The Fargo forum and daily republican., 1916-10-05

give ground Tor broad averages. AT
present Is county agents are gathering
five samples each, 26 agricultural col
| lege experimental farms are sending
| in five SAMPLES each, five sub-station
men are gathering many samples, be-
| sides many grown on the college
grounds at Fargo, while private grow
ers and q number of elevator COM
panies and mills are already contrib
uting to the work that DR.. Ladd has
| cut out for himself and staff.
Everything is being halted until this
timely information, can be gathered
and given out, and 1t is his hope that 1t
will reach the public in time to affect
the 1915 prices for grain
A Sample of Results From REJECTED"
Wheat.
| That IL ought to become a factor in
! prices is shown by such facts as these,
| for instance; From Pembina county q
sample Of hard spring wheat was sent
in which had to grade as rejected. It's
weight per busheI before cleaning was
As pounds and after cleaning 80
pounds. Figuring out 5.45 per cent in
cleaning and 0.S3 per cent in milling
this sample Of rejected wheat pro-
duccd 66.4 per cent of flour. Wheat is
| considered doing well if it produces
6S per cent of flour, although much
wheat goes above this, and some Of the
poor-looking lightweight 1916 samples
went high above 1t, But the story of
sample Of wheat fssample Of wheat is
not told until it's by-products have
been considered, and the kind of bread
its flour will actually make. has been
determined.
This rejected Pembina county wheat
produced, besides 66.4 per cent Of -four
| TT per cent Of bran, and 17.46 per cent
| of shorts. To make q barrel Of flour 1t
requires four bushels and 55 pounds.
But what kind of bread did 1t make?
Was the bread light enough? Was it
so dark it would disgust a careful
housewife or a wide-awake baker?
Was it so coarse in texture that 1t was
all bubbles, or so heavy that it was
like lead?
Not at all. 1t produced n loaf of
bread OF $500 cubic centimeters vol
ume. which is at the ton in this re-
spect. Flour that produces loaves OF
| 22O0 ccntimeters is of standard quality.
and no housewife or baker would turn
| it down for failing to produce $500
ITwenty-tWo hundred is standard In
color It scored 80 per cent. Any flour
that scores SO per cent or upwards is
standard. Some of the finest wheat
samples ever milled go only three or
four per cent above this rejected one
in color of loaf. AS to texture it was
Fill points above standard! Most
housewives don't make bread as light.
even, and smooth in texture as 81 per
cent by millers' and bakers standards.
In fact a vast amount of the flour that
they buy will not make bread as good
as that
What the Mills Make and What
They Say.
But in spite of this showing for re-
iected wheat (and never forget that
the miIlers in their big, modernly
1oH
of this down to a fraction Of n cubic
centimeter. and a fraction Of one per
cent? farmers are confronted daily
with such little flashes as this: "**the
spring wheat crop shortage intensified
by the small percentage of millable
wheat, laid the foundation for the pre-
sent price level and by statements
that the mills are unable to buy any
good wheat as most of it is of feed
quality; or that the mills are forced to
buy from Canada or Kansas in order
to keep up their quality.
Wheat of this grade was worth
}$1.751a a week ago to the miller who
bought and converted it into flour,
bran and shorts, ignoring the value OF
the screenings, or if the screenings are
added, it was worth two cents more.
lit is we'll established that the cost of
cleaning and milling amounts to about
1S cents per bushel. But raise this to
80 cents, which Dr. Ladd says means
a big profit from the trade value of
the manufactured wheat, and $1.47R
| is left.
Did the mills pay the farmer $1.471a
for this rejected wheat?
| Every farmer would smile at the
thought. Rejected wheat on Septem-
Der IS was quoted in the Minneapolis
Miller at $1.1Sk per bushel. The diff
florence between what the farmer would
get for this wheat and $1.471a is exactly
I29 cents-so much pure "velveP for
the miller's pocket. And yet they are
industriously circulating the hint that
the 1916 wheat is not millable.
"Not MIIabIe" The Minneapolis Story.
The Minneapolis Journal seldom
misses an issue in which it does not
in some way lay stress upon the as
sertion that the mills can not get
| -four making wheat in the northwest
| and have to scour the remote corners
of the country for 1t.
But they are getting it right here In
the northwest. and as long as they
can pile up such easy profits by keep
| ing the farmers in ignorance, by dis
couraging them with their crop, they
will not share penny Of it with the
farmers. For the week ending Sept.
16. flour in Minneapolis was quoted at
to $3.50 to $500 for first clears. TAX
ing the minimum and maximum
quotations on fancy and second pat
ents, fancy and first clears. and strik-
ing an average the price of flour that
week was $3.50 per barrel. The reason
that an average for the week is taken
is so that no extreme conclusions viii
be drawn. so that the figures will ht
fair. and be within the facts rather
than outside. 1t is more likely the
-four made from this kind OF wheat
goes into the fancy grades.
1t has just been shown that the
; value Of one bushel of this rejected
wheat Of the 1916 crop Is worth to the
miller for making flour. bran ant
shorts. and for it's screenings. $1.77H
er bushel. DR.. Ladd's experiment.
} showed that 1t would take four bush
els and So pounds to make one barre
Of -four or to produce flour value
Of $3.50 If the average Is used. Fou
bushels and IS pounds would b.
worth to the miller S8.72. In othe
words the miller could take this kint
OF rejected wheat and, convert 1t int
-four. and without mixing any mor'
expensive wheat with it. produce al
excellent -four Of fine color. fine tex
ture. and fine loaf-volume. sell 1t a
the present high market prices TO
| flour and have left over besides $1.22