IMPORTANT TO BREAD-EATERS.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3051, 6 April 1881, Page 4

IMPORTANT TO BREAD-EATERS.

The Court Journal states that the letter to which the following article from tho Huddersfield Journal, refers, caused every bakery in London to be beseiged :—" We last week published a I enter, from ' Chemist,' oa the advisability of the more general coniiumption of wheat-meal bread. The question is "no of great importance, and demands serious consideration. Wheat-meal bread is made from corn which has been deprived of only the outer covering, that is to ray, tho ilour rj'italii.-i t'.e : .''.u.'. "he bival thus produced is uot only much cheaper than tbe ordinary white bread, but it is much better. A shilling's worth contains three times moro fiesb-giving ~i,r.l erial seventy times more, heat-producing material, '.uul three times more bone-forming material found in a -hi' 1 nr'* w fi o { ? lives and tloiuishes on wheat moil bie.id and garhek, but the Bntisli woiking man would be very loth to go without the roast beef of old England. Thero can be no reason, however, why wheat meal bread should not be substituted for ordinary white bread. By its nutritive qualities men would need less quanties of other victuals, and thus an appreciable saving of money would be the result, while (in growing children especially) the bones, sinews and muscles wo id 1 be strengthened, and thick coats of pun-enamel would preserve the teeth from decay. • he only obstacle in the way of the adoption of wheat-meal bread is prejudice. The English detest change in nothing so much as cooking. We still throw away the water in which we have boiled our beef, and thus waste most of its nutriment ; we are still ignorant of the use of the stock-pot and the braising-pan ; many still refuse to believe in any other fish than the herring, the spratt and tbe haddock, while almost all fish is cheap and wholesome. That this is pure fancy and prejudice is evidenced by the conduct of the wealthy, whose object of anxiety is to put a thing on the table because it is out of the season or " early, 11 and for no other reason. History shows us that there is a desire to have things simply because they are expensive and difficult to obtain. We dare wj that many English workmen would think it a fine thing to fare sumptuouvy every day on boiled salmon, but years u?v when s'dmon was extremely plentiful the farm labourers complained that tLey had to eat it more than four days a week ; while there was once a law on the English statute book which declared that domestic servants were entitled to but one meal a clay of fish and flesh, and wei'e to content themselves at Other meals with " milk, butter, cheese, and other such victuals." Men ought to have more of the spirit of Pompey, who when his physician ordered him a thrush, and such a bird could only be bad from the managerie of Lucullin, said, " Does Pompey's life depend upon the luxury of Lucullus ?" Then, without any regard to the physician, he ate something that was easy to hand, and—recovered. There is ' one other argument in favour of wheatmeal bread which is worth consideration. Among those who eat it there is less demand for over-feeding, a less tendency to gluttony, and, what is of moro importance, less craving for drink. Altogether, its use would tend to benefit the working-man and to improve bis condition. If those who are moving in the matter succeed in their agitation, they will achieve a genuine triumph, tho importance of which it is difficult to exaggerate."