196 THE MONTHLY BULLETIN. 



itself or in its preparation and handling, much depends upon the indi- 

 vidual ability in excelling others, and this must be taken into account 

 in a consideration of the reward to accrue to a neighborhood or state 

 in the desire to attain the enforcement of an average excellence of stand- 

 ard. We must, therefore, I think, for the encouragement of the indi- 

 vidual producer and handler, allow each the proper reward for his labor 

 and ability through comparison. 



After we have eliminated what is obviously unfit for consumption, and 

 which is covered by the pure food law standard I have quoted, we then 

 proceed to consider the grading of all the balance. This result is 

 best obtained to my mind through such legislatively encouraged stand- 

 ards as for instance the National Standard Apple Act. which provides 

 for a certain specified standard of quality and pack, known as a 

 United States standard apple pack. Any other apples which do 

 not come under the head of being filthy and decomposed, etc., as pro- 

 vided by the pure food laws, are marketable for what they are. Under 

 this procedure and method of establishing standards and encouraging 

 quality, the product which is of superior merit can advertise itself as 

 such by proclaiming upon the package that it conforms to the standard 

 and is as good as or better than the established standard of the time and 

 can obtain the added reward of its quality of product and handling, but, 

 at the same time, any other fruit which is fit for human consumption 

 can be handled and sold to such advantage as its character allows, and 

 for what it is worth, it being plain to the purchaser that it is an inferior 

 article because it can not be labeled as standard. 



I believe this theory of standardization should prevail throughout, 

 and I plead for this consideration of the fruit of any grower or section 

 which, because of lack of ability or possibly circumstances beyond con- 

 trol, is not to be classed among the extra fancy but still has a value 

 and a use. Standardization laws which prohibit transportation to any 

 other fruit than that which is established as a proper quality of product 

 or packing are entirely unjust and will in the long run either be over- 

 thrown by revolution or destroyed in principle through a deterioration 

 of the standard set. There can lie no misunderstanding, fraudulent sale 

 or false pretense in the disposal of a product for what it is, and fruit 

 which is equal to or superior to the established standards, when so 

 marked, may be known at sight and sold accordingly, and what is still 

 merchantable but not, for one reason or another, possible of being so 

 marked may still have a "material value, both to its owner, the consumer 

 and the community. 



In these days of rapid rise in prices and what is popularly known as 

 "the high cost of living," the burden must not be increased by any 

 attempt at eliminating any material part of the production of any 

 community, which is consumable, because it may not be strictly Class A. 

 There is, naturally, a considerable proportion of the consuming popula- 

 tion which either can not or should not afford to buy the very best. 

 Now, if we are to proceed, as is advocated in the theories of some of the 

 standardizes, along the lines of elimination from the market of seconds 

 and culls, or cheaper forms of packing, we shall be doing an economic 

 harm of considerable magnitude in destroying or eliminating otherwise 

 valuable food because it is not topnotch. 



