Weight of wheat as an index to its value.—Much has been said in regard to the relative weights of the bushel of wheat of different varieties or under different modes of culture.
As ordinarily determined, this weight ranges from fifty-six to sixty-five or sixty-six pounds, being in a few cases set down somewhat higher. It is said also that the bushel of wheat weighs less in some years than it does in others, and that the difference often amounts to two, or three, or even four pounds. Though this may seem of comparatively little consequence for a few bushels, yet, for the aggegate of the wheat crop of the United States, or for a State, or even a county, it makes a great difference. Thus, were we to estimate the product of one year in the United States at one hundred and ten million bushels, weighing fifty-six pounds to the bushel, and another year at one hundred and eight million bushels, weighing sixty-two pounds, the difference in favor of the latter, though the least in quantity, would amount to five hundred and thirty-six million pounds in weight, or more than one million and a quarter of barrels of flour.—(Report of the American Commissioner of Patents for 1847, p. 117.)
It may be remarked, however, that it is not after all so easy to determine with accuracy the weight of a bushel of wheat, nor to decide upon the circumstances which have an influence in increasing the density of a grain of wheat. If the microscopical representations of wheat are to be relied on, it is probable that the increase in the density of wheat depends upon the increase in the proportion of gluten. I have found in several cases that, the proportion of water being the same, those samples of wheat which contain the largest proportion of gluten exhibit the highest specific gravity, or, in other words, will yield the greatest number of pounds to the bushel. But the weight of wheat will be influenced by the proportion of water which it contains; the drier the grain, the greater is its density; a fact which may account for the difference which has been observed in the weight of wheat in different seasons. If this is the cause, the calculation above given in reference to the United States is fallacious—but if the amount of gluten is actually, instead of relatively, increased by peculiarities in seasons, it is no doubt correct.
I have devised a series of experiments to test the accuracy of the statements made upon this point, but have not yet had leisure to complete them.
General conditions from the analyses of wheat flour.—The large number of analyses which I have made, and the uniformity of the processes pursued, enable me to draw some general conclusions which it may be useful to present in a connected form.
1. In the samples from the more northern wheat-growing States, there seems to be little difference in the proportion of nutritive matter that can be set down to the influence of climate. Thus, the yield of the wheat from Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, is scarcely inferior to that from New York, Indiana, and Illinois, although the two latter are somewhat farther south. Local causes, and more especially the peculiarities of culture and manufacture, have more influence, within these parallels of latitude, than the difference of mean temperature.
2. The samples from New Jersey, Lower Pennsylvania, the southern part of Ohio, Maryland (probably Delaware), Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia,[41] contain less water and more nutritive matter than those from the States previously enumerated. That the samples from Missouri, which is included within nearly the same parallels of latitude as Virginia, do not exhibit so high an average of nutritive matter as those from the latter State, must be ascribed principally to a want of care in the management of the crop, and perhaps also in the manufacture of the flour. Virginia flour, for obvious reasons, maintains a high reputation for shipment.
3. The difference in the nutritive value of the various samples of wheat depends greatly upon the variety, and mode of culture, independently of climate. The correctness of the former statement is shown by the much larger proportions of gluten yielded by many of the samples of hard wheat from abroad, the Oregon wheat in Virginia, and a variety of Illinois wheat, &c. And in regard to the effect of particular modes of culture, the various analyses of Boussingault may be referred to, and that in my table of a sample from Ulster county, New York.
4. The deterioration of many of the samples of wheat and wheat flour arises in most cases from the presence of a too large per centage of water. This is often the result of a want of proper care in the transport, and is the principal cause of the losses which are sustained by those who are engaged in this branch of business.
5. There seems to be little doubt that a considerable portion of the wheat and wheat flour, as well as of other breadstuffs, shipped from this country to England, is more or less injured before it reaches that market. It is also shown that this is mostly to be ascribed to the want of care above noticed, and to the fraudulent mixture of good and bad kinds. The remedy in the former case is the drying of the grain or flour before shipment, by some of the modes proposed, and the protection of it afterwards as completely as possible from the effect of moisture. The frauds which are occasionally practised should be promptly exposed, and those who are engaged in them held up to merited reproach.