1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Dairy and Dairy-Farming

​DAIRY and DAIRY-FARMING (from the Mid. Eng. deieris, from dey, a maid-servant, particularly one about a farm; cf. Norw. deia, as in bu-deia, a maid in charge of live-stock, and in other compounds; thus “dairy” means that part of the farm buildings where the “dey” works). Milk, either in its natural state, or in the form of butter and cheese, is an article of diet so useful, wholesome and palatable, that dairy management, which ​includes all that concerns its production and treatment, constitutesa most important branch of husbandry. The physicalconditions of the different countries of the world have determinedin each case the most suitable animal for dairy purposes. TheLaplander obtains his supplies of milk from his rein-deer, theroving Tatar from his mares, and the Bedouin of the desertfrom his camels. In the temperate regions of the earth manypastoral tribes subsist mainly upon the milk of the sheep. Insome rocky regions the goat is invaluable as a milk-yielder; andthe buffalo is equally so amid the swamps and jungles of tropicalclimates. The milking of ewes was once a common practice inGreat Britain; but it has fallen into disuse because of its hurtfuleffects upon the flock. A few milch asses and goats are hereand there kept for the benefit of infants or invalids; but withthese exceptions the cow is the only animal now used for dairypurposes.

No branch of agriculture underwent greater changes duringthe closing quarter of the 19th century than dairy-farming;within the period named, indeed, the dairying industry may besaid to have been revolutionized. The two great factors in thismodification were the introduction about the year 1880 of thecentrifugal cream-separator, whereby the old slow system ofraising cream in pans was dispensed with, and the inventionsome ten years later of a quick and easy method of ascertainingthe fat content of samples of milk without having to resort tothe tedious processes of chemical analysis. About the year 1875the agriculturists of the United Kingdom, influenced by variouseconomic causes, began to turn their thoughts more intently inthe direction of dairy-farming, and to the increased productionof milk and cream, butter and cheese. On the 24th of October1876 was held the first London dairy show, under the auspicesof a committee of agriculturists, and it has been followed by asimilar show in every subsequent year. The official report of thepioneer show stated that “there was a much larger attendanceand a greater amount of enthusiasm in the movement than eventhe most sanguine of its promoters anticipated.” On the daynamed Professor J. Prince Sheldon read at the show a paper onthe dairying industry, and proposed the formation of a societyto be called the British Dairy Farmers’ Association. This wasunanimously agreed to, and thus was founded an organizationwhich has since been closely identified with the development ofthe dairying industry of the United Kingdom. In its earlierpublications the Association was wont to reproduce from HouseholdWords the following tribute to the cow:—

The association has, directly or indirectly, brought aboutmany valuable reforms and improvements in dairying. ItsLondon shows have provided, year after year, a variety ofobject-lessons in cheese, in butter and in dairy equipment. Inorder to demonstrate to producers what is the ideal to aim at,there is nothing more effective than a competitive exhibition ofproducts, and the approach to uniform excellence of characterin cheese and butter of whatever kinds is most obvious to thosewho remember what these products were like at the first two orthree dairy shows. Simultaneously there has been a no lessmarked advance in the mechanical aids to dairying, including,in particular, the centrifugal cream-separator, the crude germof which was first brought before the public at the internationaldairy show held at Hamburg in the spring of 1877. The associationin good time set the example, now beneficially followed inmany parts of Great Britain, of providing means for technicalinstruction in the making of cheese and butter, by the establishmentof a dairy school in the Vale of Aylesbury, subsequentlyremoving it to new and excellent premises at Reading, whereit is known as the British Dairy Institute. The initiation ofbutter-making contests at the annual dairy shows stimulatedthe competitive instinct of dairy workers, and afforded thepublic useful object-lessons; in more recent years milkingcompetitions have been added. Milking trials and butter testsof cows conducted at the dairy shows have afforded results ofmuch practical value. Many of the larger agricultural societieshave found it expedient to include in their annual shows a workingdairy, wherein butter-making contests are held and publicdemonstrations are given.

What are regarded as the dairy breeds of cattle is illustratedby the prize schedule of the annual London dairy show, in whichsections are provided for cows and heifers of the Shorthorn,Jersey, Guernsey, Red Polled, Ayrshire, Kerry and Dexterbreeds (see Cattle). A miscellaneous class is also provided,the entries in which are mostly cross-breds. There are likewiseclasses for Shorthorn bulls, Jersey bulls, and bulls of any otherpure breed, but it is stipulated that all bulls must be of proveddescent from dams that have won prizes in the milking trials orbutter tests of the British Dairy Farmers’ Association or otherhigh-class agricultural society. The importance of securingdairy characters in the sire is thus recognized, and it is notifiedthat, as the object of the bull classes is to encourage the breedingof bulls for dairy purposes, the prizes are to be given solely toanimals exhibited in good stock-getting condition.

The award of prizes in connexion with milking trials cannotbe determined simply by the quantity of milk yielded in a givenperiod, say twenty-four hours. Other matters must obviouslybe taken into consideration, such as the quality of the milk andthe time that has elapsed since the birth of the last calf. Withregard to the former point, for example, it is quite possible forone cow to give more milk than another, but for the milk of thesecond cow to include the larger quantity of butter-fat. Theawards are therefore determined by the total number of pointsobtained according to the following scheme:—

This method of award is at present the best that can be devised,but it is possible that, as experience accumulates, some rearrangementof the points may be found to be desirable. Omittingmany of the details, Table I. shows some of the results in thecase of Shorthorn and Jersey prize cows. The days “in milk”denote in each case the number of days that have elapsed sincecalving; and if the one day’s yield of milk is desired in gallons,it can be obtained approximately^[1] by dividing the weight in ​pounds by 10: thus, the Shorthorn cow Heroine III. gave 52.4 ℔,or 5.24 gallons, of milk per day. The table is incidentally ofinterest as showing how superior as milch kine are the unregisteredor non-pedigree Shorthorns—which are typical ofthe great majority of dairy cows in the United Kingdom—ascompared with the pedigree animals entered, or eligible for entry,in Coates’s Herd-Book. The evening’s milk, it should be added,is nearly always richer in fat than the morning’s, but the percentagesin the table relate to the entire day’s milk.

The milking trials are based upon a chemical test, as it isnecessary to determine the percentage of fat and of solids otherthan fat in each sample of milk. The butter test, on the otherhand, is a churn test, as the cream has to be separated fromthe milk and churned. The following is the scale of pointsused at the London dairy show in making awards in buttertests:—

The manner in which butter tests are decided will be renderedclear by a study of Table II. It is seen that whilst the muchlarger Shorthorn cows—having a bigger frame to maintainand consuming more food—gave both more milk and morebutter in the day of twenty-four hours, the Jersey milk wasmuch the richer in fat. In the case of the first-prize Jerseythe “butter ratio,” as it is termed, was excellent, as only 13.83 ℔of milk were required to yield 1 ℔ of butter; in the case of thesecond-prize Shorthorn, practically twice this quantity (or27.11 lb) was needed. Moreover, if the days in milk are takeninto account, the difference in favour of the Jersey is seen tobe 123 days.

The butter-yielding capacity of the choicest class of buttercows, the Jerseys, is amply illustrated in the results of the buttertests conducted by the English Jersey Cattle Society over theperiod of fourteen years 1886 to 1899 inclusive. These testswere carried out year after year at half a dozen different shows,and the results are classified in Table III. according to the ageof the animals. The average time in milk is measured by thenumber of days since calving, and the milk and butter yieldsare those for the day of twenty-four hours. The last columnshows the “butter ratio.” This number is lower in the caseof the Jerseys than in that of the general run of dairy cows.The average results from the total of 1023 cows of the variousages are:—One day’s milk, 32 ℔ 21/4 oz., equal to about 3 gallonsor 12 quarts; one day’s butter, 1 ℔ 103/4 oz.; butter ratio,19.13 or about 16 pints of milk to 1 ℔ of butter. Individualyields are sometimes extraordinarily high. Thus at the Tringshow in 1899 the three leading Jersey cows gave the followingresults:—

The eight prize-winning Jerseys on this occasion, with anaverage weight of 916 ℔ and an average of 117 days in milk,yielded an average of 2 ℔ 9 oz. of butter per cow in the twenty-fourhours, the butter ratio working out at 16.69. At the Tringshow of 1900 a Shorthorn cow Cherry gave as much as 4 ℔ 41/2 oz.of butter in twenty-four hours; she had been in milk 41 days,and her butter ratio worked out at 15.79,which is unusually good for a big cow.

In the six years 1895 to 1900 inclusive285 cows of the Shorthorn, Jersey, Guernseyand Red Polled breeds were subjected tobutter tests at the London dairy show, andthe general results are summarized inTable IV.

Although cows in the showyard mayperhaps be somewhat upset by theirunusual surroundings, and thus not yieldso well as at home, yet the average resultsof these butter-test trials over a number ofyears are borne out by the private trials thathave taken place in various herds. The trials have, moreover,brought into prominence the peculiarities of different breeds,such as: (a) that the Shorthorns, Red Polls and Kerries, beingcattle whose milk contains small fat globules, are better formilk than the Jerseys and Guernseys, whose milk is richer,containing larger-sized fat globules, and is therefore moreprofitable for converting into butter; (b) that the weights ofthe animals, and consequently the proportionate food, mustbe taken into account in estimating the cost of the dairyproduce; (c) that the influence of the stage reached in theperiod of lactation is much more marked in some breeds than inothers.

An instructive example of the milk-yielding capacity of Jerseycows is afforded in the carefully kept records of Lord Rothschild’sherd at Tring Park, Herts. Overleaf are given the figures forfour years, the gallons being calculated at the rate of 10 ℔ ofmilk to the gallon. ​

The average over the four years works out at about 630 gallonsper cow per annum.

Cows of larger type will give more milk than the Jerseys,but it is less rich in fat. The milk record for the year 1900of the herd of Red Polled cattle belonging to Mr Garrett Taylor,Whitlingham, Norfolk, affords a good example. The cows inthe herd, which had before 1900 produced one or more calves,and in 1900 added another to the list, being in full profit thegreater part of the year, numbered 82. Their total yield was521,950 ℔ of milk, or an average of 6365 ℔—equivalent toabout 636 gallons—per cow. In 1899 the average yield of 96cows was 6283 ℔ or 628 gallons; in 1898 the average yield of75 cows was 6473 ℔ or 647 gallons. Of cows which droppeda first calf in the autumn of 1899, one of them—Lemon—milkedcontinuously for 462 days, yielding a total of 7166 ℔ of milk,being still in milk when the herd year closed on the 27th ofDecember. Similar cases were those of Nora, which gave 9066 ℔of milk in 455 days; Doris, 8138 ℔ in 462 days; Brisk, 9248 ℔in 469 days; Della, 8806 ℔ in 434 days, drying 28 days beforethe year ended; and Lottie, 6327 ℔ in 394 days, also drying28 days before the year ended; these were all cows with theirfirst calf. Eight cows in the herd gave milk on every day ofthe 52 weeks, and 30 others had their milk recorded on 300 daysor more. Three heifers which produced a first calf before the11th of April 1900, averaged in the year 4569 ℔ of milk, orabout 456 gallons. In 1900 three cows, Eyke Jessie, Kathleenand Doss, each gave over 10,000 ℔, or 1000 gallons of milk;four cows gave from 9000 ℔ to 10,000 ℔, two from 8000 ℔ to9000 ℔, 17 from 7000 ℔ to 8000 ℔, 19 from 6000 ℔ to 7000 ℔,30 from 5000 ℔ to 6000 ℔, and 16 from 4000 ℔ to 5000 ℔.The practice, long followed at Whitlingham, of developingthe milk-yielding habit by milking a young cow so long as shegives even a small quantity of milk daily, is well supported bythe figures denoting the results.

