Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BELOW STANDARD

CHAMPIONSHIP BREAD JUDGES BLAME FLOUR The poor quality of flour supplied to bakers throughout, the Dominion was blamed by the judges for a fiasco which occurred in the New Zealand championship bread competition for bakers at the Nelson Agricultural and Pastoral Show. “The best loaf in the show this year, the one which won the New Zealand championship, was not as good as the worst exhibit in the bakers’ bread classes at the last Nelson show,” was the comment of the judges, Messrs. Forster,. Russell and Freeman, in a joint statement. The judges contended that the poor quality.was not the fault of the bakers, who are in 10 towns in Now Zealand, but was the result of the quality of the flour supplied to them, which was not 'up to the standard necessary for baking first quality bread. The judges stated that some intending exhibitors had not sent their entries to compete in what was regarded as an important competition; Though they could not definitely state the reason for those defections, they felt sure the intending exhibitors had found they could not produce bread of sufficiently high standard from the flour available. The exhibits other than the prizewinning loaves could not be described as anything but very poor from the show point of view, and the judges were unable to pay a compliment to the best of the entries. The championship award went to Stacey and Hawker, Christchurch. That firm also gained a certificate for runner-up. The certificate for third place went to C. J. Callaghan, Westport.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19411125.2.80

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20622, 25 November 1941, Page 6

Word Count
259

BELOW STANDARD Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20622, 25 November 1941, Page 6

BELOW STANDARD Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20622, 25 November 1941, Page 6