Smyrna times., 1895-11-13
Rerly to T. B. c. With a Bic "Y.''

RNA'iy az = D. ~ " lti a DIX
special ,orr. -pondencc to he smyrna Times
EDIroE or SMYRNA TIMES:
Dear Sir The letter printed in the TINES
over the signature OF 7. b. Coursay. Spring
Mills. IN reply and as an answer to the uues-
tion. is it Honest :" being the headline of
communication printed in the Times of
date 23d OF October, referring to millcrs
first taking toll ont OF wheat, rs directed by
law. and in addition thereto keeping the
coarse flour or middlings which of right be-
longs TO the farmer who takes his wheat to
the mill to be ground into flour for family
use.
1t must be evident TO the reader of the
two communications that T. b. Courspy is "A
miller and personally and peculiarly inter-
ested IN I'VE Answer Yes With Big "Y."
He proceeds to explain that 1t Is honest for
milleIs To first take their toll, as prescribed
by law, t!Ieu ip order tD Justify ihsm in
taking the coarse -four or middlings, he al
leges the law which he obeys as far as it is
to his interest to do; was passed about a
hundred years ago and IS out of date. Does
not T. B. c. with big 'Y' know that the
writer knows that he knows that all laws no
matter when they We're passed are operative
until repealed. As well might he undertake
to disregard the various provisions uf the
Constitution of the State of Delaware be
cause IT was adopted more than a hundred
years ago and Il now ont OF date. To un-
d2rtake to set aside the law which Is opera
tive, in order To Justify his action in taking
from the farmer that which the millers
| clearly have no legal right to do, is a poor
excuse TO justify him in taking from the
| farmer that portion of his grist which mill
/ ers clearly have no legal or equitable right
In order to test the custom OF the millers
the writer sent bllshel of wheat to mill to
be ground into flour for family use, and in
stead of having the miller take therefrom
Nla II A.v,Hh 4911 L. =
price charged for grinding, which was stated
eight cents a bushel, which was paid, feel
| ing assured that he would get not only the
| supertine flour; the coarse flour or middlings
as well as the bran, which was clearly of
| right his for he had paid for grinding the
bushel Of wheat. The miller, however,
| kept the coarse flour or middiings as a per-
quisite in addition to the charge of eight
cents for grinding.
| 1t Is not a question whether the price of
wheat was 50 per bushel or corn 81 so and
is now so or 60 cents for wheat and 40 for
corn, nor is 1t question whether the roller
process Of grinding wheat makes whiter
| flour for the farmers pr their wives, than
| the burr millers make. The reason why
millers changed their process of grinding
| grain from the burr to the roller was because
it was an improvement, less expensive, more
| expeditions, and made more and better
flour, otherwise why should they change as
aleSeu Dy !. -, AOurSeyi ullltI, ab IN eX-
pense of several thousand dollars.
The question, rs it Honest?" for millers
to take toll for grinding wheat as directed
by law one-tenth, and in. addition keep the
coarse flour or middlings, which the writer
contends belongs to the farmer. That is
the question which I'VE Answer Yes With a
Big ''Y'' states T. h. CouTsey, Spring Mills.
And as if to intimidate any one in order to
prevent them claiming their rights under
the law, no closes his letter, which seems ia
be an excuse or apology for wrong doing,
by stating ''any one who may see proper to
sue miller who only takes the usual amount
claimed by roller mills will find that he will
have the costs to pay"
The writer fails to see after careful and
critical reading of Z. B. Courseys letter OF
excuse or apology for milleTs taking what
clearly seems To belong to the farmer, why
the law does not govern the roller process
as it has the burr millers, except as he states
lit is out of date" VIII he explain? %%*