Though milking trials and butter tests are not usually availableto the ordinary dairy farmer in the management of his herd,it is, on the other hand, a simple matter for him to keep whatis known as a milk register. By a milk register is meant a recordof the quantity of milk yielded by a cow. In other words, itis a quantitative estimation of the milk the cow gives. It affordsno information as to the quality of the milk or as to its butter-yieldingor cheese-yielding capacity. Nevertheless, by its aidthe milk-producing capacity of a cow can be ascertained exactly,and her character in this respect can be expressed by means offigures about which there need be no equivocation. A greateror less degree of exactness can be secured, according to thegreater or less frequency with which the register is taken. Evena weekly register would give a fair idea as to the milk yields of acow, and would be extremely valuable as compared with noregister at all.

The practice of taking the milk register, as followed in a well-knowndairy, may be briefly described. The cows are alwaysmilked in the stalls, and during summer they are brought intwice a day for this purpose. After each cow is milked, thepail containing the whole of her milk is hung on a spring balancesuspended in a convenient position, and from the gross weightindicated there is deducted the already known weight of thepail.^[2] The difference, which represents the weight of milk, isrecorded in a book suitably ruled. This book when open presentsa view of one week’s records. In the left-hand column are thenames of the cows; on the right of this are fourteen columns,two of which receive the morning and evening record of eachcow. In a final column on the right appears the week’s totalyield for each cow; and space is also allowed for any remarks.Fractions of a pound are not entered, but 18 ℔ 12 oz. wouldbe recorded as 19 ℔, whereas 21 ℔ 5 oz. would appear as 21 ℔,so that a fraction of over half a pound is considered as a wholepound, and a fraction of under half a pound is ignored. Bydividing the pounds by 10 the yield in gallons is readily ascertained.

Every dairy farmer has some idea, as to each of his cows,whether she is a good, a bad or an indifferent milker, but suchknowledge is at best only vague. By the simple means indicatedthe character of each cow as a milk-producer is slowly but surelyrecorded in a manner which is at once exact and definite. Sucha record is particularly valuable to the farmer, in that it showsto him the relative milk-yielding capacities of his cows, and thusenables him gradually to weed out the naturally poor milkersand replace them by better ones. It also guides him in regulatingthe supply of food according to the yield of milk. The registerwill, in fact, indicate unerringly which are the best milk-yieldingcows in the dairy, and which therefore are, with the milkingcapacity in view, the best to breed from.

The simplicity and inexpensiveness of the milk register mustnot be overlooked. These are features which should commendit especially to the notice of small dairy farmers, for with amoderate number of cows it is particularly easy to introducethe register. But even with a large dairy it will be found that,as soon as the system has got fairly established, the additionaltime and trouble involved will sink into insignificance whencompared with the benefits which accrue.

The importance of ascertaining not only the quantity, but alsothe quality of milk is aptly illustrated in the case of two cows atthe Tring show, 1900. The one cow gave in 24 hours 41/2 gallonsof milk, which at 7d. per gallon would work out at about 2s. 7d.;she made 2 ℔ 12 oz. of butter, which at 1s. 4d. per ℔ wouldbring in 3s. 8d.; consequently by selling the milk the ownerlost about 1s. 1d. per day. The second cow gave 51/3 gallons ofmilk, which would work out at 3s. 1d.; she made 1 ℔ 12 oz.of butter, which would only be worth 2s. 4d., so that by convertingthe milk into butter the owner lost 9d. per day.

The colour of milk is to some extent an indication of its quality—thedeeper the colour the better the quality. The colour dependsupon the size of the fat globules, a deep yellowish colourindicating large globules of fat. When the globules are of largesize the milk will churn more readily, and the butter is betterboth in quality and in colour.

The following fifty dairy rules relating to the milking andgeneral management of cows, and to the care of milk and dairyutensils, were drawn up on behalf of, and published by, theUnited States department of agriculture at Washington. Theyare given here with a few merely verbal alterations:—

In their comprehensive paper relating to the feeding of animalspublished in 1895, Lawes and Gilbert discussed amongst otherquestions that of milk production, and directed attention tothe great difference in the demands made on the food—on theone hand for the production of meat (that is, of animal increase),and on the other for the production of milk. Not only, however,do cows of different breeds yield different quantities of milk,and milk of characteristically different composition, but individualanimals of the same breed have very different milk-yieldingcapacity; and whatever the capacity of a cow maybe, she has a maximum yield at one period of her lactation,which is followed by a gradual decline. Hence, in comparingthe amounts of constituents stored up in the fattening increaseof an ox with the amounts of the same constituents removedin the milk of a cow, it is necessary to assume a wide range ofdifference in the yield of milk. Accordingly, Table V. shows theamounts of nitrogenous substance, of fat, of non-nitrogenoussubstance not fat, of mineral matter, and of total solid matter,carried off in the weekly yield of milk of a cow, on the alternativeassumptions of a production of 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 or 20quarts per head per day. For comparison, there are given at thefoot of the table the amounts of nitrogenous substance, of fat,of mineral matter, and of total solid matter, in the weeklyincrease in live-weight of a fattening ox of an average weightof 1000 ℔—on the assumption of a weekly increase, first, of10 ℔, and, secondly, of 15 ℔. The estimates of the amountsof constituents in the milk are based on the assumption thatit will contain 12.5% of total solids—consisting of 3.65 albuminoids,3.50 butter-fat, 4.60 sugar and 0.75 of mineral matter.The estimates of the constituents in the fattening increase ofoxen are founded on determinations made at Rothamsted.

With regard to the very wide range of yield of milk per headper day which the figures in the following table assume, it maybe remarked that it is by no means impossible that the sameanimal might yield the largest amount, namely, 20 quarts, or5 gallons, per day near the beginning, and only 4 quarts, or ​1 gallon, or even less, towards the end of her period of lactation.At the same time, an entire herd of, for example, Shorthornsor Ayrshires, of fairly average quality, well fed, and includinganimals at various periods of lactation, should not yield anaverage of less than 8 quarts, or 2 gallons, and would seldomexceed 10 quarts, or 21/2 gallons, per head per day the year round.

For the sake of illustration, an average yield of milk of 10quarts, equal 21/2 gallons, or between 25 and 26 ℔ per head perday, may be assumed, and the amount of constituents in theweekly yield at this rate may be compared with that in theweekly increase of the fattening ox at the higher rate assumedin the table, namely, 15 ℔ per 1000 ℔ live-weight, or 1.5%per week. It is seen that whilst of the nitrogenous substanceof the food the amount stored up in the fattening increase ofan ox would be only 1.13 ℔, the amount carried off as such inthe milk would be 6.6 ℔, or nearly six times as much. Ofmineral matter, again, whilst the fattening increase would onlyrequire about 0.22 ℔, the milk would carry off 1.35 ℔, or againabout six times as much. Of fat, however, whilst the fatteningincrease would contain 9.53 ℔, the milk would contain only6.33 ℔, or only about two-thirds as much. On the other hand,whilst the fattening increase contains no other non-nitrogenoussubstance than fat, the milk would carry off 8.32 ℔ in the formof milk-sugar. This amount of milk-sugar, reckoned as fat,would correspond approximately to the difference between thefat in the milk and that in the fattening increase.

It is evident, then, that the drain upon the food is very muchgreater for the production of milk than for that of meat. Thisis especially the case in the important item of nitrogenoussubstance; and if, as is frequently assumed, the butter-fatof the milk is at any rate largely derived from the nitrogenoussubstance of the food, so far as it is so at least about two parts ofsuch substance would be required to produce one of fat. Onsuch an assumption, therefore, the drain upon the nitrogenoussubstance of the food would be very much greater than thatindicated in the table as existing as nitrogenous substance inthe milk. To this point further reference will be made presently.

Attention may next be directed to the amounts of food, andof certain of its constituents, consumed for the production ofa given amount of milk. This point is illustrated in Table VI.,which shows the constituents consumed per 1000 ℔ live-weightper day in the case of the Rothamsted herd of 30 cows in thespring of 1884. On the left hand are shown the actual amountsof the different foods consumed per 1000 ℔ live-weight per day;and in the respective columns are recorded—first the amounts oftotal dry substance which the foods contained, and then theamounts of digestible nitrogenous, digestible non-nitrogenous(reckoned as starch), and digestible total organic substancewhich the different foods would supply; these being calculatedaccording to Lawes and Gilbert’s own estimates of the percentagecomposition of the foods, and to Wolff’s estimates of the proportionof the several constituents which would be digestible.

The first column shows that the amount of total dry substanceof food actually consumed by the herd, per 1000 ℔ live-weightper day, was scarcely 20 ℔ whilst Wolff’s^[3] estimated requirement,as stated at the foot of the table, is 24 ℔. But his rationwould doubtless consist to a greater extent of hay and straw-chaff,containing a larger proportion of indigestible and effetewoody fibre. The figures show, indeed that the Rothamstedration supplied, though nearly the same, even a somewhat lessamount of total digestible constituents than Wolff’s.

Of digestible nitrogen substance the food supplied 2.64 ℔ per day, whilst the amount estimated to be required for sustenancemerely is 0.57 ℔; leaving, therefore, 2.07 ℔ availablefor milk production. The 23.3 ℔ of milk yielded per 1000 ℔live-weight per day would, however, contain only 0.85 ℔; andthere would thus remain an apparent excess of 1.22 ℔ of digestiblenitrogenous substance in the food supplied. But against theamount of 2.64 ℔ actually consumed, Wolff’s estimate of theamount required for sustenance and for milk-production is2.5 ℔, or but little less than the amount actually consumed atRothamsted. On the assumption that the expenditure ofnitrogenous substance in the production of milk is only in theformation of the nitrogenous substances of the milk, there wouldappear to have been a considerable excess given in the food.But Wolff’s estimate assumes no excess of supply, and that thewhole is utilized; the fact being that he supposes the butter-fatof the milk to have been derived largely, if not wholly, from thealbuminoids of the food.

It has been shown that although it is possible that some ofthe fat of a fattening animal may be produced from the albuminoidsof the food, certainly the greater part of it, if not thewhole, is derived from the carbohydrates. But the physiologicalconditions of the production of milk are so different from thosefor the production of fattening increase, that it is not admissibleto judge of the sources of the fat of the one from what maybe established in regard to the other. It has been assumed,however, by those who maintain that the fat of the fatteninganimal is formed from albuminoids, that the fat of milk mustbe formed in the same way. Disallowing the legitimacy of sucha deduction, there do, nevertheless, seem to be reasons for supposingthat the fat of milk may, at any rate in large proportion,be derived from albuminoids.

Thus, as compared with fattening increase, which may ina sense be said to be little more than an accumulation of reservematerial from excess of food, milk is a special product, of aspecial gland, for a special normal exigency of the animal.Further, whilst common experience shows that the herbivorousanimal becomes the more fat the more, within certain limits, itsfood is rich in carbohydrates, it points to the conclusion that boththe yield of milk and its richness in butter are more connectedwith a liberal supply of the nitrogenous constituents in the food.Obviously, so far as this is the case, it may be only that therebymore active change in the system, and therefore greater activityof the special function, is maintained. The evidence at commandis, at any rate, not inconsistent with the supposition that a gooddeal of the fat of milk may have its source in the breaking upof albuminoids, but direct evidence on the point is still wanting;and supposing such breaking up to take place in the gland, thequestion arises—What becomes of the by-products? Assuming,however, that such change does take place, the amount of nitrogenoussubstance supplied to the Rothamsted cows would be less ​in excess of the direct requirement for milk-production than thefigures in the table would indicate, if, indeed, in excess at all.

