The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1918-08-22
The Editors Mail Bag

To the Editor OF The Forum:
This afternoon at the grain grading here ]
made few remarks in regard to the work done
and the methods used by Mr.. McGovern, chief
deputy grain inspector OF this state 1t seems
that Mr.. McGovern didn't approve Of the way I
put 1t and he in turn had his say and in the
course OF his talk he said as far as he knew, I
might be a gentleman and that he had nothing
against me personally But" he continued to
the assemblage, the kind Of work that Mr.. Ras-
thieves for. This remark objected to at the
time and take this means Of throwing little
light on the subject and let the reader Judge for
himself
Some time last fall one of Mr.. McGoverns ment
Mr.. Miller of Elgin. called on me and informed
me he had orders to check me UP. We went through
my scale ticket book and found that had bought
about 500 bushels Of wheat. Mr.. Miller, of course
could see from my books l was buying ma No
Northern spring basis. He asked for a sample
OF my wheat, which gave him and as told him
at the time believed it about an average
sample of most Of what had taken in In the
course Of our conversation, asked Mr.. Miller If
/ was doing things according to "Hoyle'; If not
to put me right as this grading system was new
to all of us and wanted to be put right if l was
doing 1t wrong in any way Mr.. Miller replied
as far as he could see was doing all right with
the exception Of my scale ticket. I was not using
the duplicate and from then on I made out all
scale tickets in duplicate.
A short time after this I was notified by the
secretary Of the railroad and warehouse commits
sion that Mr.. McGovern had preferred charges
against me on misgrading Of grain and had asked
to have my license cancelled, and for me to APP
pear at the capitol at Bismarck to show cause
why said license should not be cancelled. Well,
thought was the Goat" all by lonesome and
the more thought Of 1t, the madden got. q
forgot to mention / got pretty mad when 1 got
the above mentioned letter. happened to run
up to Stanley and I learned there from Mr.. Nell
son and Mr.. Arnold that they were in the same
boat We decided to go to Bismarck hoping in
the meantime that our stay there wouldn't be
permanent. The day Of the hearing it appeared
that the charges against by the chief deputy
was 'wilfully and falsely misgrading grain" and
it appeared said deputy based his charges on the
fact that were buying on 8, Northern spring
basis instead Of on the Dark Northern basis, he
claiming that the wheat raised in our section was
all Dark Northern. That what l was guilty
Of according to the chief deputy, and 1 want to
say here that there were number Of elevators
checked about the Same time I and quite
number OF these elevators were buying on the
same basis. This be verified by looking up
the records in Mr.. NGcGovern's office.
Now the question with me ever since has been
this why should Arnold and Nelson Of Stan
ley, Sawyer of Roach, Olson Of Berthold and
when there were others in the same boat,
of whom had handled far more grain than we had,
Dark Northern basis?' And have indisputable
proof that there were other buyers buying
the same basis and my proof Is not
Mr.. McCoVerns records, either. Now if the work
am doing is the cause Of the grain men of this
state being called Wheat thieves" why doesn't
Mr.. McGovern go right down the line and treat
all alike? Those Of us that are in the same boS8
can give them the same publicity that he gave
few Of us last fall. Mr.. McGovern is employed by
tn state, consequently a servant of the public,
and such should treat all alike without show
ing partially to anyone and furthermore, his
action against US was unWarranted. The Rail
road and Warehouse commission have adopted
what is known as the rule Number One, which is
as follows:
The sample of grain submitted for rein
specton shall be true and representative
sample and weigh not less than five pounds;
accompanied by a statement of the facts in
dispute giving the postoffice address and
signed by each Of the parties to the dis
agreement Of the inspection Of the grain sub
mitted.
This rule approved by the commission
ers Of railroads on the 18th day Of August,
1917.
Now in my case, there was no dispute be-
tween any Of my customers and myself and no
sample sent in, hence deem that on this count
alone the action Of the chief deputy was most I'M
just and unwarranted The inspection laws Of
the state of North Dakota further provide that
warehouse inspectors are to assist the elevator
men of the state and advise them to the better
ment Of the grain business. Section Of the
Inspection Laws covers this point fully
r. A. Rasmussen,
Palermo, N. D.