In the Fifty-second Congress (1892) two bills were introduced in the Senate S. 380 by Senator Paddock and S. 797 by Senator Sherman-to provide for the Federal classification and grading of grain. The bill S. 797 was favorably reported April 28, 1892, and passed the Senate and was favorably reported in the House and debated, but failed of passage.

In the same Congress a similar bill was introduced in the House by Mr. Doan.

During the early part of the Fifty-second Congress Senator Casey presented petitions from residents of North Dakota for the enactment of a national law for the classification and grading of grain.

On April 13, 1892, when the bill reported in the Senate (S. 797) was under consideration, Senator Sherman in his remarks said:

The passage of this bill is, I believe, requested by nearly all the farmers' alliances in the United States, especially in the Northern States where wheat and these cereals are grown. Hitherto the rules of classification have been determined by the various boards of trade. * * I was about to say that not only have some of the State legislatures asked for this uniform rule, but the farmers' alliances have requested it. I have many letters about it.

In his annual report, transmitted November 15, 1892, Secretary of Agriculture Rusk calls attention to the matter and makes the following recommendation (p. 64):

NATIONAL STANDARD OF GRAIN.

Another matter which is the subject of legislation now pending is that of a national standard of grain. There is evidence in the correspondence of this Department of a steadily growing feeling in favor of the establishment of such a national standard, which will relieve the grower from the annoyance inseparable from the existence of several standards, varying in the different grain markets of the country. Unquestionably some system of national inspection and grading under the control of the Secretary of Agriculture should be established in the interest of the grain growers and would be, without doubt, in a very short time, accepted and recognized in all the great market centers of the United States.

In support of Federal inspection he calls attention to the Federal inspection of meats, as follows:

As a result of the meat inspection already executed under the direction of this Department we have raised the standard of taste in this matter among consumers themselves; witness the increased price willingly paid not only in our own markets, but abroad for meat bearing our certificates of inspection. The second object to be thus accomplished is that which has already, in a very satisfactory degree, attained, but which must be sedulously maintained— the reputation of our meat products abroad.

In the Fifty-third Congress Senator Casey introduced a similar bill for Federal inspection of grain.

In the latter part of the Fifty-seventh Congress (1902) Senator McCumber introduced the bill (S. 7009) for national grain inspection and grading, but no action was taken on the bill.

At the beginning of the Fifty-eighth Congress, November 11, 1903, Senator McCumber reintroduced the bill as S. 199, and on March 30, 1904, he made extended remarks on the bill in the Senate which brought on protests and indorsements of such legislation from all the grain trade centers of the country and the grain-raising districts of the United States.

On December 6, 1905, at the beginning of the Fifty-ninth Congress Senator McCumber reintroduced the bill as S. 151, and the bill was

referred to the Committee on Agriculture of the Senate. On February 26, 1906, hearings were had on the bill by the committee, but no further action was taken.

(The hearings were printed in full as a Senate document.)

The Agricultural appropriation bill of 1907 contained a provision and an appropriation for the establishment and maintenance of laboratories to inspect grain chemically, and these laboratories have been established at Baltimore, Washington, New York, Minneapolis, Duluth, New Orleans, and Buffalo.

In his message to the two Houses of Congress at the beginning of the first session of the Sixtieth Congress, the President of the United States says:

The grain producing industry of the country, one of the most important in the United States, deserves special consideration at the hands of the Congress. Our grain is sold almost exclusively by grades. To secure satisfactory results in our home markets and to facilitate our trade abroad, these grades should approximate the highest degree of uniformity and certainty. The present diverse methods of inspection and grading throughout the country under different laws and boards result in confusion and lack of uniformity, destroying that confidence which is necessary for healthful trade. Complaints against the present methods have continued for years and they are growing in volume and intensity, not only in this country but abroad. I therefor suggest to the Congress the advisability of a national system of inspection and grading of grain entering into interstate and foreign commerce as a remedy for the present evils.

In his annual report for 1907, the Secretary of Agriculture says:

GRAIN STANDARDIZATION.

Attention was called in my last report to the unsatisfactory methods of handling and grading grain now in vogue. The laboratories established at Baltimore and New Orleans have continued to receive the cordial cooperation of all interested in the handling of grain and have determined some of the more important factors entering into the question of standardizing present methods and grades.

Development of moisture-testing apparatus.—The moisture-testing apparatus introduced last year by the Department has been used with great success in these laboratories. This apparatus has been adopted by many commercial organizations, and they report that it has been of the greatest value to them in determining the moisture content of grain. This apparatus enables us to determine the moisture quickly and accurately, making it entirely practicable for use under commercial conditions.

Establishment of new laboratories.—Additional laboratories have been established at Duluth, Minneapolis, St. Louis, and New York. At Duluth and Minneapolis special attention is to be given to finding the best method of accurately determining and measuring dockage. Through the work of these laboratories and the general investigation of grain-trade conditions the Department is coming into possession of much valuable information which should enable it to be of great assistance in straightening out the unsatisfactory conditions now existing.

