As a maker, I have had opportunities of seeing milk in all stages and in all conditions, and I have found it an invariable rule that the milk furnished by farmers who read and studied the dairy question in all of its phases; who were conversant with dairy literature and adopted the most improved methods extant for producing an abundant, pure and rich flow of milk, were enough affected by the ideas absorbed from library and press to be unconsciously moulded by their influence. On the other hand, farmers who never read; who avoided all progressive methods as “new-fangled notions” and clung to the primitive ways of their ancestors, forgetful that those ancestors adopted nothing new because there was no new thing to adopt, furnished milk sometimes good, often poor, and never profitable to themselves. A man who doesn’t have an opinion on the relative value of milch breeds, who doesn’t know how to feed scientifically and who has narrow conceptions of systematic dairying, generally is, in this competitive epoch, an agricultural cipher.
The other day the writer inspected two cheese factories, separated by only a few miles, each being located on admirable sites and accessible to water. Previous to my visit I had been told that the maker in B——’s factory had, during the past season, produced poor, uneven stock, which was a surprise to his friends, as his trade reputation was excellent. On the other hand, I knew that the cheese from W——’s factory, although manufactured by a man of less experience than his rival, had sold at prices above the former’s and footed up a lower ratio. As soon as I had seen the interior of each building the sequel was made plain to me, and subsequent investigation proved it. The first named factory was a mere shell, furnished with utensils both primitive and worn out; the second was a tight, plastered structure and equipped with all of the paraphernalia essential to a modern cheese building. The competition was like running a pony express against a United States mail train.
A cheese factory needs good, improved utensils, just the same as a farm requires machinery of the latest patterns. It should have a boiler, because steam heating is cheaper, more under control and, consequently, safer for scalding than where fire under heating is employed. It should be furnished with a curd mill, because with one the maker has the acid almost completely under control. Without a mill, the whey must be retained until nearly enough acid has developed to meet the requisite gauge. Then it must be hastily drawn and hastily salted, with the whey not all out of it; too often the acid is in advance of the maker’s expectations. Cheese made in this way from day to day cannot help but be uneven in flavor, in salt and in acid. “Salting in the whey,” as it is called, without a mill is wasteful, too. As the whey flows off, the constant tendency of the curd is to pack, and hand manipulation to prevent this will start white whey, the life blood of the cheese, in wasteful quantities. With a mill to use, all this is changed. The whey can be drawn when but very little acid has appeared, and the curd, packed and drained, waits for the sourness to develop there. It matures more slowly than when submerged in whey, and when the right point is reached the iron teeth of the mill attack it and tear it up and salt it when in a dry state, which is a great advantage. The make-room should be supplied with a gang press and patent hoops, because one screw will compress a dozen cheese and solidify them more firmly than old fashioned single screws. A good cheese can be spoiled after it is in the hoop by insufficient pressing.
I consider the latest milk handling devices almost as essential in a modern factory or creamery as the practical knowledge of the maker. Not merely for labor saving purposes should manufactories be so supplied, but because the demands of present trade require dairy products of a complexion difficult to attain without. It is a “penny wise and pound foolish” policy to scantily furnish a butter or cheese plant when thereby the loss on one under price sale would have more than covered the deficiency in tools.
TO CHEESE MAKERS.
The main point why Canadian cheese is lately quoted higher than American is that they are ahead of us on uniformity. To obtain this a uniform Rennet and a uniform Color are most essential. No matter how careful the maker is, he can never get it as uniform as our
Chr. Hansen’s Rennet Extract
——AND——
CHEESE COLOR.
Taking into account the poor Rennets in the market, the saving by making your own Extract is very small; and as to Cheese Color, even if you did save 60 cents a gallon it would only cost you 5 cents more to color 1000 pounds of cheese, a mere nothing if ours is at all more uniform and of a more natural shade, bright, clean, creamy, and not dull reddish.