The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, March 1, 1917, Page 5

Closing the Door on Dr. Ladd Federal Investigators State That His Findinlgs and Recommendations Will - Have No Effect in Establishing New United States Grain Grades INNEAPOLIS, Feb. 22.—The federal grain grading hearings for the hard spring wheat belt adjourned this afternoon with the following statement of C. J. Brand, chief of the office ot markets, United States department of agriculture: “l had hoped that we would find some of Dr, Ladd's suggestions and data of value in fixing the fed- eral grades. However, after hav- ing one of our men working on his figures and recommendations for a day, and giving about three hours’ consideration to the matter myself, | have come to the conclusion that little” if anything he has to offer can be of much help to us. “l am sorry about this, because I had been led to believe that Dr. Ladd had considerable of real value to offer and | know great store has been set on his investi- gations in many quarters. “In the first place we absolutely cannot consider his proposition of price differentials and premiums in the grades. We are authorized by congress to fix standards for qual- ity and condition of wheat only. We cannot consider price. The prices of the grades we fix will be determined by commercial conditions. In the second place we find that Dr. Ladd's tests as reported by him are not any bet- ter if as good as our own. In fact, he has based much of his work on tests in which the wheat was used _ before dockage was taken out, and the rest on tests of wheat where dockage was left in, making a double basis which is confusing and causes error. Also we find the samples he usc! were taken from a limited area and not a wide area, as our samples have been. 1 think we found that 47 out of 80 samples he used in one instance were taken from the farm at the North Dakota Agricultural col- lege, instead of from a wide area in the hard spring wheat district. “l want to make this statement in fairness, and to clear up any misunderstanding about the Ladd recommendations.” MILLERS APPLAUD BRAND’S WORDS This statement, made by the man who will fix the new federal wheat grades, was greeted by applause. There were over 100 elevator and mill men present and only a few representatives of the producers, Mr, Brand added: “l may find on further exami- nation that | am mistaken, but that's how | feel now, and | do not believe that Dr. Ladd is going to be of much help to us.” Mr. Brand's estimate of Dr. Ladd was brought out after he had hinted at both today’s and yesterday’s hear- ing that the Ladd tests were unreliable and his recommendations too radical and sweeping to consider. The direct statement that the Ladd recommen- dations would in all probability be re- jected in toto was made when a mem- ber of the Minnesota legislature asked Mr. Brand flatly what he thought of Dr. Ladd and his findings. “Then you do not think Dr. Ladd s an expert?” asked the questioner, after Brand’s opinion was given. v “I must beg to be excused from stat- ing whether or not any man is an ex- pert,” was the U. S. department man’s reply. PRODUCERS’ SIDE IS GIVEN HEARING This setting aside of the data on which the wheat producers of the northwest hoped to obtain justice in what they believe are the present un- fair grading rules, came at the close of the most interesting meeting held by the dederal men since the hearings for the hard spring wheat district open- ed in Fargo last Tuesday. A. F. Tiegen and Magnus Johnson, members of the Minnesota legislature and farmers, were present this after- noon and voiced for the first time in the Minneapolis hearings the real views of the wheat producers. : The extent to which wheat should be discriminated against ‘on account of the presence of wild peas was under discussion. The proposed federal rules, like the present Minnesota grades put a heavy penalty on wheat containing wild peas and clags them as “insepar- able” foreign matter. Millers approved this provision, ndtably I. M. Crosby, of the Washburn-Crosby mill, as did a representative of the Pillsbury mills. ‘“As a member of the legislature,” said Mr. Tiegen, “I was on a commit- tee investigating scales at the various mills here the other day. I dropped out of the party and interviewed one of the employes at the Washburn- Crosby mill, while the committee was there. I asked him if the mills could take wild peas out of wheat. He said they sure could, and that they had machinery for removing all kinds of so-called inseparable matter from grain. I asked him to show me how he did it. He took me to a number of big machines where they were taking wild peas out of grain. They were ma- chines that utilized centrifugal force in matter,” they have the privilege of putting in machinery ahd cleaning - the wheat themselves. They can- not hope to have the grades pro- tect them in raising goor, dirty wheat and failing to have their local elevators use proper care or put in proper machinety.” The first day of ducted -at . Minneapolis by the U. S. department of agriculture pre- liminary to final fixing of the fed- eral grain grades which are to determine the conditions under which the wheat of the northwest is to be marketed, was a millers’ hearing. No grain producers were heard and the hearing con- only a few were present. Hardly a word was said from tha farmers’ standpoint. The score or two of millers, com- and it will slip into the high grades, where it should not be.” Commissioner Rhenke of the Minne- apolis hoard of grain appeals, when called on to answer the charge that “humpback” was bought cheap, and sold high, by mixing with other grades, said: § “It may be true, I will not dispute it.” BRAND TAKES GIDE OF MILL INTERESTS “The opinion here certainly seems to be that humpback ought to be dis- criminated against,” said C. J. Brand, in charge of the hearings for the United States department. “I am not sure but that we ought to make a spe- cial grade for it.” C. B. Pierce, a grain dealer of Chi- A group of those who attended the federal grain grade hearings at Fargo, photographed for the Leader. four, left to right, are Mr. Brand of the federal department; Mr. Thomas, U. S. employe co-operating in the wheat tests at the North Dakota Agricultural college; Dr. Boyle, investigator of ‘market conditions for