The figures in the column of Table VI. relating to the estimatedamount of digestible non-nitrogenous substance reckoned asstarch show that the quantity actually consumed was 11.71 ℔,whilst the amount estimated by Wolff to be required was 12.5 ℔,besides 0.4 ℔ of fat. The figures further show that, deducting7.4 ℔ for sustenance from the quantity actually consumed, therewould remain 4.31 ℔ available for milk-production, whilst onlyabout 3.02 ℔ would be required supposing that both the fatof the milk and the sugar had been derived from the carbohydratesof the food; and, according to this calculation, therewould still be an excess in the daily food of 1.29 ℔. It is to beborne in mind, however, that estimates of the requirement formere sustenance are mainly founded on the results of experimentsin which the animals are allowed only such a limited amountof food as will maintain them without either loss or gain when atrest. But physiological considerations point to the conclusionthat the expenditure, independently of loss or gain, will be thegreater the more liberal the ration, and hence it is probablethat the real excess, if any, over that required for sustenanceand milk-production would be less than that indicated in thetable, which is calculated on the assumption of a fixed requirementfor sustenance for a given live-weight of the animal.Supposing that there really was any material excess of eitherthe nitrogenous or the non-nitrogenous constituents suppliedover the requirement for sustenance and milk-production,the question arises—Whether, or to what extent, it conducedto increase in live-weight of the animals, or whether it was inpart, or wholly, voided, and so wasted.

As regards the influence of the period of the year, with itscharacteristic changes of food, on the quantity and compositionof the milk, the first column of the second division of Table VII.shows the average yield of milk per head per day of the Rothamstedherd, averaging about 42 cows, almost exclusively Shorthorns,in each month of the year, over six years, 1884 to 1889inclusive; and the succeeding columns show that amounts ofbutter-fat, of solids not fat, and of total solids in the averageyield per head per day in each month of the year, calculated,not according to direct analytical determinations made atRothamsted, but according to the results of more than 14,000analyses made, under the superintendence of Dr Vieth, in thelaboratory of the Aylesbury Dairy Company in 1884;^[4] thesamples analysed representing the milk from a great manydifferent farms in each month.

It should be stated that the Rothamsted cows had cakethroughout the year; at first 4 ℔ per head per day, but afterwardsgraduated according to the yield of milk, on the basisof 4 ℔ for a yield of 28 ℔ of milk, the result being that thenthe amount given averaged more per head per day during thegrazing period, but less earlier and later in the year. Bran,hay and straw-chaff, and roots (generally mangel), were alsogiven when the animals were not turned out to grass. Thegeneral plan was, therefore, to give cake alone in addition whenthe cows were turned out to grass, but some other dry food,and roots, when entirely in the shed during the winter and earlyspring months.

Referring to the column showing the average yield of milkper head per day each month over the six years, it will be seenthat during the six months January, February, September,October, November and December the average yield wassometimes below 20 ℔ and on the average only about 21 ℔of milk per head per day; whilst over the other six monthsit averaged 27.63 ℔, and over May and June more than 31 ℔per head per day. That is to say, the quantity of milk yieldedwas considerably greater during the grazing period than whenthe animals had more dry food, and roots instead of grass.

Next, referring to the particulars of composition, accordingto Dr Vieth’s results, which may well be considered as typicalfor the different periods of the year, it is seen that the specificgravity of the milk was only average, or lower than average,during the grazing period, but rather higher in the earlier andlater months of the year. The percentage of total solids wasrather lower than the average at the beginning of the year,lowest during the chief grazing months, but considerably higherin the later months of the year, when the animals were kept inthe shed and received more dry food. The percentage of butter-fatfollows very closely that of the total solids, being the lowestduring the best grazing months, but considerably higher thanthe average during the last four or five months of the year, whenmore dry food was given. The percentage of solids not fat wasconsiderably the lowest during the latermonths of the grazing period, but average,or higher than average, during the earlierand later months of the year. It may beobserved that, according to the averagepercentages given in the table, a gallonof milk will contain more of bothtotal solids and of butter-fat in the latermonths of the year; that is, when thereis less grass and more dry food given.

Turning to the last three columns of thetable, it is seen that although, as hasbeen shown, the percentage of the severalconstituents in the milk is lower duringthe grazing months, the actual amountscontained in the quantity of milk yieldedper head are distinctly greater duringthose months. Thus, the amount of butter-fatyielded per head per day is above theaverage of the year from April to Septemberinclusive; the amounts of solidsnot fat are over average from April toAugust inclusive; and the amounts oftotal solids yielded are average, or overaverage, from April to August inclusive.

From the foregoing results it is evidentthat the quantity of milk yielded per head is very much thegreater during the grazing months of the year, but that thepercentage composition of the milk is lower during that periodof higher yield, and considerably higher during the months ofmore exclusively dry-food feeding. Nevertheless, owing to themuch greater quantity of milk yielded during the grazingmonths, the actual quantity of constituents yielded per Cow isgreater during those months than during the months of higherpercentage composition but lower yield of milk per head. Itmay be added that a careful consideration of the number of ​newly-calved cows brought into the herd each month showsthat the results as above stated were perfectly distinct,independently of any influence of the period of lactation of thedifferent individuals of the herd.

The few results which have been brought forward in relationto milk-production are admittedly quite insufficient adequatelyto illustrate the influence of variation in the quantity and compositionof the food on the quantity and composition of themilk yielded. Indeed, owing to the intrinsic difficulties ofexperimenting on such a subject, involving so many elements ofvariation, any results obtained have to be interpreted with muchcare and reservation. Nevertheless, it may be taken as clearlyindicated that, within certain limits, high feeding, and especiallyhigh nitrogenous feeding, does increase both the yield and therichness of the milk.^[5] But it is evident that when high feedingis pushed beyond a comparatively limited range, the tendencyis to increase the weight of the animal—that is, to favour thedevelopment of the individual, rather than to enhance theactivity of the functions connected with the reproductive system.This is, of course, a disadvantage when the object is to maintainthe milk-yielding condition of the animal; but when a cow isto be fattened off it will be otherwise.

It has been stated that, early in the period of six years in whichthe Rothamsted results that have been quoted were obtained,the amount of oil-cake given was graduated according to theyield of milk of each individual cow; as it seemed unreasonablethat an animal yielding, say, only 4 quarts per day, shouldreceive, beside the home foods, as much cake as one yieldingseveral times the quantity. The obvious inference is, that anyexcess of food beyond that required for sustenance and milk-productionwould tend to increase the weight of the animal,which, according to the circumstances, may or may not bedesirable.

It may be observed that direct experiments at Rothamstedconfirm the view, arrived at by common experience, that roots,and especially mangel, have a favourable effect on the flow ofmilk. Further, the Rothamsted experiments have shown thata higher percentage of butter-fat, of other solids, and of totalsolids, was obtained with mangel than with silage as the succulentfood. The yield of milk was, however, in a much greaterdegree increased by grazing than by any other change in thefood; and at Rothamsted the influence of roots comes nextin order to that of grass, though far behind it, in this respect.But with grazing, as has been shown, the percentage compositionof the milk is considerably reduced; though, owing to the greatlyincreased quantity yielded, the amount of soil-constituentsremoved in the milk when cows are grazing may neverthelessbe greater per head per day than under any other conditions.Lastly, it has been clearly illustrated how very much greateris the demand upon the food, especially for nitrogenous and formineral constituents, in the production of milk than in that offattening increase.

Manurial Value of Food consumed in the Production of Milk

In any attempt to estimate the average value of the manurederived from the consumption of food for the production ofmilk, the difficulty arising from the very wide variation in theamount of milk yielded by different cows, or by the same cowat different periods of her lactation, is increased by the inadequatecharacter of information concerning the difference in the amountof the food actually consumed by the animal coincidentlywith the production of such different amounts of milk. Butalthough information is lacking for correlating, with numericalaccuracy, the great difference in milk-yield of individual cowswith the coincident differences in consumption to produce it,it may be considered as satisfactorily established that more foodis consumed by a herd of cows to produce a fair yield of milk,of say 10 or 12 quarts per head per day, than by an equal live-weightof oxen fed to produce fattening increase. In the casessupposed it may, for practical purposes, be assumed that thecows would consume about one-fourth more food than theoxen. Accordingly, in the Rothamsted estimates of the valueof the manure obtained on the consumption of food for theproduction of milk, it is assumed that one-fourth more will be consumedby 1000 ℔ live-weight of cows than by the same weightof oxen; but the estimates of the amounts of the constituents ofthe food removed in the milk, or remaining for manure, are neverthelessreckoned per ton of each kind of food consumed, as in thecase of those relating to feeding for the production of fatteningincrease. It may be added that the calculations of the amounts ofthe constituents in the milk are based on the same average compositionof milk as is adopted in the construction of Table V. Thusthe nitrogen is taken at 0.579 (= 3.65 nitrogenous substance)%,the phosphoric acid at 0.2175%, and the potash at 0.1875%in the milk.

Table VIII. shows in detail the estimate of the amount ofnitrogen in one ton of each food, and in the milk produced fromits consumption, on the assumption of an average yield of 10quarts per head per day; also the amount remaining for manure,the amount of ammonia corresponding to the nitrogen, and thevalue of the ammonia at 4d. per ℔. Similar particulars are alsogiven in relation to the phosphoric acid and the potash consumedin the food, removed in the milk, and remaining for manure, &c.This table will serve as a sufficient illustration of the mode ofestimating the total or original value of the manure, derivedfrom the consumption of the different foods for the productionof milk in the case supposed; that is, assuming an averageyield of a herd of 10 quarts per head per day.

In Table IX. are given the results of similar detailed calculationsof the total or original manure-value (as in Table VIII.for 10 quarts), on the alternative assumptions of a yield of 6, 8,12 or 14 quarts per head per day. For comparison there isalso given, in the first column, the estimate of the total or originalmanure-value when the foods are consumed for the productionof fattening increase.

So much for the plan and results of the estimations of totalor original manure-value of the different foods, that is, deductingonly the constituents removed in the milk, and reckoning theremainder at the prices at which they can be purchased inartificial manures. With a view to direct application to practice,however, it is necessary to estimate the unexhausted manure-valueof the different foods, or what may be called their compensation-value,after they have been used for a series of years by theoutgoing tenant and he has realized a certain portion of themanure-value in his increased crops. In the calculations for thispurpose the rule is to deduct one-half of the original manure-valueof the food used the last year, and one-third of the remaindereach year to the eighth, in the case of all the more concentratedfoods and of the roots—in fact, of all the foods in the list exceptingthe hays and the straws. For these, which containlarger amounts of indigestible matter, and the constituents ofwhich will be more slowly available to crops, two-thirds of theoriginal manure-value is deducted for the last year, and only ​one-fifth from year to year to the eighth year back. The resultsof the estimates of compensation-value so made are given for thefive yields of 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 quarts of milk per head per dayrespectively in Lawes and Gilbert’s paper^[6] on the valuationof the manures obtained by the consumption of foods for theproduction of milk, which may be consulted for fuller details.It must, however, be borne in mind that when cows are fed insheds or yards the manure is generally liable to greater lossesthan is the case with fattening oxen. The manure of the cowcontains much more water in proportion to solid matter thanthat of the ox. Water will, besides, frequently be used forwashing, and it may be that a good deal of the manure is washedinto drains and lost. In the event, therefore, of a claim forcompensation, the management and disposal of the manurerequires the attention of the valuer. Indeed, the varyingcircumstances that will arise in practice must be carefullyconsidered. Bearing these in mind, the estimates may beaccepted as at any rate the best approximation to the truththat existing knowledge provides; and they should be foundsufficient for the requirements of practical use. Obviously theywill be more directly applicable in the case of cows feeding entirelyon the foods enumerated in the list, and not dependinglargely on grass; but, even when the animals are partiallygrass-fed, the value of the manure derived from the additionaldry food or roots may be estimated according to the scale given.

