The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, October 5, 1916, Page 6

e YN VYV Y VYV & s e At S R A T st oo et " tural college test mill been roused before. W. L. Stockham, state cereal chemist employed in the whe! Fargo. He is shown using on¢ of the delicate balances which tions for government and state data. Under the cooperative a; governnient furnishes two men (sometimes three), sends to Fargo from all over the country the grain that is being te have been considered, and the kind of. bread its flour will actually make, has been determined. ) i This rejected Pembina. county wheat produced, besides 66.4 percent of flour,. 17.7 percent of bran, and 17.46 percent of ‘shorts. = To make a barrel of flour it requires’ four bushels and 55 pounds. -But what kind of bread did it make? - Was the bread light enough? Was it 80 dark - it would disgust a careful houswife or a wide-awake baker? Was it s0 coarse in texture that it was all bubbles, or so heavy that it was like lead? . Not at all. - It produced a loaf of bread of 2590 cubic centimeters volume, which is at the top- in- this respect. Flour that produces loaves of 2200 cen- timeters is of standard quality, and no housewife or baker would turn it down for failing to produce 2500. Twenty- two hundred is standard. . In ‘color it scored " 92 per cent. Any flour that scores 88 per cent.or upwards is stan- dard. Some of the finest wheat sam- ples ever milled/ go only three or four per cent above this rejected one in color: of loaf. As to.texture it was 97 — 11 points ‘above standard! Most house- wives don’t make bread as:light, even, and smooth in texture as 97 per cent by millers’ and bakers’ standards. In fact & vast amount of the flour that they buy . will not make bread as good as thatc WHAT THE MILLS MAKE . AND WHAT THEY SAY- But in spite of this showing for re- Jjected wheat (and never forget that the millers' in their big, modernly equipped ' laboratories know every item of this down to a fraction of a cubic centimeter, ‘,and a fraction of one per cent) farmers are confronted daily with such. little flashes as- this: “ ** the spring wheat crop shortage intensified by the small: percentage of millable wheat, laid the foundation for the pre- gent. price level,” and ’ by statements that the mills ‘are unable to' buy any good wheat as - most ofiit'is of feed “quality; or'that the mills“are forced to buy. from’ Canada or Kansas in order to keep up ‘their ‘quality. ~$L76% a week ago the miller’ whe bought and converted: it into flour, bran eenings, or if - the 'screenings’ are - The truth babout milling .- and ‘shorts, ignoring the value of the the state two, 18 cents per bushel. But raise this to 80 cents, which Dr. Ladd“says means a big profit from the trade value of the manufactured wheat, and $1.47% left. Did the mills pay the farmer $1.47% for ‘this rejected Wheat? * ‘Every farmer would smile '‘at the thought. . Rejected wheat .on Septem- ber 18 was quoted in the Minneapolis Miller at” $1.18%% per bushel.: The dif- ference between what the farmer would ‘get for this wheat and $1.47% is exactly 29 cents— so much pure “velvet” for the miller’s pocket. And yet they are industriously circulating the hint that the 1916 wheat is mot millable. “NOT MILLABLE” ‘ THE MINNEAPOLIS STORY The ‘Minneapolis Journal seldem mis- ses an issue in. which it does not in some way-lay stress upon the assertion : that the mills: can not get: flour-making wheat in: the Northwest and have to remote ' corners of the - scour ' the country for. it. e s : But they are getting it right here in the Northwest, and as long as they can pile up such easy profits by keep- ing the farmers in ignorance, by dis- couraging them ‘with = their ' crop, they will not share a penny of it with the farmers. ' For the week ending Sep- tember: 16, flour in Mi Taking the mmmumund maxmmm quotations’ on fancy and second patents; average the. price of flonr that week was $7.50 per barrel.. ‘The reason that an’ average for the week is taken, is- so that no . extreme conclusions - will = be the facts rather than outside, It is more likely -It has just been shown that the value of ‘one bushel of this rejected its screenings, $1.77% per bushel . Wheat of this grade was “worth to mak quoted at $8.10 to $8.60 for best patents, down to' $6.50 10-$6.90 for first clears, - wheat goes into valucs ad ‘trust vpflc;zs:‘ aé &:i)scoyered by the North Dakota Agricul- should rouse the wheat growers of the entire northwest as they never have The amazing details of the ~mar-ket robbery at last are being laid bare, ct testing hboratol"y.at the Nérih Dakota Ag'ficulm:al col!ege'-at are constantly utilized in making the accurate tests and calcula- greement between the United States and North Dakota, the and half their joint time is given to each. - The government sted with a view to establishing national wheat grades. * produce an excellent-flour of fine color, fine texture, and fine loaf-volume, sell it at the present high market prices for flour and have' left over besides So much for ° the “millable” quality of the 1916 rust-shriveled wheat. NORTH DAKOTA NO. 4 . IS A HIGH GRADE WHEAT While this is figured on the = poorest sort- of wheat—rejected, there are telling figures' for the bettér grades: For instance another' sample on which the 1916 crop is worth to the miller for making flour, bran and shorts, ‘and for s the complete figures have been worked out ‘was ' graded as No. 4 and ; weighed . . before cleaning 52.5 pounds per bushel - and three pounds more per bushel after losses, this: No.-4 produced ' 63.03 per cent of flour, which is=above the per- volume was 2400 cubic centimeters, its . color score 92, and its texture 93; 'all high" above the standard ‘limit. ~ This wheat figured -out a value to the miller ‘of $1.80 per bushel including.its screens ings, or ‘one-half cent. less without the per bushel for cost and profit, $1.50' is But on September 18, this grad /e of Wheat was quoted at only $1:39%, the - ‘miller after milling it, Teserving about . 11 cents in ‘“velyet” and still keeping up, the hue and cry about the poor mill . quality of the 1916 wheat. =~ = Another sample of this ' season’s: light - Wweight wheat graded: rejected, which has been milled, but. for' which complete figures have mot been com-. piled, yielded' before ‘cleaning - only 34 poynds per bushel (after cleaning 43.5) but it gave 52.16 per cent flonr, 21.12. per cent of bran and 25 per cent of shorts. .What "kind "¢f flour did this shrunken, feather-weight stuff produce? Perhaps * the ordinary farmer would “think by looking at it that it would ba no good for flour—and 'that.is what tha millers want him to think. ‘But the big millers’ who' are’ buying 'this kind of wheat in Minneapolis * and elsewhers know exactly how much and what kind of flour it makes. This grain-gave flour 90 per cent perfect for color, ahd a loaf . that was-95 per cent perfect in texture, and had a volume' of 2340 cubic" centi- meters.. "This is a .record that every baker and miller would acknowledge is above the standard—and it was made from wheat of such shriveled up berries mixed with so much straw and chaff that the buyer. would have no trouble in convincing the grower that it was worth practically nothing. - - MILLING TESTS AGAIN PROVE JINJUSTICE OF THE GRADES Facts being newly gathered égain on* this season’s crop' simply corroborate (Continned on page 20) |