Willmar tribune., 1900-10-20

low they would be below the standard,
and if we once get below we cannot
tighten up, we can never get back.
There was never known such a thing
as tightening up a grade.
20. In other words, the rule never
worked both ways?
"a. No. sir.
Mr.. G. A. Tunnell, then Chief De-
putty Inspector at Minneapolis, was
placed on the stand.
20. You have testified that early
in the season you have to inspect
closer?
"A.Yes, at the very start.''
The committee in closing it's findings
from the evidence produced before it,
made this statement:
"From this it appears that nearly
one-third Of the crop has been mar
keted each year before the farmer is
enabled to get the grade that his crop
merits"
Who Got the Benefit
If the inspection from farmers
hands during the early shipping
season, when the bulk of the grain
left the farms, was severe, or, as dra-
matically explained by the republican
ex-chief, the custom was "to press the
grades down, press them down." who
got the benefit? Apparently, the in
spection out of dealers hands for ex-
port was not "pressed down. pressed
down." because eastern buyers some
times found a state of affairs widely
different. The Buffalo IN. Y. News,
OF Feb. II, last, contained an inter-
view on the subject of Minnesota
grades of the preceding season from
Chief Inspector j. D. Shanahan of the
Buffalo port, in which the latter was
quoted as saying:
"When was in the Northwest last
spring (spring of '99), I endeavored to
tell the people of Minnesota through
the press that they could not sell No.
2 Northern or No. 3 Northern to
eastern or foreign buyers by covering
it with No. Northern certificates, and
it looks to me as though they had
come to realize the fact.''
The condition here complained OF
took place prior to the spring of 1899,
under republican inspection, as ap-
pears from the face of it. And yet the
St. Paul Dispatch of Feb. 20, produces
it as condemnation of the Reishus
inspection, which did not begin until
the August following Mr.. Shanahan s
visit. This is the only serious criti-
cism that has ever been published in
regard to the standing of Minnesota
grades in the Eastern and foreign
market, and the complaint is against
republican inspection under a regime
that 'pressed down the grades in the
inspection from farmers hands. The
evidence is therefore corroborative O.
the charge that the inspection was i,
the interes Of favored parties betwee,
the producer and the foreign buyer ant
against the interests of both the grove
and the final consumer.
The reform in Minnesota grain in
spection under Governor Lind i
strongly reflected in testimony from
two sources: First, by that of tn
wheat-growefs who for the first tim
receive in the inspection from thei
/ hands the same just and liberal grade
! accorded to the grain trade; an
second, from the market records G
New York and Liverpool, where Min
nesota grades go with the same eve
and uniform standard established b
the inspection from the producer
hands. The worlds market and tn
farm join in approval of an inspectio
that is at once uniform, accurate an
honest, that knows neither fear nc
favor. .". t>~@
Greater Economy and Efficiency.
: AS showing the trend of economy
, the administration of the state graz
/ department during the past twel,
months, the following comparison wi
/ serve as an index: Minneapolis Il
: spection Department, July, 100
e So, ,1A.2l, against 50, ,s9677 for Ju
! 1899; Duluth Inspection Department
) July, 1900, 81, ,636.65, against So, ,906.
, for July, 1899; St Paul Inspection D
' partment, Sl37.25 for July, 100
) against S305.85 for July, 1899; pay-rc
4 of general office at ST. Paul, Jul
{ 1900, S4O9.4O, against. $4,000 for, Ju
+ a year ago. For the three inspectit
) departments and general Office pa
4 roll, the total for the month was r
8 duced from 81 ,694 ~ A to sc, 1867 81, a /
8 duction Of 81, 326. SO, or. II per cent. !.
: For the twelve months ending wi
81 July q, last, the cost of the entire q
& partment is as ollows: ,g.5 !.
al Year ending July 81 1900 ID h,
. Total cost OF Grain Department, In s5-'
cludng Board OF Appeals. /. 1924 5S8
4 Less expenses OF Board Of Appeals. l.
Ell Salaries 81 two helpers detailed to 3
"a ID bring samples to Board. .... .3l, 500. 90 5000