NEW ZEALAND BREAD

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22358, 23 March 1938, Page 15

NEW ZEALAND BREAD

QUESTION OF QUALITY

AN EXCELLENT LOAF

At the last meeting of the Wheat Research Committee, Mr R. K. Ireland drew attention to a lecture on flour quality delivered by Dr. D. W. KentJones, at Manchester, on January 19, 1938, and reported in “Milling” for January, 1938. Dr. Kent-Jones is an authority with a world-wide /reputation for knowledge of flour quality, and there is almost no country in which/, he has, not made investigations on tnis"'raatler. The weight that is attached to his opinions is understood by the fact that people came from Liverpool and London to hear this Manchester- address.

In the course of his remarks. Dr. Kent-Jones said: “If an English baker were provided with all-English or with Australian flour, he would quite naturally complain, as it would not be of the type and nature to which he was accustomed, and for which his process, of fermentation and bread-making generally Is suitable; yet when I visited Australia I did not notice that the bread was perceptibly worse than bread made In England with stronger flour, and this was even more marked in New Zealand, where they were using practically 100. per cent, homegrown wheat, which -is nob much stronger than ordinary English. The bakers were able to adapt their process to turn out excellent bread, and, as I have stated on previous occasions, some of the best bread I have seen was turned out in a certam bakery in New Zealand.” . ' That such an impression of New Zealand bread was produced on Dr. Kent-Jones, With his world-wide oxperience, effectively counters the criticisms one sometimes hears of New Zealand bread. It not only shows that there is nothing to complain of in' New Zealand wheat, but that New Zealand millers and bakers handle it with the greatest skill.

LUCERNE GROWING

(To the Agricultural Editor of "The Press.”

Sir,—Dr. F. W. Hilgendorf. in a statement at a meeting of the Lincoln College Board of Governors, is reported to have said that there was an enormous area of Canterbury on which lucerne would not grow. This may be* the doctor’s opinion. It is known that the college tried to grow lucerne for 20 years without much success, yet farmers in the district have grown it successfully. I understand an area was recently established at. the college and is doing well. Despite what anyone may say lucerne is still the -king of fodders, and will grow in most parts of Canterbury and give more feed than any other plant. If the land has reasonable drainage and is well limed (not ‘scwt per acrel) and the seed inoculated with lucerne culture, a successful strike is almost certain. All that is then required is ordinary good farming. In one case known to the writer an attempt was made to establish lucerne on three occasions, and altogether one ton per acre of artificial fertiliser was used, but no lime —result, failure, and a statement made that' lucerne would not grow. In this case, and many others, It was not the lucerne that failed but the grower. I would like to say that lucerne is growing on some of the richest soils in Canterbury, and on some of the poorest, where other crops will not grow. It is rather remarkable that a crop with such a record as lucerne should be considered by some people as a greenhouse plant that will only grow under the most favourable soil conditions. In your columns in the past the growing of lucerne has been strongly advocated, and I hope you will continue to bring this important fodder before the public.—Yours, etc..