Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-09-28
Michigan, Colorado and California
Want the Result Of
Analyses.
PROF. WIDTSOE GIVES THEM.
Tells Just How Each Competitor Stood
After the Judges Had Got Through
Their Examination.

protest entered against the award Of
the Hayemeyer $500 cup for the best
exhibit Of sugar beets at the Eleventh
National Irrigation Congress are forth
coming As told In the dispatch from
Ogden on Saturday protests had been
filed with the committee In Ogden
against the award OF the cup to A.
Rhodes Of Garland. Utah. The protests,
Il now uanspires, were filed by e. C.
Post Of Michigan and Colorado and j,
Ross Clark OF Los Angeles, Cal. The
first named represents a German beet
seed house at Detroit and also held a
proxy as a delegate from Michigan and
participated In the convention proceed
ings. Mr. Clark, also. Is interested In
the beet sugar Industry In California.
The protest is based on the grounds
that the committee failed to notify the
competitors OF the result of their an
alyses on the beets entered for the cup.
The protests are put In. IL is under
stood. not for the purpose OF setting
aside the decision OF the judges but
for the purpose OF having the analyses
of all made public. This matter Will
be taken up at the meeting of the board
of control in ogden tonight.
HOW THEY STOOD.
Prof John A. Wldtsoe OF the Agri-
cultural College at Logan and one of
the members OF the beet testing com
mIttee which awarded the cup In an
interview has the following to say rel
atiye to the incident:
"A committee composed OF all the
sugar beet men at the congress met un-
der the direction OF the local board OF
control to formulate the rules govern
ing the award of the Havemeyer cup.
At the meeting of said committee
George IL. Herr OF California, w. X.
Wnterhalter OF Rocky Ford, Colo, and
myself were appointed judges and Mr.,
William Lawson Of the Utah Sugar
company. and q. w. Shaw of the Call
fornia Experiment station, were chosen
as chemists to analyze the beets.
THE rules formulated and agreed up
on by all the sugar beet men present
and approved by the local board OF
control were these.
"Flrst-Thirty-three points was a
maximum allowed for external form
and weight,
"second-Each per cent OF sugar In
the beet was TO count two points.
"ThIrd-Seventh- eight per cent purity
was 10 count twenty points and each
additional percent purity was to count
one additional point.
"Fourth-No beets to be considered
eligible for the cantet which contained
less than i4Npef ,ehat ,sitkar or less than
rs per cent purity. The final valuation
Of the beet to be the sum OF the points
assigned for FORM sugar and purity.
After the rules had been formulated
Ia ..t. t.1 agst.
exhibit of sugar beets and assigned
points TO each on external form and
weight Each member of the commit
tee then selected one beet from the six
constituting each exhibit The three
beets 40 selected were sent to the chem
lists for analysis. The chemists knew
those beets only by numbers.
After the analyses had been made
report was submitted TO the committee
OF judges who then proceeded to obtain
the total number OF points to be as
signed each exhibit by adding to the
points already obtained for external
form and weight, the points based on
the chemical analysis.
oelyed from A. Rhodes of Garfield,
Utah, was shown to have received 93
points; exhibit No. {, from the Utah
Sugar company Of Garland, Utah, re-
ceived 80 points; exhibit No. II, from
Austin Brothers, Rexburg. Idaho, re-
ceived so points, exhibit No. IS from
the Union Sugar company, Betteravia.
Cal, and exhibit No. AZ, from David
Barnes, Loveland Colo. both received
Sc points. The remaining 20 exhl- |
bits which were eligible for the COM
petition received from 81 to 70 points |
There was a total OF CT exhibits, ~ OF |
which fell below the standard OF IA per- |
cent sugar or rs per cent purity
ut Is absurd 10 bring this matter in |
to question. Three men with three diff |
ferent interests passed on the question |
and We're unanimous In the decision. |
The work Of the chemists and judges
was entirely independent Of each other
the work OF the Judges having been |
done before the beets went to the |
chemists, except the computation OF |
results. The beets went 10 the chem |
lists by number, who In connection with !
the Judges We're entirely Ignorant OF Y
the locality In which they were raised.
II Utah ever won q contest fairly she
did this one, Utah Is Justly entitled TO
the cup and here the cup should re-
main"