the North Dakota experiment station; Dr. Duvel, who, with Mr. Brand, will fix the new federal grades. The first The last one on the right is Mr. Bemmels of the Bemmels Milling company, Ljsbon, N. D, and next to him is J. G. Crites, general manager of the Equity Co-operative exchange, St. Paul. a system of spirals. The grain is ro- tated and the peas flow out of one spout and the wheat another, “Judging from the stream of peas I saw going out that spout, they were taking peas out of several carloads of wheat all at once. I asked the man if the peas were worth anything. He said the mill sold them for $30 a ton. Now the point I am making is, you call peas inseparable and grade wheat away down when they are present. The mills get it cheap, take the seeds out and have the best kind of milling wheat left and besides they have the peas, which they sell for $30 a ton and which ought to pay the cost of separa- tion. Is it fair to the producer?” CROSBY “EXPLAINS” WILD PEA MACHINE Mr. Crosby was then recognized by the chair. “It is true we have such machines as Mr. Tiegen has mentioned,” he said. “However, they are very costly to operate and are not a success. The process of getting the peas out is very slow, and even with the machines we have we cannot clean the grain fast enough to use. To install enough ma- chines to handle it would be too costly. We are really merely trying out these machines and expect we will have to discard them and refuse to buy wheat containing very many Dpeas, unless millwrights invent some better ma- chinery.” “It strikes me,” said Mr. Brand, after hearing the miller’s explanation, “that it is a case of the cost of cleaning out peas being too high. I would say that it is much like making paper from corn stalks, Wé& find we can make fine paper from corn stalks, but the process is so complicated and expensive it does not pay. I judge that's the case with trying to separate wild peas, judging from what the millers sa$™ DR. DUVEL WOULD LET FARMERS DO IT ‘Dr. Duvel of the federal department added that small mills had no ma- chinery like big mills to clean wheat and the grades had to be made to cover the conditions the small miller had to meet. “Also,” said Dr. Duvel, “if the farmers or country elevators think they are getting cheated on wild peas or other inseparable foreign FIVE mission men and elevator men who spoke, were satisfied with the basic plan of the grades adopted by the United States department, men, but they bent their efforts particularly to obtain minor changes that would dis- criminate more strictly against certain varieties of wheat grown by the farmers. This position of the millers was well illustrated when the discussion turned to “humpback” wheat. This variety is at present discriminated against by the Minnesota grades by the provision that it shall never take a grade better than No. 3 northern. The proposed I'ederal grades elimin- ate this discrimination, allowing “humpback” to take any hard spring grade it can make on its merits. “Humpback, while it gives farmers a larger yield makes very poor flour and should be in a grade by itself, or otherwise separated out from the rest of the wheat,” said Mr, Stockman of Duluth. “It should be an outlaw.” WANT “HUMPBACK” IN A LOWER GRADE “The reason we have removed the discrimination against it,” said Dr. Duvel of the Federal department, “is because it cannot well be distinguished from other hara spring wheat in ap- pearance, and because it is now milled or resold at the terminals after mixing with other grades. “We find, to tell you the truth, that while it is sent to Minneapolis and knocked down to No. 3 or worse under present grades, being bougks at a low price, it is apparently never shipped out. It disappears. “Somebody, therefore, gets a big profit on it by mixing before re-ship- ment, or it is milled.” Chairman Jacobsen-of the Minnesota railrond and warehouse commission, which conducts the present Minnesota grading system, arose and said: ‘“We put ‘humpback’ in No. 3 to discourage farmers from raising-it. It weighs heavy per bushel and ¢ would make high grades unless we discriminated against’it, altho it is a poor milling variety.” Mr. Benson of the Newhouse Stabeck Company said: “If you let that rule stand, you will encourage the raising of ‘humpback’ cago, and 1. M. Crosby, of Washburn and Crosby, millers, Minneapolis claimed tests showed ‘“humpback” was inferior and should not be allowed to get in the higher hard spring wheat grades. The millers approvea the plan in the proposed grades to keep “Red” durum in a separate grade, carrying out dis- crimination against it now existing. “Red” durum is called “Ladd's” durum by the millers, the inference be- ing it was invented by Dr. Ladd of North Dakota. As a matter of fact it is “D5,” the. rust resisting strain of durumn produced by Professor Bolley of the North Dakota Agricultural col- lege. The present grades will not let it go better than No. 3 durum. Millers were sarcastic about Bolley’s wheat. Mr. Crosby said it was very inferior and several other millers said likewise. § “But you must remember a lot more of it is going to be grown,” said Mr. Duvel. “l hear 40 per cent of the durum this year will be this strain. Farmers plant it because it yields well and certainly it did re- sist the rust of 1916.” Mr. Brand suggested that it probably would not be wise to discriminate too strictly against new wheats. He pointed out that millers once discrim- inated against durum of all kinds and against velvet chaff, “We must be far-sighted,” he said. Wheat dealers also objected to the proposed new grades dropping the term “Northern spring wheat.” They said this term was a trademark ftor hard spring wheat grown in the North- west and that it had great commercial value. Chief grain inspector Emerson of Minnesota was present but made no remarks until called on by Mr. Brand. “Our department does not intend to say anything here,” he said. “We will file with you a written brief in dus time.” “Well” said Mr. Brand, “we would discussion of what you have to say al- discusion of what you have to say al- so. We must thresh these things out in public hearings.” In answer to questions from Mr. Drand, Inspector Emersan said he be- lieved the = discrimination against “humpback” should be continued, but nothing else could be gotten out of him. > P o