or health regulation, I think, in the country that provides for an imprisonment and fine for a high bacterial content.

There is no question of warning in this bill, such as is provided in the New York health regulations and provided by the Boston regulations, etc., and then excluding the milk or cream if conditions are not met.

Mr. TABER. There is no provision for imprisonment or fine in this bill for milk or cream coming over here above a certain bacterial count.

a

wye

Mr. PARKER. Well, I think there is. We will take that up in just a minute. I think there is. Just a moment. I will get that.

Any person who knowingly violates any of the provisions of this act shall, in addition to all other penalties.

And so forth. Now that is the provision of this act. There is right on the border, as I find since I came to these hearings (I learned it from cross-examination of one of the witnesses) a couple of small creameries that go to both sides of the border to get some milk for their butter. It comes into their creamery, and they have established a circle on both sides of the line. This would make it necessary to have a bacterial content for that milk imported to a butter factory that was the equal of grade A pasteurized milk in New York City, which is really ridiculous. That does not affect any of my clients, but it does effect the fairness of the act.

Now, if the United States Government will provide the bacteriological stations and bacteriologists to make those tests just this side of the border, then we would agree to that kind of a provision; but we want the protection of the United States Government if this law is to go into effect, because bacterial content is something that varies so much with counting. Different chemists will take the saine sample and come out hundreds of thousands of colonies different. It is not an exact science. We have tried that out with chemist after chemist and find very large variations. For that reason want the protection of the United States Government taking the count by à Government bacteriologist at the border. There are between Buffalo and Maine about 30 ports of entry. If you put one bacteriologist at each one of these, and you could hardly gett one for less than $2,000 a year, it would cost $60,000 a year, and it would cost from $500 to $1,000 to set up a laboratory, and you would have to pay rent to house them. It would cost you the first year to start the laboratory out from $500 to $1,000. That is not providing a dollar for dairy inspection. The dairy inspection must cover approximately from 8,000 to 10,000 herds which at some time during the year ship into New England, New York, and Philadelphia. I am speaking of New York State and Philadelphia. The United States has no right to pass a law providing that any milk or cream shall be excluded because of the provisions of this act unless and until the United States has done its part under the act and has provided the stations, inspectors, the chemists to carry out the provisions of the law; and as far as the general provisions of the bill are concerned, we are most interested in that, because we believe that this bill is not primarily drawn for the purpose of protecting the public health.

You have had some evidence of experts on the stand here. I might say to the chairman that we did not know until afterwards the conditions under which that so-called expert evidence was taken.

The secretary of the New England Milk Producers' Association requested the Department of Agriculture to allow one of its inspectors to go over into Canada, without telling the reason, at the expense of the New England Milk Producers' Association, and to cover certain places designated by the New England Milk Producers' Association. If you will allow me to take some State inspectors and go over into Vermont, New Hampshire, and into New York, and let

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »