The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, September 21, 1916, Page 5

' St. Anthony falls and the milling and elevator district of aneapolls as seen from the falls, taking in both banks of the river. HERE is considerable discussion going on about the new Minne- sota -grades. I have be_en - requested to g1ve my opinion in regard to them. First and foremost I want it dxstmctly understood that I favor the grading of wheat on its milling qualities, and in case of disputes between producer and buyer or - manufacturer 2 chemical analysis shall decide the grade: But the new grades reject this idea. They are basically the same grades as we have always had. 'l‘hey grade wheat still' by the touch, sight; feel, smell—by physical appearance instead of lmllmg tests. Now,. to make it plam to all what T mean by the above I will take one of the ~ new.: grades “as-an” example; the rule for: No. 8 Northern. - The {ule now is:" - “No. 3 Northem spnng wheat shall be composed ‘of mfenor, ‘shrunken’ spring wheat ‘and weigh' ot less than b4 pounds to the measured bushel, and shall not contam to exceed 2 per cent of vetch (wild'peas) or kingheads; ingly or com- mingled; andnottoexceedatotalofai per cent. of-inseparable -seed.” _HOW TO MAKE GRADES BOTH ACCURATE AND FAIR ~* “That is the rule. Now what I stand - for is to ‘add‘to’ that rule as it stands the following: “_and the chemical ana]ysxs shell be, per cent of flour, 69.41; per cent of bran, - 12.60; per cent of shorts, 15.23; protein, 15.68 per 'cent;; per cent of moisture tempering, 13.14; moxsture in flour, 115 per cent.” “‘That makes the grade scxentlfic, accur- ate and fair. =1 have taken these per- centages just as an example, for the . purpose of showing what is meant by milling quahtxes or a chemical analysis. But the grain board in the new.rules . has added no such provision to the rules as contended for by the farmers. - "My "opinion in* regard to the new Min- - nesota grades ' is that they are much more easily understood by the grain trade, but I-see no advantage to the pro- ducer of ‘grain in them. In fact there is -really . no change in the grading rules for Northern: spring. wheat,. except in the grade. No. 1 'hard. The new ’grades . merely give ‘the per cent of foul seéds that will place the wheat in the dlfiemt grades. This makes the grades easier understood by the grain trade but: hardly can be consxdered any help tao pmdueers. - ONLY. REAL CHANGE INJUkY TO FARMERS ' ~But in the aseof No. 1-ha.rd spnng wheat, tne best rfidggw) % m the farmers, espemafly ch usepl ad a resylt' of that hearing. What the F armers May Expect in Market as Result of Board’s Recent Action BY J. A. M’'GOVERN Veteran grain grader of St. Paul ‘'WHAT THE FARMER GETS OUT OF IT HE Minnesota grain board of appeals made a great show of T listening ‘to farmers and their representatives last month before fixing.the fiew 1916 grades for grain.: It was the first time the farmers had been heard. Formerly only millers, chamber - of commerce experts'and elévator men had been heard by the board before fixing the grades. the Leader. . Now the grain board has fixed and published the new rules as All grain of North and South Dakota, ‘Minnegota . and ‘Montana marketed. through Minnesota terminals, ‘and practically all of it is, must be sold under these new 1916 grades. What effect had this heanng on the new grades? This was all reported in news articles in . ''The grades make some important changes:in the rules but - ACTUALLY MAKE CONDITIONS WORSE FOR THE FARMERS. : “The chief changes make the:rules more specific and make them They help the grain easier to understand by the grain trade. ) buyers. The farmer gets practically nothing by the changes. INSTEAD, THE GRAIN BOARD HAS MADE IT MORE DIF- FICULT FOR:WHEAT TO BE GRADED NO. 1 HARD, THE HIGHEST GRADE. ADDITIONAL PENALTIES HAVE BEEN - MADE FOR FOREIGN MATTER IN THE GRAIN. - - THE PROPOSITION OF GRADING GRAIN ON ITS/MILLING VALUE UNDER RULES FIXED BY CHEMICAL ANALYSES - AND MILLING TESTS, THE CHIEF POINT CONTENDED FOR BY THE FARMERS AT THE HEARING LAST MONTH, IS REJECTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. - No newspaper has covered the news about these new g'rades, except: from the point of viewof the state inspection department, the millers and the chamber of commerce. . So the Leader got J. A. McGovern of St. Paul, veteran gram grader, an experienced grain ' man ‘not_connected ‘with ‘the grain combme, to analyze these new 2 grades from the.farmers’ standpomt _He has done it in the article pnnted herew1th g - Paul for his milling wheat. able to get No. 1 hard there in its purity.