therefore from the standpoint of the best good to the greatest number and injury to none and advantage to all, I believe that the present law which taxes flour containing any admixture of corn flour is unjust and should be repealed by the passage of the bill named. Yours, very truly, FRANK J. DELANY. Hon. HENRY T. RAINEY, Washington, D. C. M. T. CUMMINGS GRAIN Co., DEAR SIR: We learn with great satisfaction that you are champion of a bill to remove the useless and wrongful restrictions on the use of corn flour for blending purposes. The inclosed message expresses our views succinctly. There is a demand for this blended flour by those who find it desirable to buy and use it because of its greater nourishment and economy. We can not understand who is hurt through their getting it. We earnestly hope for your success in this legislation. Yours, truly, M. T. CUMMINGS GRAIN Co. THE MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, January 27, 1916. Hon. HENRY T. RAINEY, Washington, D. C. SIR: I believe the tax on mixed flour is a discrimination against the great corn-producing sections of our State, and therefore earnestly favor its repeal, believing it to be in the interest of a great majority of the people of this country. Respectfully, J. T. HAMILTON. THE SPRINGFIELD COMMERCIAL ASSOCIATION, Hon. HENRY T. RAINEY, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: In accordance with the request of Mr. R. G. Gould, we are inclosing you herewith a copy of the letter written our Congressman. Very truly, yours, W. H. CONKLING, Secretary. Hon. L. E. WHEELER, M. C., THE SPRINGFIELD COMMERCIAL ASSOCIATION, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: The following is an extract from the minutes of the regular meeting of our board of directors held September 28, 1915, which is self-explanatory: The following resolution was presented and Mr. Pasfield moved that the resolution as read be adopted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Barber and carried: Whereas the present Federal statute which requires that all flour which is a mixture of wheat products and corn products shall be controlled by the internal revenue department and pay a special tax to the United States Government is an unfair discrimination against corn and the growers thereof, and is not necessary to protect the consumer, as the present pure-food laws, both Federal and State, insure adequate protection by virtue of honest labeling; and as a flour composed of wheat products and corn products is a wholesome and nutritious food, and as the repeal of this Federal statute would have a tendency to reduce the cost of living by rendering attractive to millers the marketing, under proper control, of a mixed flour at a less price than that necessarily demanded for wheat flour: Therefore be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the board that the Federal statute referred to should be repealed at the next session of Congress; and be it further Resolved, That the board of directors of this association use all honorable means to influence Members of Congress to vote for the repeal of this discriminatory tax on corn. Very truly, yours, Hon. HENRY T. RAINEY, Washington, D. C. Secretary. WESTERN GRAIN Co., Kansas City, Mo., January 27, 1916. SIR: We just learned that you have introduced a bill in Congress at the present session to repeal the mixed-flour law, which as it now stands on the statute books is a rank discrimination against corn and we wired you as follows: "We heartily favor your bill repealing the mixed-flour law," and we have to-day wired our Congressmen and Senators the following messages: "We most heartily favor Congressman Rainey's bill repealing the mixed-flour law and urge your full support. This means much to the American people." Our Senators are Hon. James A. Reed and Hon. William J. Stone, and our Congressman from this district is Hon. William P. Borland. We think if you succeed in getting this bill passed by both Houses and repealing the present law that you will have rendered a great service to this country, as it will certainly help the corn growers and be a great saving to our people in the cost of bread. DEAR SIR: My attention has been called to a measure pending before Congress relating to mixed flour, and is meant to repeal the revenue bill, also to enact an entirely new measure. Since this as a revenue measure is comparatively valueless, and since it works to the detriment of the farmers in the corn belt, also to the consumers of food, I believe that the old law should be repealed and the pending measure supported. Your consideration is very respectfully asked. Yours, truly, S. M. JORDAN. Mr. Rainey also submitted telegrams from the following persons, firms, and corporations favoring the mixed-flour bill: Chicago Mill and Lumber Co., Chicago, Ill. Seaton & Co., Peoria, Ill. E. P. McKenna, Tyler, Tex. M. T. Cummings Co., Lincoln, Nebr. James E. Hamilton, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Douglas