Need of uniformity in inspecting and grading grain.-It becomes more and more evident as this work progresses that some uniform system of inspecting and grading grain is absolutely imperative. Our producers of grain suffer through the lack of uniformity in grading, and our markets abroad are injured by lack of confidence in the grades established. It is believed that the end to be attained is through national inspection of all grain entering into interstate and foreign commerce, and the attention of Congress is respectfully called to this important question.

On the first day of the meeting of the Minnesota legislature for 1899 a resolution was adopted appointing a special committee to in

vestigate the alleged unfairness of the Minnesota grain inspection and grading system. The resolution was in substance as follows:

Whereas it has been freely charged that the department of grain inspection has become corrupt; that the inspection has been in the interest of the buyer as against the shipper and producers; that grain has been inspected in as No. 2 or 3 and inspected out as No. 1; that the dockage has been unreasonable, unjust, and excessive; that the department has employed incompetent and corrupt men as inspectors; that the only qualification necessary to secure a place on the force was a political pull; that a large number of men have been employed that have performed no other services for the State save and except they have regularly drawn their salary; that the freight charges on farm produce have been extortionate, unequal, and unjust; that the distribution of cars for the shipment of grain has been unequally distributed and often withheld from independent shippers; that the public elevators, licensed by the State, have formed unjust and corrupt combinations to buy grain at from one to two grades below what it actually was, and to take excessive dockage: Now, therefore,

Be it resolved, That a joint committee be appointed to thoroughly investigate all these charges and report by bill or otherwise at their earliest possible convenience.

That the committee shall have full power, etc., to send for persons and papers, etc.

The resolution was adopted.

On April 17, 1899, that committee from the Minnesota legislature reported as follows:

We find from the evidence produced:

1. That the grading of wheat has not been uniform; that prior to the month of October the new crop of wheat had not been graded solely on its merits, it being the policy of the inspection department to give lower grades than later.

2. That the system of appeals from the inspector's decision is impracticable and of little benefit.

3. That it appears that some of the inspectors have been incompetent or careless.

4. That the weighing of grain at the terminals is carried on in a loose manner. 5. That the farmers suffer a great loss by shipping uncleaned wheat and by loading wheat into dirty and unswept cars.

From the investigation had before this committee, it clearly appears to this committee that wheat inspections have not been uniform throughout the year. That the grading of wheat has been rigid during the first three or four weeks of each season and less rigid during the balance of the year, and we can not in too strong language condemn this practice, as it must necessarily result in great loss to the producer, from the fact that a large proportion of the crop has been marketed before the change takes place, and on all the wheat sold prior to that time the loss must necessarily fall on the producer.

No good reasons have been produced by the department of inspection, in the testimony taken before your committee, to convince this committee that the system in vogue in the department can result in anything but a dead loss to the producer and must necessarily be to the advantage of the buyer. To prove this we quote the following testimony.

Testimony of Mr. Clausen, Chief Inspector.

Q. Now, the chief complaint before the committee is that early in the season the inspection made by our inspectors is very severe against the producer, and that subsequently, about the middle of October and later, much more liberal grades were given to the producer.-A. I will concede that statement is true, but it is true of every crop of wheat we have ever handled since the department started in 1885.

Q. But that don't explain the original proposition which we started withthat it has always been that the grade was more severe early in the season and grew more liberal as the season advanced.-A. Now, we start out conservatively every year. We don't know what we have got to contend with until we get into it, so as to understand it.

*

*

Q. You don't give the farmer early in the season the benefit of the doubt.A. We take the benefit of the doubt until we get started. We don't know what we are going to get into. If we should get the grain down below the standard, we could never get them back.

Testimony of Mr. Tunnell, chief deputy at Minneapolis.

Q. Do you mean to say that you do not inspect too closely?-A. No, sir; not if the wheat is of the same quality.

Q. You have testified that earlier in the season you have to inspect closer?-— A. Yes, at the very start.

From this testimony it appears clearly to your committee that the wheat early in the season is not inspected on its merits, but from an overcautious desire on the part of the department to keep up what they think is necessary to keep up the standard of grade. It appears that this rule of rigid inspection continues from three to four weeks, and that the country buyers become overcautious in buying, and in order to protect themselves generally continue the rigid inspection for three or four weeks after the inspection department at the terminal points has changed their system of grading.

The system of rigid inspection early in the season does not commend itself to this committee as being either just or necessary to carry out the idea of just and impartial inspection. And we strongly recommend the department of inspection that this rule be discontinued, and that wheat should be graded upon its merits. Wheat should be graded No. 1 because it is No. 1, and for no other reason.