Cheese and Cheese-Making

For generations, perhaps for centuries, the question has beendiscussed as to why there should be so large a proportion of badand inferior cheese and so small a proportion of really good cheesemade in farmhouses throughout the land. That the result isnot wholly due to skill and care or to the absence of these qualitieson the part of the dairymaid may now be taken for granted.Instances might be quoted in which the most painstaking ofdairymaids, in the cleanest of dairies, have failed to producecheese of even second-rate quality and character, and yet othersin which excellent cheese has been made under commonplace ​conditions as to skill and equipment, and with not much regardto cleanliness in the dairy. The explanation of what was solong a mystery has been found in the domain of ferments. Itis now known that whilst various micro-organisms, which inmany dairies have free access to the milk, have ruined an incalculablequantity of cheese—and of butter also—neither cheesenor butter of first-rate quality can be made without the aidof lactic acid bacilli. As an illustrative case, mention may bemade of that of two most painstaking dairymaids who had triedin vain to make good cheese from the freshest of milk in thecleanest of dairies in North Lancashire. Advice to resort tothe use of the ferment was acted upon, and the result was arevelation and a transformation, excellent prize-winning cheesebeing made from that time forward. By the addition of a“starter,” in the form of a small quantity of sour milk, wheyor buttermilk, in an advanced stage of fermentation, the developmentof acidity in the main body of milk is accelerated. Ithas been ascertained that the starter is practically a cultureof bacteria, which, if desired, may be obtained as a pure culture.Professor J. R. Campbell, as the result of experiments on purecultures for Cheddar cheese-making, states^[7] that (1) first-classCheddar cheese can be made by using pure cultures of a lacticorganism; (2) this organism abounds in all samples of sourmilk and sour whey; (3) the use of a whey starter is attendedwith results equal in every respect to those obtained from amilk-starter. It is well within the power of any dairyman toprepare what is practically a pure culture of the same bacteriumas is supplied from the laboratory. Moreover, the sour-wheystarter used by some of the successful cheese-makers before theintroduction of the American system is in effect a pure culture,from which it follows that these men had, by empirical methods,attained the same end as that to which bacteriological researchsubsequently led. Wherever a starter isnecessary, the use of a culture practicallypure is imperative, whether such culturebe obtained from the laboratory or preparedby what may be called the “home-madestarter.” Pure cultures may bebought for a few shillings in the openmarket.

The factory-made cheese of Canada,the United States and Australasia, whichis so largely imported into the UnitedKingdom, is all of the Cheddar type. Thefactory system has made no headway inthe original home of the Cheddar cheesein the west of England. The system wasthus described in the Journal of theBritish Dairy Farmers’ Association in1889 by Mr R. J. Drummond:—

With regard to the hot-iron test for acidity, Mr F. J. Lloyd,in describing his investigations on behalf of the Bath and Westof England Society, states that cheese-makers have long knownthat in both the manufacture and the ripening of cheese theacidity produced—known to the chemist as “lactic acid”—materiallyinfluences the results obtained, and that amongstother drawbacks to the test referred to is the uncertainty of thetemperature of the iron itself. He gives an account,^[8] however,of a chemical method involving the use of a standard solutionof an alkali (soda), and of a substance termed an “indicator”(phenolphthalein), which changes colour according to whethera solution is acid or alkaline. The apparatus used with thesereagents is called the acidimeter. The two stages in the manufactureof a Cheddar cheese most difficult to determine empiricallyare—(1) when to stop stirring and to draw the whey, and(2) when to grind the curd. The introduction of the acidimeterhas done away with these difficulties; and though the use ofthis apparatus is not actually a condition essential to the manufactureof a good cheese, it is to many makers a necessity and toall an advantage. By its use the cheese-maker can determinethe acidity of the whey, and so decide when to draw the latteroff, and will thus secure not only the proper development ofacidity in the subsequent changes of cheese-making, but alsomaterially diminish the time which the cheese takes to make.Furthermore, it has been proved that the acidity of the wheywhich drains from the curd when in the cooler is a sufficientlyaccurate guide to the condition of the curd before grinding;and by securing uniformity in this acidity the maker will alsoensure uniformity in the quality and ripening properties of thecheese. Speaking generally, the acidity of the liquid fromthe press should never fall below 0.80% nor rise above 1.20%,and, the nearer it can be kept to 1.00% the better. Simultaneously,of course, strict attention must be paid to temperature,time and every other factor which can be accurately determined.Analyses of large numbers of Cheddar cheeses manufacturedin every month of the cheese-making season show the averagecomposition of ripe specimens to be—water, 35.58%; fat,31.33; casein, 29.12; mineral matter or ash, 3.97. It has beenmaintained that in the ripening of Cheddar cheese fat is formedout of the curd, but a comparison of analyses of ripe cheeseswith analyses of the curd from which the cheeses were madeaffords no evidence that this is the case.

The quantity of milk required to make 1 ℔ of Cheddar cheesemay be learnt from Table X., which shows the results obtainedat the cheese school of the Bath and West of England Societyin the two seasons of 1899 and 1900. The cheese was sold at anaverage age of ten to twelve weeks. In 1899 a total of 21,220gallons of milk yielded 20,537 ℔ of saleable cheese, and in 1900,31,808 gallons yielded 29,631 ℔. In the two years together53,028 gallons yielded 50,168 ℔, which is equivalent to 1.05gallon of milk to 1 ℔ of cheese. For practical purposes it may ​be taken that one gallon, or slightly over 10 ℔ of milk, yields1 ℔ of pressed cheese. The prices obtained are added as a matterof interest.

Cheshire cheese is largely made in the county from which ittakes its name, and in adjoining districts. It is extensivelyconsumed in Manchester and Liverpool, and other parts of thedensely populated county of Lancaster.

The following is a description of the making of Cheshirecheese:—

It is hardly possible to enunciate any general rules forthe making of Stilton cheese, which differs from Cheddarand Cheshire in that it is not subjected to pressure. Mr J. MarshallDugdale, in 1899, made a visit of inspection to the chief Leicestershiredairies where this cheese is produced, but in his report^[9] hestated that every Stilton cheese-maker worked on his own lines,and that at no two dairies did he find the details all carried outin the same manner. There is a fair degree of uniformity up tothe point when the curd is ladled into the straining-cloths, butat this stage, and in the treatment of the curd before salting,diversity sets in, several different methods being in successfuluse. Most of the cheese is made from two curds, the highly acidcurd from the morning’s milk being mixed with the comparativelysweet curd from the evening’s milk. Opinion varies widelyas to the degree of tightening of the straining-cloths. No test foracidity appears to be used, the amount of acidity being judgedby the taste, feel and smell of the curd. When the desired degreeof acidity has developed, the curd is broken by hand to piecesthe size of small walnuts, and salt is added at the rate of about1 oz. to 4 ℔ of dry curd, or 1 oz. to 31/2 ℔ of wet curd, care beingtaken not to get the curd pasty. If a maker has learnt how torennet the milk properly, and how to secure the right amount ofacidity at the time of hooping—that is, when the broken andsalted curd is put into the wooden hoops which give the cheeseits shape—he has acquired probably two of the most importantdetails necessary to success. It was formerly the custom to addcream to the milk used for making Stilton cheese, but the moregeneral practice now is to employ new milk alone, which yields aproduct apparently as excellent and mellow as that from enrichedmilk.

As a cheese matures or becomes fit for consumption, not onlyis there produced the characteristic flavour peculiar to the typeof cheese concerned, but with all varieties, independently of thequality of flavours developed, a profound physical transformationof the casein occurs. In the course of this change the firmelastic curd “breaks down”—that is, becomes plastic, whilstchemically the insoluble casein is converted into various solubledecomposition products. These ripening phenomena—the productionof flavour and the breaking down of the casein (that is,the formation of proper texture)—used to be regarded as differentphases of the same process. As subsequently shown, however,these changes are not necessarily so closely correlated. Thetheories formerly advanced as explanatory of the ripeningchanges in cheese were suggestive rather than based upon experimentaldata, and it is only since 1896 that careful scientificstudies of the problem have been made. Of the two existingtheories, the one, which is essentially European, ascribes theripening changes wholly to the action of living organisms—thebacteria present in the cheese. The other, which had its origin ​in the United States, asserts that there are digestive enzymes—thatis, unorganized or soluble ferments—inherent in the milkitself that render the casein soluble. The supporters of thebacterial theory are ranged in two classes. The one, led byDuclaux, regards the breaking down of the casein as due to theaction of liquefying bacteria (Tyrothrix forms). On the otherhand, von Freudenreich has ascribed these changes to the lactic-acidtype of bacteria, which develop so luxuriantly in hard cheeselike Cheddar.

With regard to the American theory, and in view of theimportant practical results obtained by Babcock and Russell atthe Wisconsin experiment station, the following account^[10] oftheir work is of interest, especially as the subject is of highpractical importance. In 1897 they announced the discovery ofan inherent enzyme in milk, which they named galactase, andwhich has the power of digesting the casein of milk, and producingchemical decomposition products similar to those that normallyoccur in ripened cheese. The theory has been advanced by themthat this enzyme is an important factor in the ripening changes;and as in their experiments bacterial action was excluded by theuse of anaesthetic agents, they conclude that, so far as thebreaking down of the casein is concerned, bacteria are notessential to this process. In formulating a theory of cheese-ripening,they have further pointed out the necessity of consideringthe action of rennet extract as a factor concerned inthe curing changes. They have shown that the addition ofincreased quantities of rennet extract materially hastens therate of ripening, and that this is due to the pepsin which ispresent in all commercial rennet extracts. They find it easilypossible to differentiate between the proteolytic action—that is,the decomposing of proteids—of pepsin and galactase, in thatthe first-named enzyme is incapable of producing decompositionproducts lower than the peptones precipitated by tannin. Theyhave shown that the increased solubility—the ripening changes—ofthe casein in cheese made with rennet is attributable solelyto the products peculiar to peptic digestion. The addition ofrennet extract or pepsin to fresh milk does not produce thischange, unless the acidity of the milk is allowed to develop to apoint which experience has shown to be the best adapted to themaking of Cheddar cheese. The rationale of the empirical processof ripening the milk before the addition of the rennet is thusexplained. In studying the properties of galactase it was furtherfound that this enzyme, as well as those present in rennet extract,is operative at very low temperatures, even below freezing-point.When cheese made in the normal manner was kept at temperaturesranging from 25° to 45° F. for periods averaging from eightto eighteen months, it was found that the texture of the productsimulated that of a perfectly ripened cheese, but that such cheesedeveloped a very mild flavour in comparison with the normally-curedproduct. Subsequent storage at somewhat higher temperaturesgives to such cheese a flavour the intensity of which isdetermined by the duration of storage. This indicates that thebreaking down of the casein and the production of the flavourpeculiar to cheese are in a way independent of each other, andmay be independently controlled—a point of great economicimportance in commercial practice. Although it is generallybelieved that cheese ripened at low temperatures is apt to developa more or less bitter flavour, the flavours in the cases describedwere found to be practically perfect. Under these conditions ofcuring, bacterial activity is inoperative, and these experimentsare held to furnish an independent proof of the enzyme theory.

Not only are these investigations of interest from the scientificstandpoint, as throwing light on the obscure processes of cheese-curing,but from a practical point of view they open up a newfield for commercial exploitation. The inability to control thetemperature in the ordinary factory curing-room results in seriouslosses, on account of the poor and uneven quality of the product,and the consumption of cheese has been greatly lessened thereby.These conditions may all be avoided by this low-temperaturecuring process, and it is not improbable that the cheese industrymay undergo important changes in methods of treatment. Withthe introduction of cold-storage curing, and the necessity ofconstructing centralized plant for this purpose, the cheeseindustry may perhaps come to be differentiated into the manufactureof the product in factories of relatively cheap construction,and the curing or ripening of the cheese in central curingstations. In this way not only would the losses which occurunder present practices be obviated, but the improvement inthe quality of the cured product would be more than sufficientto cover the cost of cold-storage curing.

