Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 4608x6656 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

F.A.Q. Wheat Standard
The fixing of the f.a-q. standard for
wheat at 61* lb. to the' Imperial bushel
for the current season's harvest 'was
by no means a unanimous one in any
of the Australian States. In New
South Wales the grain committee of
the Chamber- of Commerce were far
from unanimous on the decision. The
shinDine and muling interests dis
agreed, while another section was
favorable to the determination of the
separate standard weight for bagged
wheat, bulk or silo wheat, anad second
grade wheat. The representatives of
the milling trade considered that the
standard fixed was too low. The stan
dard for the 1934-35 crop represented
an increase of 23 lb. over that of last
year, which was 59 lb. to the Imperial
bushel. As revealed by 340 samples of
wheat taken in all parts of the State
this season, the wheat was cleaner and
better developed than that on show in
1933-4, and showed indications of more
seasonal conditions. These factors
were responsible also for an increase
in the f.a.q. standard for second-grade
wheat from 55 lb. to the bushel last
year to 57J lb, this year.
On weighing, which was certified by
the chairman of the committee Mr. J.
S. Cameron), the following averages
were arrived at:— Bagged wheat, 62 lb.
11 oz. to the bushel; bulk wheat, 61 lb.
4 oz. to the bushel: second-grade, 57
lb. 8i oz. to the bushel. Mr. J. Hurley
considered that the f.a.q. standard
should be 61£ lb. to the bushel, and in
moving a resolution to that effect said
that was the maximum weight, that
could be accepted by the silos. It was
no use establishing a standard that
could not be adhered to. An amend
ment to fix the standard at 621 lb. was
tabled, the mover (Mr. A. Sutherland)
stating that the committee last year
acted on what silo interests had told
them, with the result that they had
had an undue amount of silo wheat in
the samples for weighing, and as an
outcome the standard had been fixed
as low as 59 lb., and it was now gener
ally agreed that the standard fixed was
too low. There was scarcely a cargo
of wheat leaving Australia that had
not reached 61 lb. He thought they
6hould sink all selfish interests and
consider the question from a national
standpoint. If the standard was made
6H lb., as representing the fair average
quality this year, they would, Mr.
Sutherland contended, wrong the men
who grew the wheat and had to sell
it overseas.
Mr. F. A. Crago submitted a further
amendment, 'That two standards be
established for first-grade wheat,
namely, bagged wheat 62J lb., bulk
wheat 61J lb.' The shipping represen
tatives considered 62J lb. would be too
high; failure to maintain that (standard
would have a harmful effect on the
growers. It was pointed out by the
chairman of the meeting that most of
the bagged wheat was held by the mil
lers for their own requirements. A
very small quantity would be exported.
The bulk of the wheat shipped would
be silo wheat. He considered, there
fore, that 61* lb. would do the millers
no harm and benefit the growers. It
wag generally admitted that 59 lb. last
year was too low for European require
ments; it was certainlv not acceptable
to United Kingdom millers. From all
points of view, a standard of 61$ lb.
would be more desirable. Both amend
ments having been lost by small majo
rities, and the motion fixing the f.a.q.
standard at 61$ lb. having been adopted,
Mr. Sutherland, on behalf of the Flour
Millers' Association, entered an em
phatic protest against the fa.q. stan
dard fixed for the year 1935.
$