Judging from the number of complaints in regard to inspection, it has become apparent to your committee that the present system is far from perfect and has in a large measure to depend upon the judgment of the inspector, and no system has as yet been in vogue in the department that has resulted in a uniformity of grading. Upon this point the committee has sought to find a solution, if possible, of a better system and has taken the testimony of Mr. Chauncey E. Foster, inspector and chemist of the Northwestern Consolidated Mills at Minneapolis, who testifies:

Q. I understand you to say that wheat can be tested to a mathematical certainty according to this rule -A. Yes, sir [gives rule].

Q. Does your mill buy under this rule?-A. They buy a great deal under this rule. We have the samples brought about if we use this test.

(He further testified that one lady could probably test samples of 400 cars in one day.)

(The above report is printed in full in the senate journal of the Minnesota legislature for 1899.)

On January 14, 1899, the North Dakota legislature adopted the following resolution:

Resolved, That whereas much complaint has been made, and much dissatisfaction exists as to the grades fixed upon grain shipped from this State by the grain inspectors of the State of Minnesota,

And whereas in the inspection of said grain the authorities of the State of North Dakota have no voice,

Therefore a committee *

be appointed to visit and consult with the proper authorities of the State of Minnesota, with a view of securing cooperation and suitable legislation in the States of Minnesota and North Dakota to provide for a representative of the State of North Dakota to confer with and to assist the inspector of grains in Minnesota in fixing proper grades upon grain grown in North Dakota and shipped to Minnesota terminals.

The resolution was adopted and the committee appointed.

The committee met and organized and spent over two weeks examining and investigating the conditions as they existed at the terminal points of Minneapolis, Duluth, and Superior.

They asked through the press for information as to irregularities and suggestions as to remedies for relief, and a large number of affidavits and letters were received.

On February 20, 1899, the committee rendered its report to the North Dakota legislature, in substance as follows:

There is no doubt in the minds of our people that irregularities do exist in grain inspection.

S D-60-1-Vol 31-2

REMEDIES SUGGESTED AND OBJECTIONS TO EACH.

First. Doing away with all inspection.

This would be a step backward, because while the inspection of wheat neither adds nor takes away from its value it simply gives it a certificate of character by which it can be identified and transferred, and the value of a certificate of character depends upon who issues it, what is behind it, and its general reliability. By this certificate of character people are enabled to sell the grain to those who have never seen it or may never see it, or to borrow money on it under like conditions, and so long as the certificates are reliable and represents what it purports to be, buyers are safe and anxious to handle the grain on it, and banks and money lenders are ready to advance funds on it. Second. Inspection in North Dakota at terminal points along the eastern boundary.

This would be impracticable because it would necessitate the building of large terminal elevators at all points and the making arrangements with railroads to allow unloading and inspection at through rate. The extra cost would be a burden upon the producer rather than a relief.

Third. Inspection at Superior under the laws of Wisconsin. This would simply be for the purpose of making competition between Duluth and Superior markets and would afford no relief.

Fourth. Inspection at Superior with a view of superseding Duluth inspection. This would simply be taking the matter from one State and giving it to another.

Fifth. Minnesota inspection as it now is and means of bettering the same. This would not give any relief particularly, as it would still leave the matter entirely in the hands of the chief inspector of one State and would not remove the doubt from the minds of the people.

Sixth. Federal inspection under civil service.

The interests involved in the inspection of grain in the United States or any considerable portion of it is altogether too great to be subject to the influence of local State politicians. The existence of a large number of complicated systems do not, we believe, result in any additional good to grain raisers and shippers or to any one else concerned, but on the contrary, lead to dangerous manipulations of grain in large quantities, and dishonest, unhealthy speculative deals, which cannot but discredit and cripple the trade. The right of the people in every State to be heard in the matter of inspection of grain can not be disputed. It seems imperative that the inspection be done at lake or tide river points. Neither the large elevators, railway and vessel interests, or the interior agricultural interests should be interrupted or be subject to interruption by State politicians or by the local ambitions of vessel port cities.

SOLUTION.

Provide Federal inspection under the Secretary of Agriculture, by districts, with districts for Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, North Atlantic, South Atlantic, Gulf, North Pacific, South Pacific, and such other points as are necessary, all under civil-service rules, which shall provide that all applicants for inspector must have had not less than five years' experience as buyers of grain and also pass an examination by satisfactorily grading a large number of samples. The grades may be continued as now, but accepted by Federal officials. This plan would give all interested the right to a hearing, and would increase our foreign trade under an unchanging and reliable inspection.

We believe the results from Federal inspection as outlined above would be manifold. The character of our products as represented by the certificates would have the backing of the United States behind them, and the certificates would be accepted all over the world as readily as our currency, and the trademark on the product of North Dakota would be U. S. With Federal inspection you have removed the last barrier between our producer and the world's markets and we could feel assured if he sell a car of dry marketable grain he will get the same grade for it at which it is sold the consumer. When this result is obtained the question of marketing grain will be wonderfully simplified, and the spread between producer and consumer reduced to the lowest point.

We will not go into the matter of Federal inspection any more, as it is our intention to introduce a joint memorial to Congress asking for the enactment of Buch law.