The characteristics of typical specimens of the different kindsof English cheese may be briefly described. Cheddar cheesepossesses the aroma and flavour of a nut—the so-called “nutty”flavour. It should melt in the mouth, and taste neither sweetnor acid. It is of flaky texture, neither hard nor crumbly, and isfirm to the touch. It is early-ripening and, if not too much acidis developed in the making, long-keeping. Before all others itis a cosmopolitan cheese. Some cheeses are “plain,” that is,they possess the natural paleness of the curd, but many arecoloured with annatto—a practice that might be dispensed with.The average weight of a Cheddar cheese is about 70 ℔. Stiltoncheese is popularly but erroneously supposed to be commonlymade from morning’s whole milk with evening’s cream added,and to be a “double-cream” cheese. The texture is waxy, anda blue-green mould permeates the mass if well ripened; theflavour is suggestive of decay. The average weight of a Stiltonis 15 ℔. Cheshire cheese has a fairly firm and uniform texture,neither flaky on the one hand nor waxy on the other; is ofsomewhat sharp and piquant flavour when fully ripe; and isoften—at eighteen months old, when a well-made Cheshirecheese is at its best—permeated with a blue-green mould, which,as in the case of Stilton cheese, contributes a characteristicflavour which is much appreciated. Cheshire cheese is, likeCheddar, sometimes highly-coloured, but the practice is quiteunnecessary; the weight is about 55 ℔. Gloucester cheese hasa firm, somewhat soapy, texture and sweet flavour. DoubleGloucester differs from single Gloucester only in size, the formerusually weighing 26 to 30 ℔, and the latter 13 to 15 ℔. Leicestercheese is somewhat loose in texture, and mellow and moist whennicely ripened. Its flavour is “clean,” sweet and mild, and itsaroma pleasant. To those who prefer a mild flavour in cheese, aperfect Leicester is perhaps the most attractive of all the so-called“hard” cheese; the average weight of such a cheese isabout 35 ℔. Derby cheese in its best forms is much like Leicester,being “clean” in flavour and mellow. It is sometimes ratherflaky in texture, and is slow-ripening and long-keeping if madeon the old lines; the average weight is 25 ℔. Lancashire cheese,when well made and ripe, is loose in texture and is mellow; ithas a piquant flavour. As a rule it ripens early and does notkeep long. Dorset cheese—sometimes called “blue vinny” (orveiny)—is of firm texture, blue-moulded, and rather sharp-flavouredwhen fully ripe; it has local popularity and the bestmakes are rather like Stilton. Wensleydale cheese, a local productin North Yorkshire, is of fairly firm texture and mild flavour,and may almost be spread with a knife when ripe; the finestmakes are equal to the best Stilton. Cotherstone cheese, also aYorkshire product, is very much like Stilton and commonlypreferable to it. The blue-green mould develops, and the cheeseis fairly mellow and moist, whereas many Stiltons are hard anddry. Wiltshire cheese, in the form of “Wilts truckles,” may bedescribed as small Cheddars, the weight being usually about16 ℔. Caerphilly cheese is a thin, flat product, having the appearanceof an undersized single Gloucester and weighing about8 ℔; it has no very marked characteristics, but enters largelyinto local consumption amongst the mining population ofGlamorganshire and Monmouthshire. Soft cheese of variouskinds is made in many localities, beyond which its reputationscarcely extends. One of the oldest and best, somewhat resemblingCamembert when well ripened, is the little “Slipcote,”made on a small scale in the county of Rutland; it is a soft,mellow, moist cheese, its coat slipping off readily when the cheeseis at its best for eating—hence the name. Cream cheese is likewisemade in many districts, but nowhere to a great extent. A ​good cream cheese is fairly firm but mellow, with a slightly acidyet very attractive flavour. It is the simplest of all cheese tomake—cream poured into a perforated box lined with loosemuslin practically makes itself into cheese in a few days’ time,and is usually ripe in a week.

In France the pressed varieties of cheese with hard rindsinclude Gruyère, Cantal, Roquefort and Port Salut. The first-named,a pale-yellow cheese full of holes of varying size, is madein Switzerland and in the Jura Mountains district in the east ofFrance; whilst Cantal cheese, which is of lower quality, is aproduct of the midland districts and is made barrel-shape.Roquefort cheese is made from the milk of ewes, which are keptchiefly as dairy animals in the department of Aveyron, and thecheese is cured in the natural mountain caves at the village ofRoquefort. It is a small, rather soft, white cheese, abundantlyveined with a greenish-blue mould and weighs between 4 and5 ℔. The Port Salut is quite a modern cheese, which originatedin the abbey of that name in Mayenne; it is a thin, flat cheeseof characteristic, and not unattractive odour and flavour. Thebest known of the soft unpressed cheeses are Brie, Camembertand Coulommiers, whilst Pont l’Evêque, Livarot and othervarieties are also made. After being shaped in moulds of variousforms, these cheeses are laid on straw mats to cure, and whenfit to eat they possess about the same consistency as butter.The Neufchâtel, Gervais and Bondon cheeses are soft varietiesintended to be eaten quite fresh, like cream cheese.

Of the varieties of cheese made in Switzerland, the best knownis the Emmenthaler, which is about the size of a cart-wheel, andhas a weight varying from 150 to 300 ℔. It is full of smallholes of almost uniform size and very regularly distributed. Incolour and flavour it is the same as Gruyère. The Edam andGouda are the common cheeses of Holland. The Edam isspherical in shape, weighs from 3 to 4 ℔, and is usually dyedcrimson on the outside. The Gouda is a flat cheese with convexedges and is of any weight up to 20 ℔. Of the two, the Edamhas the finer flavour. Limburger is the leading German cheese,whilst other varieties are the Backstein and Munster; all arestrong-smelling. Parmesan cheese is an Italian product, roundand flat, about 5 in. thick, weighing from 60 to 80 ℔ andpossessed of fine flavour. Gorgonzola cheese, so called from theItalian town of that name near Milan, is made in the Cheddarshape and weighs from 20 to 40 ℔. When ripe it is permeatedby a blue mould, and resembles in flavour, appearance andconsistency a rich old Stilton.

Butter and Butter-Making

As with cheese, so with butter, large quantities of the latterhave been inferior not because the cream was poor in quality,but because the wrong kinds of bacteria had taken possession ofthe atmosphere in hundreds of dairies. The greatest if not thelatest novelty in dairying in the last decade of the 19th centurywas the isolation of lactic acid bacilli, their cultivation in asuitable medium, and their employment in cream preparatoryto churning. Used thus in butter-making, an excellent productresults, provided cleanliness be scrupulously maintained. Theculture repeats itself in the buttermilk, which in turn may beused again with marked success. Much fine butter, indeed, wasmade long before the bearing of bacteriological science upon thepractice of dairying was recognized—made by using acid buttermilkfrom a previous churning.

In Denmark, which is, for its size, the greatest butter-producingcountry in the world, most of the butter is made with the aidof “starters,” or artificial cultures which are employed inripening the cream. Though the butter made by such culturesshows little if any superiority over a good sample made fromcream ripened in the ordinary way—that is, by keeping thecream at a fairly high temperature until it is ready for churning,when it must be cooled—it is claimed that the use of thesecultures enables the butter-makers of Denmark to secure a muchgreater uniformity in the quality of their produce than would bepossible if they depended upon the ripening of the cream throughthe influence of bacteria taken up in the usual way from the air.

Butter-making is an altogether simpler process than cheese-making,but success demands strict attention to sound principles,the observance of thorough cleanliness in every stage of thework, and the intelligent use of the thermometer. The followingrules for butter-making, issued by the Royal Agricultural Societysufficiently indicate the nature of the operation:—

Well-made butter is firm and not greasy. It possesses acharacteristic texture or “grain,” in virtue of which it cutsclean with a knife and breaks with a granular fracture, like thatof cast-iron. Theoretically, butter should consist of little elsethan fat, but in practice this degree of perfection is never attained.Usually the fat ranges from 83 to 88%, whilst water is presentto the extent of from 10 to 15%.^[11] There will also be from 0.2to 0.8% of milk-sugar, and from 0.5 to 0.8% of casein. It isthe casein which is the objectionable ingredient, and the presenceof which is usually the cause of rancidity. In badly-washedor badly-worked butter, from which the buttermilk has notbeen properly removed, the proportion of casein or curd leftin the product may be considerable, and such butter has onlyinferior keeping qualities. At the same time, the mistake maybe made of overworking or of overwashing the butter, therebydepriving it of the delicacy of flavour which is one of its chiefattractions as an article of consumption if eaten fresh. Theobject of washing with brine is that the small quantity of saltthus introduced shall act as a preservative and develop theflavour. Streaky butter may be due either to curd left in byimperfect washing, or to an uneven distribution of the salt.

Equipment of the Dairy

Fig. 1.—Milking-Pail.	Fig. 2.—Milk Sieve.

Fig. 3.—Rectangular Cheese-Vat.

Fig. 4.—Cheese-Tub.

Fig. 5.—Curd-Knives.

The improved form of milking-pail shown in fig. 1 has restsor brackets, which the milker when seated on his stool placeson his knees; he thus bears the weight on his thighs, and isentirely relieved of the strain involved in gripping the canbetween the knees. The milk sieve or strainer (fig. 2) is usedto remove cow-hairs and any other mechanical impurity thatmay have fallen into the milk. A double straining surfaceis provided, the second being of very fine gauze placed vertically,so that the pressure of the milk does not force the dirt through;the strainer is easily washed. The cheese tub or vat receives ​ the milk for cheese-making. The rectangular form shownin fig. 3 is a Cheshire cheese-vat, for steam. The inner vat isof tinned steel, and the outer is of iron and is fitted with pipesfor steam supply. Round cheese-tubs (fig. 4) are made of strongsheets of steel, double tinned to render them lasting. Theyare fitted with a strong bottom hoop and bands round the sides,and can be double-jacketed for steam-heating if required. Curd-knives(fig. 5) are used for cutting the coagulated mass intocubes in order to liberatethe whey. They aremade of fine steel, withsharp edges; there arealso wire curd-breakers.The object of the curd-mill(fig. 6) is to grindconsolidated curd intosmall pieces, preparatoryto salting and vatting;two spiked rollerswork up to spikedbreasts. Hoops, intowhich the curd isplaced in order to acquire the shape of the cheese, are ofwood or steel, the former being made of well-seasoned oakwith iron bands (fig. 7), the latter of tinned steel. The cheeseis more easily removed from the steel hoops and they are readilycleaned. The cheese-press (fig. 8) is used only for hard or“pressed” cheese, such as Cheddar. The arrangement is suchthat the pressure is continuous; in the case of soft cheese thecurd is merely placed in moulds (figs. 9 and 10) of the requiredshape, and then taken cut to ripen, no pressure being applied.The cheese-room is fittedwith easily-turned shelves,on which newly-made“pressed” cheeses are laidto ripen.

Fig. 6.—Curd-Mill.	Fig. 7.—Hoop for Flat Cheese.

Fig. 8.—Cheese-Press.

Fig. 9.—Cheese-Mould (Gervais).   Fig. 10.—Cheese-Mould (Pont l’Évêque).

Fig. 11.—Milk-Pan.

Fig. 12.—Skimmer.

In the butter dairy, whenthe centrifugal separator isnot used, milk is “set” forcream-raising in the milk-pan(fig. 11), a shallowvessel of white porcelain,tinned steel or enamelled iron. The skimming-dish or skimmer(fig 12), made of tin, is for collecting the cream from the surface ofthe milk, whence it is transferred to the cream-crock (fig. 13), inwhich vessel the cream remains from one to three days, till itis required for churning.Many different kinds ofchurns are in use, andvary much in size, shapeand fittings; the oneillustrated in fig. 14is a very good type ofdiaphragm churn. Thebutter-scoop (fig. 15) isof wood and is sometimesperforated; it isused for taking the butterout of the churn. Thebutter-worker (fig. 16)is employed for consolidatingnewly-churnedbutter, pressing outsuperfluous water andmixing in salt. More extended use, however, is now being madeof the “Délaiteuse” butter dryer, a centrifugal machine thatrapidly extracts the moisture from the butter, and renders the ​ butter-worker unnecessary, whilst the butter produced has abetter grain. Scotch hands (fig. 17), made of boxwood, are usedfor the lifting, moulding and pressing of butter.

