The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-10-10
Grain Inspection Apologetics.

0Td!H iHSpSCttON RpolOgStlCSs
We adverted recently to the inter-
view with Chairman Mills, of the
state board of railroad and ware
house commissioners, in which he
said probably all there Is to be said
in answer to the complaints of the
system of inspection of grain, but does
not meet them. In fact it is more a
plea of confession with an effort at
avoidance, on which any court would
order judgment on the pleadings for
the complainant. What is this system
that, ever since it was established, in
spite of the biennial patches of correc-
tive legislation applied, has brought
forth ar annual crop of complaints?
Grain, like any other product of human
labor, varies in quality, and the varia-
lions affect its value. Cattle, hogs, but
ter barley, wool, potatoes, everything
the farmer raises, are subject to the
same variations In quality. In the gen
eral markets these varying qualities
are known and roughly classified. In
everything but his grain, and in that
mainly the wheat, the farmer and the
local buyer deal with reference to these
classifications, the buyer using his
judgment as to the class to which the
article belongs and gauging his offer
by it; the farmer interested more in the
srfficiency Of the offer.
AS to grain our inspection system
attempts to suDersede this natural
operation. The railroad and warehouse
commission annually promulgates an
order establishing grades and defining
what qualities constitute each grade.
Precision is impossible because quail
ties vary so greatly, and all that is at
tempted is to roughly approximate &C
curacy. Whether a given consignment
OF grain falls into one or another grade
depends upon the expert judgment Of
the inspector. Also on his honesty.
This inspection is made, not at the time
and place where the two persons, sell
er and buyer, most interested are, the
local market, but at terminals, hun
dreGs of miles distant ana days after
the farmer has sold and the local buyer
bought the grain. The inspector stands
betW cen the local buyer, now a shipper,
and the buyer at the terminal. In no
sense does he represent the interests OF
the producer, for that person parted
with all interest in the grain when he
delivered 1t to the local buyer and got
his check. Barring the right of appeal
to the chief deputy and from him to
the commission, if the local buyer
thinks the Inspector errs in his judg
ment, the judgment of the inspector
is conclusive on him. But it does not
bind the terminal buyer. He is not
No. hard simply because an inspector
has so rated it. He buys, just as
the local buyer would if unhampered
by state interference, on the quality
Of the article. If we mistake not, Mr..
Letter refused to accept some duly in
spected grain rendered by Mr.. Armour
because it was not in fact of the grade
called for.
What then is the use Of a state sys-
tenn? Whom does it benefit? For whom
was it created? Clearly not for the
farmer, for it does not get to work
until long after he has let his grain
60 Not the local buyer, for 1t merely
puts between him and the man who
buys grain from him the judgment
of another man, who, as Chairman
Mills admits, is liable to err and, as
a legislative committee revealed some
five years ago, is not always of in
vulnerable honesty. 1t is of advantage
to some one to have grain classified
by state authorities, because it makes
sier the buying and selling in large
quantities for delivery at distant mar
! kets. It advantages only the dealer at
the terminals and that is all the whole
mass of laws was intended for, al
though the pretense was that they
are for the sole benefit of the poor
farmer. And it is not creditable to
the lligence Of the latter that he has
imagined that the pretense was fact,
in spite of his annual demonstration
that the system does not bring him
any benefit.