Co., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. R. S. Sinclair, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. K. C. Ferman, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. E. R. Moore, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. S. E. Sinclair, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. C. E. Cumberson Co., San Francisco, Cal. Otto L. Keuhn Co., Milwaukee, Wis. Simonds Shields Grain Co., Kansas City, Mo. Morningstar, Northern Brok Co., Rockford, Ill. National Carton Co., Joliet, Ill. Ozark Cooperage and Lumber Co., St. Louis, Mo. Kurz Downey Co., Chicago, Ill. H. B. Simmons, president Detroit Board of Trade, Detroit, Mich. Bott Bros. Manufacturing Co., Alexandria, Mo. Cook McFarland Co., Los Angeles, Cal. R. J. Kittredge & Co., Chicago, Ill. National Candy Co., St. Louis, Mo. National Confectioners' Association, St. Louis, Mo. Frank G. Coe, Chicago, Ill. Clinton Sugar Refining Co., Clinton, Iowa. George A. Wells, secretary Western Grain Dealers' Association, Des Moines, Iowa. Letter submitted by Hon. Cordell Hull, a Representative in Congress from Tennessee: Mr. L. P. PADGETT, M. C., Washington, D. C. JANUARY 29, 1916. DEAR SIR: We thank you for your attention to our recent letters in regard to the mixed-flour law, and are now writing to say that we are in receipt of letters and pamphlets from the American Manufacturers' Association of Products from Corn, commonly called, we think, the Starch or Glucose Trust. We have examined their booklet carefully and find that it is very adroitly worded, as they have evidently launched on a publicity campaign and are already using the press freely. * * We find in the beginning of the argument this statement: "Although by name a revenue measure, the mixed-flour law as matter of fact, was in its inception and practical operation a monopoly giving measure." As we were interested in the passage of that law and were millers of both flour and meal at that time, we are prepared to emphatically deny this assertion. The mixedflour law was not passed to create a monopoly, but as a defensive measure by millers to prevent the destruction of pure-wheat products. The law came into being through necessity occasioned from the fact that a large number of flour millers were adulterating their wheat flour very heavily with corn goods, and in this way were debasing wheat products until it looked as if the industry would almost be destroyed. The flour millers do not object to corn flour per se, as they recognize its intrinsic worth if manufactured and sold under its real name. But if the mixed-flour law is repealed and the Rainey bill passed, it will be impossible to carry out the provisions of this law, arising from the fact that as soon as flour millers begin adulterating their pure product with a cheaper one it becomes impossible, even for an expert, to determine just how much of the adulterant is used, and in this way a wide field is opened for fraud against consumers. Previous to the passage of the mixed-flour law corn flour was being mixed with the wheat product in proportions all the way from 10 per cent up to as high as 75 per cent, and no merchant or consumer knew how much or how little corn flour he was using. If the corn millers wish to sell their product, let them put it up as corn flour and sell it on its merits; and if it is worth as much intrinsically as they claim, and is as good a mixture as they claim, they can sell it to the baker and housewife, who can themselves do the mixing in whatever proportions desired. This, however, would not suit the corn millers, as they wish to take advantage of the well-known fact that of the superiority of wheat flour and sell their corn products by mixing in same and adulterating and cheapening the quality of the wheat flour. In order to show that the flour millers are not absolutely selfish in this matter, permit us to say that the following flour millers south of the Ohio River are also almost equally large corn millers, having an aggregate daily capacity of 26,000 bushels of corn: Liberty Mills, Nashville, Tenn. Cumberland Mills, Nashville, Tenn. Lillie Mills, Franklin, Tenn. Dunlop Milling Co., Clarksville, Tenn. J. Allen Smith Co., Knoxville, Tenn. Tennessee Milling Co., Estill Springs, Tenn. Mountain City Mill Co., Chattanooga, Tenn. Atlanta Milling Co., Atlanta, Ga. City Mill & Grain Co., Columbia, Tenn. Every one of these mills were instrumental in passing the mixed-flour law, and are still anxious to see its provisions enforced. The bakers, large and small, are all irrevocably opposed to the repeal of the mixed-flour law; and while practically all of them use a certain amount of corn goods in their bakings they demand the privilege of buying these two products separately and mixing as they desire in order that they may mix in the proper proportions. If the law is repealed, they know from past experience that it is almost impossible for them to obtain pure-wheat flour, and that if they buy it mixed they are likely to get double the mixture they pay for and expect. We are relying on the fact that you are interested in this very important matter, and are sure you will give it your most careful thought and consideration. |