Fig. 13.—Cream-Crock.	Fig. 14.—Churn.

Fig. 15.—Butter-Scoop.

In the centrifugal cream-separator the new milk is allowedto flow into a bowl, which is caused to rotate on its own axisseveral thousand times perminute. The heavier portionwhich makes up the watery partof the milk flies to the outer circumferenceof the bowl, whilstthe lighter particles of butter-fatare forced to travel in an innerzone. By a simple mechanicalarrangement the separated milkis forced out at one tube andthe cream at another, and theyare collected in distinct vessels.Separators are made of all sizes,from small machines dealingwith 10 or 20 up to 100 gallonsan hour, and worked by hand (fig. 18), to large machinesseparating 150 to 440 gallons an hour, and worked by horse,steam or other power (fig. 19). Separation is found to bemost effective at temperatures ranging in different machinesfrom 80° to 98° F., though as high a temperature as 150° issometimes employed. The most efficient separators removenearly the whole of the butter-fat, the quantity of fat left inthe separated milk falling in some cases to as low as 0.1.When cream is raised by the deep-setting method, from 0.2to 0.4% of fat is left inthe skim-milk; by theshallow-setting methodfrom 0.3 to 0.5% ofthe fat is left behind.As a rule, therefore,“separated” milk is much poorer in fat than ordinary “skim”milk left by the cream-raising method in deep or shallow vessels.

The first continuous working separator was the invention ofDr de Laval. The more recent invention by Baron von Bechtolsheimof what are known as the Alfa discs, which are placed alongthe centre of the bowl of the separator, has much increased theseparating capacity of the machines without adding to thepower required. This has been of great assistance to dairyfarmers by lessening the cost of the manufacture of butter, andthus enabling a large additional number of factories to beestablished in different parts of the world, particularly in Ireland,where these disc machines are very extensively used.

Fig. 16.—Butter-Worker.

Fig. 17.—ScotchHands.	Fig. 18.—Hand-Separator.

The pasteurizer—so named after the French chemist Pasteur—affordsa means whereby at the outset the milk is maintainedat a temperature of 170° to 180° F. for a period of eight or tenminutes. The object of this is to destroythe tubercle bacillus, if it should happento exist in the milk, whilst incidentallythe bacilli associated with several otherdiseases communicable through themedium of milk would also be killed ifthey were present. Discordant resultshave been recorded by experimenterswho have attempted to kill tuberclebacilli in milk by heating the latter inopen vessels, thereby permitting theformation of a scum or “scalded layer”capable of protecting the tubercle bacilli,and enabling them to resist a highertemperature than otherwise would befatal to them. At a temperature not much above 150° F.milk begins to acquire the cooked flavour which is objectionableto many palates, whilst its“body” is so modified as to lessenits suitability for creaming purposes.Three factors really enterinto effective pasteurization of milk,namely (1) the temperature to whichthe milk is raised, (2) the length oftime it is kept at that temperature,(3) the maintenance of a conditionof mechanical agitation to preventthe formation of “scalded layer.”Within limits, what a higher temperaturewill accomplish if maintainedfor a very short time maybe effected by a lower temperaturecontinued over a longer period.The investigation of the problemforms the subject of a paper^[12] inthe 17th Annual Report of theWisconsin Agricultural ExperimentStation, 1900. The following arethe results of the experiments:—

1. An exposure of tuberculous milkin a tightly closed commercial pasteurizerfor a period of ten minutesdestroyed in every case the tubercle bacillus, as determined by the inoculationof such heated milk into susceptible animals like guinea-pigs. ​2. Where milk is exposed under conditions that would enable apellicle or membrane to form on the surface, the tubercle organismis able to resist the action of heat at 140° F. (60° C.) for considerablylonger periods of time.

Fig. 19.—Power Separator.

3. Efficient pasteurization can be more readily accomplished in aclosed receptacle such as is most frequently used in the commercialtreatment of milk, than where the milk is heated in open bottles oropen vats.

Fig. 20.—Refrigerator and Can.

4. It is recommended, in order thoroughly to pasteurize milk soas to destroy any tubercle bacilli which it may contain, without in anyway injuring its creaming properties or consistency, to heat the samein closed pasteurizers for a period of not less than twenty minutesat 140° F.

Under these conditions one may be certain that disease bacteriasuch as the tubercle bacillus will be destroyed without the milk orcream being injured in any way. For over a year this new standardhas been in constant use in the Wisconsin University Creamery,and the results, from a purely practical point of view, reported ayear earlier by Farrington and Russell,^[13] have been abundantlyconfirmed.

Fig. 21.—Cyclindrical Cooler orRefrigerator.

Fig. 22.—Butyrometer.

Dairy engineers have solved the problem as to how largebodies of milk may be pasteurized, the difficulty of raising manyhundreds or thousands ofgallons of milk up to therequired temperature, andmaintaining it at that heatfor a period of twentyminutes, having been successfullydealt with. Theplant usually employedprovides for the thoroughfiltration of the milk as itcomes in from the farms,its rapid heating in aclosed receiver and undermechanical agitation up tothe desired temperature,its maintenance thereatfor the requisite time, andfinally its sudden reductionto the temperature of cold water through the agency of arefrigerator, to be next noticed.

Refrigerators are used for reducing the temperature of milkto that of cold water, whereby its keeping properties are enhanced.The milk flows down the outside of the metal refrigerator(fig. 20), which is corrugated in order to provide a larger coolingsurface, whilst cold water circulates through the interior of therefrigerator. The conical vessel into which the milk is representedas flowing from the refrigerator in fig. 20 is absurdly called a“milk-churn,” whereas milk-can is a much more appropriatename. For very large quantities of milk, such as flow froma pasteurizing plant, cylindrical refrigerators (fig. 21), madeof tinned copper, are available; the cold water circulates inside,and the milk, flowing down the outside in a very thin sheet,is rapidly cooled from a temperature of 140° F. or higher to 1°above the temperature of the water.

The fat test for milk was originally devised by Dr S. M.Babcock, of the Wisconsin, U.S.A., experiment station. Itcombines the principle of centrifugal force with simple chemicalaction. Besides the machine itself and its graduated glassvessels, the only requirementsare sulphuric acidof standard strength andwarm water. Themachines—often termedbutyrometers—are commonlymade to hold fromtwo up to two dozentesters. After the tubesor testers have beencharged, they are put inthe apparatus, which israpidly rotated as shown(fig. 22); in a few minutesthe test is complete, andwith properly graduatedvessels the percentage offat can be read off at aglance. The butyrometeris extremely useful, alikefor measuring periodicallythe fat-producing capacity of individual cows in a herd,for rapidly ascertaining the percentage of fat in milk deliveredto factories and paying for such milk on the basis of quality,and for determining the richness in fat of milk supplied for theurban milk trade. Any intelligent person can soon learn to ​work the apparatus, but its efficiency is of course dependentupon the accuracy of the measuring vessels. To ensure this theboard of agriculture have made arrangements with the NationalPhysical Laboratory, Old Deer Park, Richmond, Surrey, toverify at a small fee the pipettes, measuring-glasses, and test-bottlesused in connexion with the centrifugal butyrometer,which in recent years has been improved by Dr N. Gerber ofZürich.

Dairy Factories

In connexion with co-operative cheese-making the merit ofhaving founded the first “cheesery” or cheese factory is generallycredited to Jesse Williams, who lived near Rome, Oneida county,N.Y. The system, therefore, was of American origin. Williamswas a skilled cheese-maker, and the produce of his dairy soldso freely, at prices over the average, that he increased his outputof cheese by adding to his own supply of milk other quantitieswhich he obtained from his neighbours. His example wasso widely followed that by the year 1866 there had been establishedclose upon 500 cheese factories in New York state alone.In 1870 two co-operative cheeseries were at work in England,one in the town of Derby and one at Longford in the samecounty. There are now thousands of cheeseries in the UnitedStates and Canada, and also many “creameries,” or butterfactories, for the making of high-class butter.

The first creamery was that of Alanson Slaughter, and it wasbuilt near Wallkill, Orange county, N.Y., in 1861, or ten yearslater than the first cheese factory; it dealt daily with the milkof 375 cows. Cheeseries and creameries would almost certainlyhave become more numerous than they are in England but forthe rapidly expanding urban trade in country milk. The developmentof each, indeed, has been contemporaneous since 1871,and they are found to work well in conjunction one with the other—thatis to say, a factory is useful for converting surplus milkinto cheese or butter when the milk trade is overstocked, whilstthe trade affords a convenient avenue for the sale of milk wheneverthis may happen to be preferable to the making of cheese orbutter. Extensive dealers in milk arrange for its conversion intocheese or butter, as the case may be, at such times as the milkmarket needs relief, and in this way a cheesery serves as a sort ofeconomic safety-valve to the milk trade. The same cannotalways be said of creameries, because the machine-skimmedmilk of some of these establishments has been far too muchused to the prejudice of the legitimate milk trade in urbandistricts. Be this as it may, the operations of cheeseries andcreameries in conjunction with the milk trade have led to thediminution of home dairying. A rapidly increasing populationhas maintained, and probably increased, its consumption of milk,which has obviously diminished the farmhouse production ofcheese, and also of butter. The foreign competitor has been lesssuccessful with cheese than with butter, for he is unable toproduce an article qualified to compete with the best that ismade in Great Britain. In the case of butter, on the other hand,the imported article, though not ever surpassing the best home-made,is on the average much better, especially as regardsuniformity of quality. Colonial and foreign producers, however,send into the British markets as a rule only the best of theirbutter, as they are aware that their inferior grades would butinjure the reputation their products have acquired.

There are no official statistics concerning dairy factories inGreat Britain, and such figures relating to Ireland were issuedfor the first time in 1901. The number of dairy factories inIreland in 1900 was returned at 506, comprising 333 in Munster,92 in Ulster, 52 in Leinster and 29 in Connaught. Of the totalnumber of factories, 495 received milk only, 9 milk and creamand 2 cream only. As to ownership, 219 were joint-stock concerns,190 were maintained by co-operative farmers and 97 wereproprietary. In the year ended 30th September 1900 thesefactories used up nearly 121 million gallons of milk, namely, 94in Munster, 14 in Ulster, 7 in Leinster and 6 in Connaught.The number of centrifugal cream-separators in the factories was985, of which 889 were worked by steam, 79 by water, 9 byhorse-power and 8 by hand-power. The number of handspermanently employed was 3653, made up of 976 in Munster,279 in Leinster, 278 in Ulster and 120 in Connaught. The year’soutput was returned at 401,490 cwt. of butter, 439 cwt. of cheese(made from whole milk) and 46,253 gallons of cream. In mostcases the skim-milk is returned to the farmers. A return of thenumber of separators used in private establishments gave a totalof 899, comprising 693 in Munster, 157 in Leinster, 39 in Ulsterand 10 in Connaught. In factories and private establishmentstogether as many as 1884 separators were thus accounted for.Much of the factory butter would be sent into the markets ofGreat Britain, though some would no doubt be retained for localconsumption. A great improvement in the quality of Irishbutter has recently been noticeable in the exhibits entered at theLondon dairy show.

