jury-I know it would be a very great injury-to the millers of the State of Michigan if this law was to be repealed. I do not know that I could say very much more than that on the subject. From the commercial point of view it would be very injurious to us.

Mr. FORDNEY. I was giving attention to something else when you began your remarks, and I did not understand whether you are for or against this new law?

Mr. STOTT. I am against it; against the repeal of the present law. I am against any change in it, because it seems to have worked so effectually in stopping the mixing of corn flour with wheat flour.

Mr. FORDNEY. What is the total output of flour, in barrels, of the association you represent?

Mr. STOTT. I think about 30,000 barrels a day.

Mr. FORDNEY. All in the State of Michigan?

Mr. STOTT. Yes.

Mr. FORDNEY. Do all of the wheat flour millers in the State belong to that association?

Mr. STOTT. Nearly all of them. All of the important mills belong to it.

Mr. SLOAN. Do you grind corn, too?

Mr. STOTT. We grind corn meal from both white and yellow

corn.

Mr. SLOAN. Do you grind it to the condition of meal or to the further condition of flour?

Mr. STOTT. We grind some of it into meal and some of it further, making white corn flour. It is not as fine as some of the others, but we sell it as white corn flour.

Mr. SLOAN. Do you let any of that go abroad?

Mr. STOTT. No, sir.

Mr. SLOAN. Would you have any objections if the law was so framed as to tax the mixing of corn with wheat flour?

Mr. STOTT. We want it designated what it is, so as not to interfere with our business.

Mr. SLOAN. What would be your objection to the allowance of the removal of the tax on mingling strictly wheat flour with strictly corn flour?

Mr. STOTT. The difficulty of detecting the quantities that they put in it.

Mr. SLOAN. Do you object to that?

Mr. STOTT. Yes.

Mr. LANNEN. Mr. Chairman, Dr. Wagner was asked by some of the members to remain here that he might be asked some further questions, and he would like to go home to-night.

Mr. HELVERING. I believe I made that suggestion, but I think in the testimony that has come out since the questions I was going to ask him have all been answered except one.

STATEMENT OF MR. T. B. WAGNER-Resumed.

Mr. HELVERING. I wish you would submit in your report, or give it now, the number of employees of the mills you represent. Mr. WAGNER. The number of employees?

Mr. HELVERING. In all branches of the association, I mean.
Mr. WAGNER. Of the association?

Mr. HELVERING. Yes. Of course if you have to do that from memory you need not submit it, but put it in the record.

Mr. WAGNER. I would like to wire to the secretary and get that information. I have not got it-accurately, I mean.

Mr. FORDNEY. Would you, in making the statement, state what the labor cost is in the production of cornstarch in your factories; what portion of the total cost is labor cost?

Mr. WAGNER. Yes.

Mr. FORDNEY. I will thank you if you can do that. I have seen somewhere here that the labor cost in making cornstarch and other products is about 16 per cent of the cost of the starch. If you could do that I would thank you for it.

Mr. WAGNER. I will be very glad to do that. I can get those figures in our New York office, and I will bring them back here. Mr. FORDNEY. Will you get them so that they can be put into the record?

Mr. WAGNER. The labor cost in making cornstarch?

Mr. FORDNEY. Yes; and, figuring the total cost of the production of cornstarch, what proportion of that cost is labor?

Mr. WAGNER. And how much is corn?

Mr. FORDNEY. Yes.

Mr. WAGNER. You can see that with 80-cent corn the largest item in making starch would be the corn.

Mr. FORDNEY. Yes; and any other element, the overhead expense you put in, I would be glad to have it.

Mr. WAGNER. Yes.

Mr. SLOAN. I call your attention to Dr. Wiley's distinction between the gluten and protein and proteids, and so on, as distinguishing between wheat and corn. Having your attention called to that, have you anything to say in anywise explanatory or contradictory of the doctor's explanation of these different parts or constituents?

Mr. WAGNER. All I can say here is that all the agricultural experiment stations in the United States, and the Department of Agriculture itself, use only the name "gluten " in connection with our gluten preparations, which we produce commercially on a large scale. There is no other term used for that product. We use the terms "gluten feed" or "corn gluten feed." Those are recognized as the official designations for those products, and are so recognized by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists of the United States and are found in every report issued by the Government or by the State experiment stations dealing with feedstuffs when that class of products is discussed. There is no other term used.

