By Arthur Atkins

There seems to have sprung up within a few mouths a tendency to revive the discussion on that hackneyed question, "Shall the germ be retained in the flour?" This question has been more than once answered in the negative by both scientific and practical men, but recently certain prominent persons have come to the conclusion that every one has been wrong on this point, and the miller should by all means retain the germ. Now the nutritive value of the germ cannot be disputed, but there are two circumstances which condemn it us an ingredient of flour. The first is that the albuminoids which it contains are largely soluble, and this means that good light bread from germy flour is impossible. I have not time to go into a detailed explanation of the chemical reasons for this, but they may be found in a series of articles which appeared in The Milling World about a year ago. In the next place, the oil contained in the germ not only discolors the flour, but seriously interferes with its keeping qualities. Now color is only a matter of taste, and if that were the only objection to the germ, it might be admitted, but we certainly do not want anything in our flour to interfere with making light, sweet bread, and will render it more liable to spoil.

If our scientists can discover some method of obviating these objections, it will then be time enough to talk about retaining the germ. Meanwhile millers know that germy flour is low priced flour, and they are not very likely to reduce their profits by retaining the germ. - Milling World.