Adulteration of Dairy Produce^[14]

The Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899, which came into operationon the 1st of January 1900, contains several sections relatingto the trade in dairy produce in the United Kingdom. Section 1imposes penalties in the case of the importation of produce insufficientlymarked, such as (a) margarine or margarine-cheese,except in passages conspicuously marked “Margarine” or“Margarine-cheese”; (b) adulterated or impoverished butter(other than margarine) or adulterated or impoverished milk orcream, except in packages or cans conspicuously marked witha name or description indicating that the butter or milk orcream has been so treated; (c) condensed separated or skimmedmilk, except in tins or other receptacles which bear a labelwhereon the words “machine-skimmed milk” or “skimmedmilk” are printed in large and legible type. For the purposesof this section an article of food is deemed to be adulterated orimpoverished if it has been mixed with any other substance, orif any part of it has been abstracted, so as in either case to affectinjuriously its quality, substance, or nature; provided that anarticle of food shall not be deemed to be adulterated by reasononly of the addition of any preservative or colouring matter ofsuch a nature and in such quantity as not to render the articleinjurious to health. Section 7 provides that every occupier ofa manufactory of margarine or margarine-cheese, and everywholesale dealer in such substances, shall keep a register showingthe quantity and destination of each consignment of such substancessent out from his manufactory or place of business, andthis register shall be open to the inspection of any officer of theboard of agriculture. Any such officer shall have power to enterat all reasonable times any such manufactory, and to inspect anyprocess of manufacture therein, and to take samples for analysis.Section 8 is of much practical importance, as it limits the quantityof butter-fat which may be contained in margarine; it statesthat it shall be unlawful to manufacture, sell, expose for saleor import any margarine the fat of which contains more than10% of butter-fat, and every person who manufactures, sells,exposes for sale or imports any margarine which contains morethan that percentage shall be guilty of an offence under theMargarine Act 1887. For the purposes of the act margarine-cheeseis defined as “any substance, whether compound orotherwise, which is prepared in imitation of cheese, and whichcontains fat not derived from milk”; whilst cheese is defined as“the substance usually known as cheese, containing no fatderived otherwise than from milk.” The so-called “filled”cheese of American origin, in which the butter-fat of the milk ispartially or wholly replaced by some other fat, would come underthe head of “margarine-cheese.” In making such cheese a cheapform of fat, usually of animal origin, but sometimes vegetable,is added to and incorporated with the skim-milk, and thus takesthe place previously occupied by the genuine butter-fat. Theact is regarded by some as defective in that it does not prohibitthe artificial colouring of margarine to imitate butter.

In connexion with this act a departmental committee wasappointed in 1900 “to inquire and report as to what regulations,if any, may with advantage be made by the board of agricultureunder section 4 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899, for ​determining what deficiency in any of the normal constituentsof genuine milk or cream, or what addition of extraneous matteror proportion of water, in any sample of milk (including condensedmilk) or cream, shall for the purposes of the Sale of Foodand Drugs Acts 1875 to 1899, raise a presumption, until thecontrary is proved, that the milk or cream is not genuine.”Much evidence of the highest interest to dairy-farmers was taken,and subsequently published as a Blue-Book (Cd. 484). Thereport of the committee (Cd. 491) included the following “recommendations,”which were signed by all the members exceptingone:—

The committee further submitted the following expressions ofopinion on points raised before them in evidence:—

In the minority report, signed by Mr Geo. Barham, the mostimportant clauses are the following:—

Much controversy arose out of the publication of these reports,the opinion most freely expressed being that the standard recommendedin the majority report was too high. The difficulty ofthe problem is illustrated by, for example, the diverse legalstandards for milk that prevail in the United States, where theprescribed percentage of fat in fresh cows’ milk ranges from 2.5in Rhode Island to 3.5 in Georgia and Minnesota, and 3.7 (in thewinter months) in Massachusetts, and the prescribed total solidsrange from 12 in several states (11.5 in Ohio during May andJune) up to 13 in others. Standards are recognized in twenty-oneof the states, but the remaining states have no lawsprescribing standards for dairy products. That the public discussionof the reports of the committee was effective is shown bythe following regulations which appeared in the London Gazetteon the 6th of August 1901, and fixed the limit of fat at 3%:—

The board of agriculture, in exercise of the powers conferredon them by section 4 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899, dohereby make the following regulations:—

In July 1901 another departmental committee was appointedby the board of agriculture to inquire and report as to whatregulations, if any, might with advantage be made under section4 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act 1899, for determining whatdeficiency in any of the normal constituents of butter, or whataddition of extraneous matter, or proportion of water in anysample of butter should, for the purpose of the Sale of Food andDrugs Acts, raise a presumption, until the contrary is proved, ​that the butter is not genuine. As bearing upon this pointreference may be made to a report of the dairy division of theUnited States department of agriculture on experimental exportsof butter, in the appendix to which are recorded the results of theanalyses of many samples of butter of varied origin. First, as toAmerican butters, 19 samples were analysed in Wisconsin, 17 inIowa, 5 in Minnesota and 2 in Vermont, at the respective experimentstations of the states named. The amount of moisturethroughout was low, and the quantity of fat correspondinglyhigh. In no case was there more than 15% of water, and only 4samples contained more than 14%. On the other hand, 11samples had less than 10%, the lowest being a pasteurized butterfrom Ames, Iowa, with only 6.72% of water. The averageamount of water in the total 43 samples was 11.24%. The fatvaries almost inversely as the water, small quantities of curd andash having to be allowed for. The largest quantity of fat was91.23% in the sample containing only 6.72% of water. Thelowest proportion of fat was 80.18%, whilst the average of allthe samples shows 85.9%, which is regarded as a good marketstandard. The curd varied from 0.55 to 1.7%, with an averageof 0.98. This small amount indicates superior keeping qualities.Theoretically there should be no curd present, but this degree ofperfection is never attained in practice. It was desired to havethe butter contain about 21/2% of salt, but the quantity of ashin the 43 samples ranged from 0.83 to 4.79%, the average being1.88. Analyses made at Washington of butters other thanAmerican showed a general average of 13.22% of water over28 samples representing 14 countries. The lowest were 10.25%in a Canadian butter and 10.38 in an Australian sample. Thehighest was 19.1% in an Irish butter, which also contained theremarkably large quantity of 8.28% of salt. Three samples ofDanish butter contained 12.65, 14.27 and 15.14% respectivelyof water. French and Italian unsalted butter included, theformer 15.46 and the latter 14.41% of water, and yet appearedto be unusually dry. In 7 samples of Irish butters the percentagesof water ranged from 11.48 to 19.1. Of the 28 foreignbutters 15 were found to contain preservatives. All 5 samplesfrom Australia, the 2 from France, the single ones from Italy,New Zealand, Argentina, and England, and 4 out of the 7 fromIreland, contained boric acid.

The Milk Trade

The term “milk trade” has come to signify the great traffic incountry milk for the supply of dwellers in urban districts. Priorto 1860 this traffic was comparatively small or in its infancy.Thirty years earlier it could not have been brought into existence,for it is an outcome of the great network of railways which wasspread over the face of the country in the latter half of the 19thcentury. It affords an instructive illustration of the process ofcommercial evolution which has been fostered by the vastincrease of urban population within the period indicated. Itis a tribute to the spirit of sanitary reform which—as an examplein one special direction—has brought about the disestablishmentof urban cow-sheds and the consequent demand for milk producedin the shires. London, in fact, is now being regularlysupplied with fresh milk from places anywhere within 150 m.,and the milk traffic on the railways, not only to London but toother great centres, is an important item. A factor in thedevelopment of the milk trade must no doubt be sought in theoutbreak of cattle plague in 1865, for it was then that the dairymenof the metropolis were compelled to seek milk all overEngland, and the capillary refrigerator being invented soonafter, the production of milk has remained ever since in the handsof dairymen living mainly at a distance from the towns supplied.

This great change in country dairying, involving the continuousexport of enormous quantities of milk from the farms, has beenaccompanied by subsidiary changes in the management of dairy-farms,and has necessitated the extensive purchase of feeding-stuffsfor the production of milk, especially in winter-time. Itis probable that, in this way, a gradual improvement of the soilon such farms has been effected, and the corn-growing soils ofdistant countries are adding to the store of fertility of soils in theBritish Isles. Country roads, exposed to the wear andtear of a comparatively new traffic, are lively at morn andeve with the rattle of vehicles conveying fresh milk from thefarms to the railway stations. Most of these changes werebrought about within the limits of the last third of the 19thcentury.

In the case of London the daily supply of a perishable articlesuch as milk, which must be delivered to the consumer within afew hours of its production, to a population of five millions, is anundertaking of very great magnitude, especially when it is consideredthat only a comparatively minute proportion of thesupply is produced in the metropolitan area itself. To meet thedemand of the London consumer some 5000 dairies proper exist,as well as a large number of businesses where milk is sold inconjunction with other commodities. It has been computedthat some 12,000 traders are engaged in the business of milk-sellingin the metropolis, and the number of persons employed inits distribution, &c., cannot be fewer than 25,000. The amountof capital involved is very great, and it may be mentioned thatthe paid-up capital of six of the principal distributing and retaildairy companies amounts to upwards of one million sterling.The most significant feature in connexion with the milk-supply ofthe metropolis at the beginning of the 20th century is the gradualextinction of the town “cowkeeper”—the retailer who producesthe milk he sells. The facilities afforded by the railway companies,the favourable rates which have been secured for thetransport of milk, and the more enlightened methods of its treatmentafter production, have made it possible for milk producedunder more favourable conditions to be brought from considerabledistances and delivered to the retailer at a price lower thanthat at which it has been possible to produce it in the metropolisitself. As a result, the number of milk cows in the county ofLondon diminished from 10,000 in 1889 to 5144 in 1900, thelatter, on an estimated production of 700 gallons per cow—theaverage production of stall-fed town cows—representing a yearlymilk yield of 3,600,000 gallons. How small a proportion this is ofthe total supply will be gathered from the fact that the annualquantity of milk delivered in London on the Great Western lineamounts to some 11,000,000 gallons, whilst the London & North-Westernrailway delivers 9,000,000, and the Midland railway atSt Pancras 5,000,000, and at others of its London stationsabout 1,000,000, making 6,000,000 in all. The London & South-Westernrailway brings upwards of 8,000,000 gallons to London,a quantity of 7,500,000 gallons is carried by the Great Northernrailway, and the Great Eastern railway is responsible for7,000,000. The London, Brighton & South Coast railway delivers1,000,000 gallons, and the South-Eastern & Chatham andthe London & Tilbury railways carry approximately 1,000,000gallons between them. A large quantity of milk is also carriedin by local lines from farms in the vicinity of London anddelivered at the local stations, and a quantity is also broughtby the Great Central railway. In addition to this, milk is takeninto London by carts from farms in the neighbourhood of themetropolis. A computation of the total milk-supply of themetropolis reveals a quantity approximating to 60,000,000gallons per annum, or rather more than a million gallons perweek, which, taking 500 gallons as the average yearly productionof the cows contributing to this supply, represents the yield of atleast 120,000 cows. The growth of the supply of country milk toLondon may be judged from the figures given by Mr GeorgeBarham, chairman of the Express Dairy Co. Ltd., in an article on“The Milk Trade” contributed to Professor Sheldon’s work onThe Farm and Dairy. The quantities carried by the respectiverailways in 1889 are therein stated in gallons as:—Great Western,9,000,000; London & North-Western, 7,000,000; Midland,7,000,000; London & South-Western, 6,000,000; GreatNorthern, 3,000,000; Great Eastern, 3,000,000; the southernlines, 2,000,000. The increase, therefore, on these lines amountedto no less than 13,500,000 gallons per annum, or 36%. Thediminished production in the metropolis itself amounted approximatelyonly to 3,000,000 gallons, and it follows, therefore, thatthe consumption largely increased.