- Now, will not this raise of 25 per cent North Dakota, where the blg bulk of the No. 1 hard comes from. - . “Thé -old : No:-: 1 -bard: grade was as: follows: . “No. 1 hard spring wheat shall be dry sound, bnght, sweet, clean and consist of over 50 per cent of the hard varieties and ,we:gh not - less thau 58 pounds to the . measured bus .The new rule. 1s the same as the old except that instedd of wheat being made tocontmn“overBOper t of the hard ' Yarieties” to make thisrade,; it is made to. contam‘“over 76 per cent ofvt.he hard kernels.” ' In other words they ‘have raised the standard considerably . and made it much. harder for wheat to make . this: best grade.' Let me state that the Illinois and Wis- ‘consin grade for No. 1 hard.requires that it shall consist of only 50 per cent of the hard variety, the same as the old Minne- sota = rule. . The ‘difference between the No. 1 hard and the N"'» Northern, the next lower grade, averages three cents in favor of the hard. The différetice: was one iéent betweethe Nd. L ST W on goa lnd .in. price: choice Northern. The new rule for No. 1 hard means that much wheat that formerly got this grade will not make it now and will sell on thée average for three cents a bushel less. ' WHO WANTED THIS CHANGE .IN THE GRADING RULES? I don’t think that the man who is interested in raising No. 1 hard asked that it should be made to contain 25 per cent more hard wheat than formerly, and 25 per cent more than the grade * requirements in Wisconsin and Tllinois. Now_ the question is, who dxd want this : change" v The country miller the last few years has got in the habit of coming to St. in the standard of No. 1 hard have a tendency to cause the shipper.to send his No. 1 hard wheat, or wheat that he thinks ought to get that grade, to a market where the rule only requires 50 per.cent to place it in No. 1 hard, instead of 75 per cent? The Minnneapolis millers, or the most of . them; have. their' country elevators ‘through the. hard wheat belt and it is immaterial to them whethér or not theé shipper sends a bushel ‘of hard wheat to Minneapolis. They get their No. 1 hard from their own country. elevators. - The same will apply to the line elevators. They are located where the No. 1 hard is raised. Can’t they say to the buyer of No. 1 hard, “Come to us if you want No. 1 hard.” So I say it was not the producer who wanted that"rile changed: . The old rule for No. 1 Northern spring wheat. was as follows: . “No. 1 Northern spring wheat shall be dry, sound, sweet and clean. It may consist of the hard and soft varieties of spring wheat and weigh not less than 57 pounds to the measured bushel.” -To this old rule the new rule has added the following: . .. . ‘“—and shall not conta.m to exceed one- half of one per cent of vetch (wild peas) or kingheads, singly or commingled, and ‘not- to_exceed a total of one-per cent of inseparable weed seed.” LOWERING THE GRADE 5 FOR MILLER’S BENEFIT This new grade: of No. 'l *Northern~ would lead us to believe that wild peas could not be separated from the wheat, I have the word of Minnesota millers that they have machinery that separates .the wild peas from the wheat. So I say that to lower the’ grade on account of wild péas or kmghea.ds is too great a penalty. The average’ price of No. 1 Northern is three cents higher. than No. anines Kc.vnhnned 9n_ page 20)... oy - ] mg fo_r an. “open marke ” for grain as long' ‘as grades are made for the of commission me; buyers and speculators. - The state of Minnesota is SUPPOSED to fix the ' » ‘ahout grades? Why leave it all to the experts” who make‘. o rofits out of bo \_prod cersand‘ nsumers? -He has been": T