Mr. SLOAN. Thank you for your explanation. A sharp point of difference seemed to arise.

Mr. MOORE. You do say, Doctor, that there is a gluten content in the cornstarch?

Mr. WAGNER. Yes.

Mr. MOORE. I mean in the corn flour that would be mixed with the wheat flour under this bill?

Mr. WAGNER. Yes, indeed.

Mr. MOORE. There seems to have been some difference of opinion in regard to that in the testimony recently adduced here, as to whether corn flour is as productive of the nutritive qualities as wheat flour.

Mr. WAGNER. That is really outside of my iine.

Mr. MOORE. Dr. Wesener had something to say about that. My recollection is that he spoke rather pointedly and strongly about the nutritive quality of corn flour. If Dr. Wesener will answer that, I shall be obliged.

STATEMENT OF DR. J. A. WESENER-Resumed.

Dr. WESENER. It is true that I did speak of the nutritive quality of corn flour rather strongly, and I still speak of it; and when I use the term "gluten " I use it interchangeably with the same term— "protein." To-day the words "gluten" and "protein," from a nutritional and a food-value standpoint, are interchangeable, and it does not make any difference about the fine distinctions as to it being glutinin and gliadin which make the gluten in flour. That is merely a scientific distinction. We know all about that. And, as I explained the other day, so far as nutritional value of the protein in corn is concerned, it is just as nutritious as the gluten. There may be some difference as to the roughage which accompanies the protein from the corn, and therefore it does not linger so long in the bowels as the more highly concentrated protein or refined protein. For example, meat is ideal protein; eggs are ideal protein; and, of course, they have very high nutritional values, because they have no roughage, and they do not start up peristalsis in the bowels. We know very well where a great deal of rough food is taken with concentrated food, it is more rapidly eliminated by the human system, and even to-day those who are leading sedentary lives are recommended by their physicians to eat bran. Their physicians even prescribe agaragar, which is a peculiar moss, and is nothing more than a fibrous material, and that is desirable to take because it is odorless and tasteless.

Mr. MOORE. The difference in nutritious qualities of different flours has been referred to. Take one loaf made of pure-wheat flour and another made of 80 per cent wheat and 20 per cent corn. The term "debased" has been used here referring to the loaf made of the mixed flour, indicating that there was less of nutritious quality in the mixed-flour loaf than in the pure wheat-flour loaf.

Dr. WESENER. I said this, that as the starch which replaces a certain amount of the flour has the same caloric value that is, it furnishes the same amount of heat units as the protein does-that pound for pound it will replace it, from the caloric standpoint, and the whole scientific world is in accord on that.

Mr. MOORE. You and Dr. Wiley agree on that, then.

Dr. WESENER. He could not disagree with that. The whole world

is together on that.

Mr. MOORE. Yes; as to heat production.

Dr. WESENER. Yes; as to heat production; and he said the workingman ought to have a high starchy food.

Mr. MOORE. Yes; and then he referred to the necessary food for the growing child.

Dr. WESENER. I would not feed starch alone any more than I would feed meat or fat alone. As I told you gentlemen the other day, nature does not base our requirements on such a fine, carefully balanced ration. None of us would be here discussing this subject

25718-1625

if that were so. The human race would have become extinct long ago. The same thing applies to this bread analysis. The analysis which was shown Dr. Wiley here, made by our labortory-he did not analyze it. He did not understand the question. What does that show in sample C, which represents 80 per cent of a hard winterwheat patent flour and 20 per cent cornstarch? What does that show? It shows that the C sample, which is the mixed flour, made a flour that is in every way identical with a soft winter-wheat flour. Now, then, these people that have the pellagra, as he calls it, down South-as a scientist, he seemed to think it is a lack of nutritionthat is, they do not get enough of the right kind of food; and, as he seemed to think it is too large a starchy ration, it must be something faulty with the food that is produced down in that neck of the woods, and not simply the starchy stuff, or not simply the protein or any phosphate principle, but it must be the way it is balanced. The soft winter-wheat flours are excellent flours, but they have high starch content. They are the highest of any flour known. The Michigan wheats and California wheats are the highest in starches of any produced in this country. You do not hear of any pellagra up in Michigan or out in California, do you? And, as I say, they produce there a foodstuff that is a very wide ration as to being high in carbohydrates.