​Previously to 1864 it was only possible to bring milk intoLondon from short distances, but the introduction of the refrigeratorhas enabled milk to be brought from places as farremoved from the metropolis as North Staffordshire, and it haseven been received from Scotland. Practically the whole ofthe milk supplied to the metropolis is produced in England.Attempts have been made to introduce foreign milk, and in1898 a company was formed to promote the sale of fresh milkfrom Normandy, but the enterprise did not succeed. The tradesubsequently showed signs of reviving, owing probably to theincreased cost of the home produced article, and during thewinter season of 1900–1901 the largest quantity received intothe kingdom in one week amounted to 10,000 gallons. Of recentyears a large demand has sprung up for sterilized milk in bottles,and a considerable trade is also done in humanized milk, whichis a milk preparation approximating in its chemical compositionto human milk.

Estimating the average yield of milk of each country cow at500 gallons per annum, and assuming an average of 28 cows toeach farm, as many as 4300 farmers are engaged in supplyingLondon with milk; allotting ten cows to each milker, it needs12 battalions of 1000 men each for this work alone. Some 3500horses are required to convey the milk from the farms to thecountry railway stations. The chief sources of supply are in thecounties of Derby, Stafford, Leicester, Northampton, Notts,Warwick, Bucks, Oxford, Gloucester, Berks, Wilts, Hants,Dorset, Essex, and Cambridge. It is not entirely owing to therailways that London’s enormous supply of milk has beenrendered possible, for the milk must still have been produced inthe immediate neighbourhood of the metropolis had not themethod of reducing the temperature of the product by means ofthe refrigerator been devised. There are probably 5700 horsesengaged in the delivery of milk in London, and more people areemployed in this work than in milking the cows. One of thegreat difficulties the London dairyman has to contend with, anda cause of frequent anxiety to him, is associated with the riseand fall of the thermometer, for a movement to the extent of tendegrees one way or the other may diminish or increase the supplyin an inverse ratio to the demand. Thus, at periods of extremecold, the cows shrink in their yield of milk, while from the samecause the Londoner is demanding more, in an extra cup of coffee,&c. Again, at periods of extreme heat, which has the same effecton the cow’s production as extreme cold, the customer alsodemands an increased quantity of milk. Ten degrees fall oftemperature in the summer will result in a lessened demand andan enlarged supply—to such an extent, indeed, that a singlefirm has been known to have had returned by its carriers some600 gallons in one day. In such cases the cream separator iscapable of rendering invaluable assistance. To make cheese inLondon in large quantities and at uncertain intervals has beenfound to be impracticable, while to set for cream a great bulk ofmilk is almost equally so. But now a considerable portion ofwhat would otherwise be lost is saved by passing the milkthrough separators, and churning the cream into butter.

Previously to the enormous development of the urban trade incountry milk, dairy farms were in the main self-sustaining in thematter of manures and feeding-stuffs, and the cropping of arableland was governed by routine. To-day, on the contrary, manydairy farms are run at high pressure by the help of purchasedmaterials,—corn, cake, and manure,—and the land is croppedregardless of routine and independent of courses. Such crops,moreover, are grown—white straw crops, green crops, root crops—asare deemed likely to be most needed at the time when theyare ready. Green crops,—“soiling” crops, as they are termedin North America,—consisting largely of vetches or tares (heldup by stalks of oat plants grown amongst them), cabbages, andin some districts green maize, are used to supplement the failinggrass-lands at the fall of the year, and root crops, especiallymangel, are advantageously grown for the same purpose. Forwinter feeding the farm is made to yield what it will in the shapeof meadow and clover hay, and of course root crops of the severalkinds. This provision is supplemented by the purchase of, forexample, brewers’ grains as a bulky food, and of oilcake and cornof many sorts as concentrated food.

British Output, Imports and Exports of Dairy Produce

Whilst the quantity of imported butter and cheese consumedin the United Kingdom from year to year can be arrived atwith a tolerable degree of accuracy, it is more difficult to forman estimate of the amounts of these articles annually producedat home. Various attempts have, however, from time to timebeen made by competent authorities to arrive approximatelyat the annual output of milk, butter and cheese in the UnitedKingdom, and the results are given by Messrs W. Weddel & Co.in their annual Dairy Produce Review. Table XI. shows theestimates for each of the ten years 1890 to 1899, the numbersin the second column of “cows and heifers in milk or in calf”being identical with those officially recorded in the agriculturalreturns. In thus estimating the quantity of milk, butter andcheese produced within the United Kingdom, the “averagemilking life” of a cow is taken to be four years, from which itfollows that on the average one-fourth of the total herd has tobe renewed every year by heifers with their first calf. Thisleaves 75% of the total herd giving milk throughout the year.Each cow of this 75% is estimated as yielding 49 cwt., or531 gallons of milk annually. It is assumed that 15% of thetotal milk yield is used for the calf, 32% utilized for butter-making, ​20% for cheese-making, and the remaining 33%consumed in the household as fresh milk. A ton of milk isestimated to produce 80 ℔ of butter or 220 ℔ of cheese. Agallon of milk weighs 10.33 ℔ (101/3 ℔). The probable effectsof each season upon the production have been taken into considerationin making these estimates, and it will be noticed thatowing to the terrible drought of 1893 a reduction of 9% ismade from the average. Accepting these estimates with duereservation,^[15] it is seen that the annual production of milk variedin the decade to the extent of nearly a million tons, the exactdifference between the maximum of 7,667,505 tons in 1894and the minimum of 6,712,004 tons in 1893 being 955,501 tons.The decennial averages are 7,906,874 tons of milk, 83,992 tonsof butter, and 141,412 tons of cheese.

The development of the dairying industry in the vast regionof the United States of America has been described in theofficial Year-Book by Major Henry E. Alvord, chief of the dairydivision of the bureau of animal industry in the departmentof agriculture at Washington. The beginning of the 20th centuryfound the industry upon an altogether higher level than seemedpossible a few decades earlier. The milch cow herself, upon whichthe whole business rests, has become almost as much a machineas a natural product, and a very different creature from theaverage animal of bygone days. The few homely and inconvenientimplements for use in the laborious duties of the dairyhave been replaced by perfected appliances, skilfully devisedto accomplish their object and to lighten labour. Long rowsof shining metal pans no longer adorn rural dooryards. Thefactory system of co-operative or concentrated manufacturehas so far taken the place of home dairying that in entire statesthe cheese vat or press is as rare as the handloom, and in manycounties it is as difficult to find a farm churn as a spinning-wheel.An illustration of the nature of the changes is afforded in thebutter-making district of northern Vermont, at St Albans, thebusiness centre of Franklin county. In 1880 the first creamerywas built in this county; ten years later there were 15. Nowa creamery company at St Albans has upwards of 50 skimmingor separating stations distributed through Franklin and adjoiningcounties. To these is carried the milk from more than 30,000cows. Farmers who possess separators at home may delivercream which, after being inspected and tested, is accepted andcredited at its actual butter value, just as other raw material issold to mills and factories. The separated cream is conveyedby rail and waggon to the central factory, where in one roomfrom 10 to 12 tons of butter are made every working day—asingle churning place for a whole county! The butter is all ofstandard quality, “extra creamery,” and is sold on its reputationupon orders received in advance of its manufacture. The priceis relatively higher than the average for the product of the samefarms fifty years earlier. This is mainly due to better averagequality and greater uniformity—two important advantagesof the creamery system.

In one important detail dairy labour is the same as a centuryago. Cows still have to be milked by hand. Although manyattempts have been made, and patent after patent has beenissued, no mechanical contrivance has yet proved a practicalsuccess as a substitute for the human hand in milking. Consequently,twice (or thrice) daily every day in the year, the dairycows must be milked by manual labour. This is one of the mainitems of labour in dairying, and is a delicate and important duty.Assuming 10 cows per hour to a milker, which implies quickwork, it requires the continuous service of an army of 300,000men, working 10 or 12 hours a day throughout the year, tomilk the cows kept in the United States.

The business of producing milk for urban consumption, withthe accompanying agencies for transportation and distribution,has grown to immense proportions. In many places the milktrade is regulated and supervised by excellent municipal ordinances,which have done much to prevent adulteration and toimprove the average quality of the supply. Quite as much is,however, being done by private enterprise through large milkcompanies, well organized and equipped, and establishmentswhich make a speciality of serving milk and cream of fixedquality and exceptional purity. Such efforts to furnish “certified”and “guaranteed” milk, together with general competitionfor the best class of trade, are doing more to raise thestandard of quality and improve the service than all the legalmeasures. The buildings and equipment of some of these moderndairies are beyond precedent. This branch of dairying isadvancing fast, upon the safe basis of care, cleanliness andbetter sanitary conditions.

Cheese-making has been transferred bodily from the domain ofdomestic arts to that of manufactures. In the middle of the 19thcentury about 100,000,000 ℔ of cheese was made yearly in theUnited States, and all of it in farm dairies. At the beginning ofthe 20th century the annual production was about 300,000,000 ℔,and 96 or 97% of this was made in factories. Of these thereare nearly 3000, but they vary greatly in capacity, and some arevery small. New York and Wisconsin possess a thousand each,but the former state makes nearly twice as much cheese as thelatter, whilst the two together produce three-fourths of the entireoutput of the country. A change is taking place in the directionof bringing a number of factories previously independent into a ​“combination” or under the same management. This tends toimprove the quality and secure greater uniformity in the product,and often reduces cost of manufacture. More than nine-tenths ofall the cheese made is of the familiar standard type, copied afterthe English Cheddar, but new kinds and imitations of foreignvarieties are increasing. The annual export ofcheese from the United States ranges between30,000,000 and 50,000,000 ℔. The consumptionper capita does not exceed 3½ ℔ per annum, whichis much less than in most European countries.

Butter differs from cheese in that it is stillmade much more largely on farms in the UnitedStates than in creameries. Creamery butter controlsall the large markets, but this representslittle more than one-third of the entire business.Estimating the annual butter product of the entirecountry at 1,400,000,000 ℔ not much over 500,000,000 ℔ ofthis is made at the 7500 or 8000 creameries in operation.Iowa is the greatest butter-producing state, and the onein which the greater proportion is made on the factoryplan. The total output of butter in this state is one-tenthof all made in the Union. The average quality of butterhas materially improved since the introduction of the creamerysystem and the use of modern appliances. Nevertheless, avast quantity of poor butter is made—enough to afford alarge and profitable business in collecting it at country stores atgrease prices or a little more, and then rendering or renovating itby patent processes. This renovated butter has been fraudulentlysold to a considerable extent as the true creamery article,of which it is a fair imitation while fresh, and several states havemade laws for the identification of the product and to preventbuyers from being imposed upon. No butter is imported, and thequantity exported is insignificant, although there is beginning tobe a foreign demand for American butter. The home consumptionis estimated at the yearly rate of 20 ℔ per person, which, ifcorrect, would indicate Americans to be the greatest butter-eatingpeople in the world. The people of the United States also consumemillions of pounds every year of butter substitutes andimitations, such as oleomargarine and butterine. Most of this isbelieved to be butter by those who use it, and the state dairycommissioners are busily employed in carrying out the lawsintended to protect purchasers from these butter frauds.

The by-products of dairying have, within recent years, been putto economical uses, in an increasing degree. For every pound ofbutter made there are 15 to 20 ℔ of skim-milk and about 3 ℔ ofbutter-milk, and for every pound of cheese nearly 9 ℔ of whey.Up to 1889 or 1890 enormous quantities of skim-milk and butter-milkfrom the creameries and of whey from the cheese factorieswere entirely wasted. At farm dairies these by-products aregenerally used to advantage in feeding animals, but at thefactories—especially at the seasons of greatest milk supply—thismost desirable method of utilization is to a great extent impracticable.In many places new branches have been institutedfor the making of sugar-of-milk and other commercial productsfrom whey, and for the utilization of skim-milk in various ways.The albumin of the latter is extracted for use with food productsand in the arts. The casein is desiccated and prepared as asubstitute for eggs in baking, as the basis of an enamel paint, andas a substitute for glue in paper-sizing. It has also been proposedto solidify it to make buttons, combs, brush-backs, electricalinsulators and similar articles.