New-York tribune., 1888-03-24
Knows MORE THAv HE DID ONCE.
COLONEL oRosvESoR ON Mr.. MEDlLL.


TO IA. Edttor Of The Tribwne
Sir: The Editor Of The Chicago Tribune In
an editorial commenting on recent letter oy me
regarding the development Of wool growing, affords
q fitting opportunity for response which since
1t is necessary for one so we'll Informed Us inc
veteran Mr. Medill may be needed for others also.
That paper fit to say that l. after figuring ior
wears as a rampant free-trade pamphleteer, turned
a stipendiary Of trust protection interests The
veteran Mr. Medill probably knows that he Is not
q stipendiary OF British manufacturers or Oh I'M
porters and that his assistants IN the conduct OF
The Chicago Tribune are not. III he knows
this, |. is unworthy Of him to stgmatize as
stipcndiary Of protected interests one who mas
congenial employment on journal which docs noc
agree with Mr.. Medilrs opinion He well knows
that the money which The Chicago Tribune
once paid me for editorial articles which 1t pub
l,sbed did not form or modify the opinions
I then expressed in those articles, aud he should
he manly enough to acknowledge that he has not
q trace of evidence and no occasion to believe
that compensation in any form has shaped or
modified the opinions which have more recently
EXPRESSED. raE Ngw-YohK fKIBUSE. at all events,
will bear me witness that for years after lad
become n member of its editorial staff, was never
asked TO WRITE and never wrote, anything on the
tariff question for its columns, because my De
lefs at that time were not in accord with tne
policy which TIE TRIBUNE has for long tlmo
consistently pursued. m ;.
It. would seem more worthy of Mr.. Mediu IL
he would meet the reasons which have statca
for changes Of opinion regarding the practicai
workings Of the tariff In 1871 / showed that 1t
had not then accelerated the development OF
certain industries; now I show that 1t has, ana
to an extent not equalled by any other poncy 10
IL. hiO,
this or any other country. The sole reply "hlcn
{" The Chicago Tribune" makes is that tne htet
and more rapid increase in woo[production may DC
attributed to the extension Of railroads In the Tar
West This would be sound explanation Oh
great EXPANSION in wheat growing, for wheat is
worth / cent per pound In the West, and WOOL ~
cents The entire value Of the wheat would pay the
cost Of waeonnq at 90 cents per ton per mile, only
112 miles; the value of tho wool would pay the
cost OF wagoning at the same rate 2,24O miles
Uence wheat growing at the West depends on
the building OF railroads; wool growing does not
AMI the tariff only has made its great increase
possible But for the tariff, foreign wool couio
be placed In any part of the country even IN the
far Western ranches where land is Cheapest Al
less than the cost Of growing it there, and II the
ranch wool growers could not exist without pro
lection, as they are unanimously informing Mr
Mills. then The Chicago Tribune may be safely
left to figure out how Illinois and Iowa WOOL
growers would fare, who scarcely get along II
competition with wool transported Thousand
miles or more from ranches before 1T reaches th'
market at Chicago.
The argument Of " The Chicago Tribune re
duced to it's simplest terms, appears TO DC tn's DC
cause wool growing in this country mas increase'
most where land is cheap, therefore it is folly u
nrovide anv defence for that industry there, OF
anywhere else against the competition OF A ct al
where land is still cheaper. Possibly the pro
ducers of the West may be satisfied with this logic
New-York, March %, 1888.
W. NJ GROSvENOR