The Ward County independent. [volume] (Minot, Ward County, N.D.) 1902-1965, 1920-01-15
MILLING BY ARITHMETIC.

| NOTIHWeSLerH MIllei. NOI lOuk 0ko
The Northwestern Miller published q
statement regarding the operation Of
the state-owned -four mill at Drake,
North Dakota, purporting to cover its
operation for the twenty-six days
ended September 26. This statement
was based on report issued by the
state auditor, Carl Kositzky, the con-
clusion of which was that, in it's first
twenty-six days of operation as q
state-owned venture, the Drake mill
had managed to lose more than seven
thousand dollars.
Since the publication of this state
ment, The Northwestern Miller has
received a very courteous letter from
William A. Anderson, secretary of the
North Dakota Industrial Commission,
declaring that Mr.. Kositzky's report
was vicious and untruthful," was
propaganda sent out at the expense
Of several thousands of dollars to the
state" and twas intended to deceive
the public" Evidently, therefore, the
Nonpartisan League has not been
wholly successful in securing amity
,, and mutual trustfulness among the
officials of North Dakota. In support
of his claim, Mr.. Anderson incloses "a
copy of the audit made by the Schultz
Audit Company Of Fargo" together
with copy Of Mr.. Kositzky's figures.
Mr.. Schultz's conclusion is, "Net
profit, $2,349:o4"; Mr.. Kositzky's, met
loss, $7,44O.23."
In the matter of income the two
statements virtually agree, the state
auditor merely having failed to de-
duct from the earnings an alarming
loss of forty-two cents charged to
whole wheat" and deficit of dol
lar and eleven cents on rye flour. It
is on the expense side Of the ledger
that the extraordinary discrepancies
occur. The difference here amounts
to $9,790.8O, or rather more that three
hundred and seventy-fve dollars day.
One obvious error in the state audit
or's figures accounts for about nine
hundred dollars of this total; the rest
is largely explained by salaries and
expenses paid on account of the North
Dakota Mill and Elevator Association,
the state industrial commission, and
by cost or appraisal Of various mills,
including the one at Drake. These
expenses, Mr.. Anderson claims, should
ndt be charged to the Drake mill at
all.
This is quite possibly true, and the
figures presented by the audit com
pany look very reasonable until, on
close scrutiny, one fails to find there
in any charge for labor. Mr.. Kositzky
says the mills payroll amounted to
$1,087.44; the audit company's report
gives only a bookkeeper's salary, am
ounting to $124.16.- Perhaps the book
keeper does the milling in his spare
time, or perhaps the labor item is in
cluded under "coal used" or Gloss on
future sales" Anyway, it does not
appear, and it's absence makes one
wonder if the industrial commission is
much more accurate in its accounting
methods than the state auditor. Al
charge Of 304.31 for Salaries accrued
but not paid" is included by Mr.. Ko-
sticky under another head, and there
fore clearly does not cover wages.
The whole controversy illustrates,
even more clearly than a proved finan-
cial loss. the dangers of state owner
ship and operation of industrial plants. !
Nobody is going to know, at least for
a long time, whether the Drake mill
is making or losing money. With the
state treasury back Of it, with innum-
cradle other accounts to which items
may be charged, and with the taxpay-
ers always available to stop the gaps,
it is just as easy to show paper
profit as q paper loss. For instance,
some, though probably not all, Of the
expenses Of the mill and elevator as
ISOLATION ought to be charged against
the Drake mill. Mr.. Kositzky wants
the mill to show a loss, and charges