Mr. LIND. Did you not report to the Northwestern Miller in a very recent number-I think I have an extract in my satchel-that while the gluten, speaking of the wheats of the present season, of the spring and hard wheats is higher in quality, as usual, than the gluten of the winter wheat, the gluten in the winter wheat is higher in quality to the extent of 4 per cent?

Dr. WESENER. Well, bring it out and let us look at it. I do not think you state it right.

Mr. LIND. It would not be surprising. I am not an expert.

Dr. WESENER. While the governor is looking for that I should like to go a little further into this question of the nutritional value of corn. This is in Bulletin 13 of the United States Department of Agriculture, "Food and Food Adulterants." On page 1291 of this bulletin I call attention to a statement.

Mr. MOORE. Is the name of the author given?
Dr. WESENER. This is Dr. Wiley. He says:

The comparative digestibility of wheat and Indian corn has been studied in the Minnesota station (Bulletin No. 36). The data obtained, with the exception of the digestibility of the ash, are as follows:

Constituents:

Dry matter.
Proteids.

Ether extract.
Crude fiber..
Nitrogen-free..

Mr. LIND. That is the whole corn?

Dr. WESENER. The whole corn, yes.

Mr. LIND. Was that human or hog stomachs?

Dr. WESENER. These were pigs; and I want to say right now that the scientists of the world, all over, when they make experiments on the lower animals choose the pig as being nearest the man. That is a recognized scientific fact.

Mr. LIND. Yes; I know; and I was very much suprised the other day that the gentleman did not state that these experiments were made with young shoats. I happened to be president of the board of regents at the time that the experiments were made, and I knew all about it. They were not made upon children or human beings.

Dr. WESENER. Certainly not. If they had been it would have killed the children and probably have killed the adult human beings, because whole cracked wheat and whole corn is not a fit food alone, as such, for human beings. That is the answer to that question. You could not exist on those.

Mr. LIND. Yes; but the committee are entitled to know that they are hog, and not human, experiments.

Dr. WESENER. Certainly; I was coming to that, but you interrupted me.

Mr. SLOAN. The Governor is quite interested in how these experiments are carried on. I happen to be a graduate of the school that Dr. Wiley visited; so that you can presume that a member of the committee is quite familiar with how those experiments are conducted. They are not usually conducted on what was called a poison squad-that we had in Washington some years ago. The experiment was conducted on animals and not human beings.

Dr. WESENER. Yes; and the way that the account of the experiment read, I thought that nobody could fail to understand it was on animals and not human beings.

Mr. FORDNEY. I thought you referred to human food. I am not expert enough to distinguish without your explanation.

Mr. MOORE. The test did not relate to corn flour or corn meal? Dr. WESENER. No; it was the raw grain-cracked wheat and cracked corn.

Now I will answer that question in regard to the Northwestern miller.

Mr. LIND. Yes; I think you can explain this. It is from your own laboratory. The qualitative value is in the lower line.

Dr. WESENER. Yes; this is a report made by my associate, Mr. Teller. Of course, I have not read it. Just what is it you want to refer to?

Mr. LIND. In reporting upon the wheats of this season you say, "Hard winter wheats, content of gluten, 10.1." Then "color, absorption, size of loaf, purity, and so on." "Quality of gluten, 99.5. Soft winter wheat, quantity of gluten, 8.7." Then the other qualities, "Quality of gluten, 104.6.”

Dr. WESENER. I am glad you brought that out. That simply will help to amplify what I have already put in the record-that the mechanical proposition of the gluten from a bread-making standpoint is the most important thing from a chemical standpoint as to the value of that flour; when a baker finds a flour that is strong in gluten, he does not care a rap whether there is 5 or 10 per cent gluten in there as long as it has good absorption quality and will take up a lot of water. And he is right in that contention; and I would do the same thing if I were a baker; I would buy that kind of flour.