The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-07-25
"n'x>d FIour'' and liked Statesmen.

H.
Last year it was discovered that sun
dry millers were mixing a percentage
or nnely ground corn. meal with wheat
hour. There was nothing deleterious
In this to the digestion, however in
furious 1T was to the morals of those
engaged in the business. 1t was a fraud
on the purchaser who wished to buy
pure wheat flour, but no greater fraud
than may be found in a hundred diff
ferent directions of manufacture, dis
covered and undiscovered. Persons en-
gaging in any such practices are cheats
under the common law, and that is
supplemented in every state by anti
adulteration laws. The remedies lie in
amplitude ready to the hand of him
who will set in motion the machinery
of the law for their enforcement. There
was in this case great hubbub, but
no prosecutions. 1t afforded, however,
another opportunity for the enactment
Of one more superfiuous statute. and
for the eager politician, paying tie rlla
of craftsmanship, to get before the
public as a valuable, efficient and in
dispensable servant The statute was.
enacted to do no better service than
to again illustrate the truth of the re-
mark that but two things are certain
about any remedial law that it will NOT
effect the intended end, ard that no
one can predict what will be it's eff
fects. One more service, of doubtful
public good, it served. 1t enabled the
congressional statesman to pose. We
regret to be obliged to say that in this
case the statesman was representa-
tive from Minnesota, Mr.. Tawney That
gentleman was very active in securing
the passage of what is known as the
mixed -four act. We believe he f.am-
ed it; at least it came from his com
mittee, and he advocated it's adoption.
He explained its need, it's terms and
its effects. And all that he did was
conscientiously narrated by the ever
faithful Washington correspondent in
dispatches to his state paper. If COM
plications have arisen, If the act is not
what it seemed, If it lacks definiteness
OF statement, so that what it applies
to is obscure, and for this confusion,
criticism is visited upon Mr.. Tawney,
he merely pays the per atty Of his prom
inence in connection with it.
And confusion has arisen. The COM
missioner of internal revenue holds
that flour is -four, no matter Of what
substance made. There are sundry in
terests engaged in making -four other
than wheat. There are the millers of
buckwheat, whose product is also flour.
Rye, ground and bolted, also becomes
flour. Then there are the compounders
Of that mysterious substance known
as self-raising flour who mix with the
wheat flour other substances. The mill
ers mix wheat shorts with buck
wheat and sell it for pure buckwheat
-four. Rye gets mixed with other meal.
The net result of the law is mixed
lot of millers, statesmen and flour.
This mixture brings Mr.. Tawney to
the front again. He is reported as be-
ing surprised at the position taken by
the commissioner. He meant, his COM
mittee meant and congress meant
wheat flour only, of course. Any dolt
would know that. He is appealed to
by the mixers to go down to Washing
ton and argue the commissioner out
of his doltishness. It was said the
commissioner had asked him to come
and untangle the tangle. This that Of
ficer denies with some asperity. He is
incensed that it should be thought that
he cannot construe so plain a law. He
rejects the bubble Mr.. Tawney sug-
gests by which mixed flour will be con-
strued not to mean mixed wheat flour.
He insists that -four is flour, no mat
ter whether it be made of wheat, buck
wheat, rye or corn, and whether it
raises itself or is raised. AS it was
the function of Mr.. Tawney to make
law, so it is that of the commissioner
to construe 1t. He could not make it
nor can Tawney construe it. Each
in his separate star" performs his du-
ties. Mr.. Tawney, clearly. is not to be
felicitated upon the ability with which
he has performed his. He is a badly
s~yo1 49,