The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1891-02-13
An Interview on the Wheat
Documents.

J
willing to answer them?"
eyes sir" wereplied, s'provided they
are such as we can answer, and If we
may take the interview in shorthand"
Certainly, and if you will publish
what / have to say have no objec-
ton. Will you feline when you got
those documents?"
"That cannot tell you. They are
straight goods, however"
"Well, he continued, "you recently
had discussion with Mr. C. A. Pills
bury regarding the wheat traffic?"
eyes sir"
"Did he not actually assist you in
your work of getting the information
you desired that is, did he not appear
to be willing to impart information on
that subject?"
"He did-much to our surprise"
'EDid he appear to be hostile to that
Investigations
"No-not hostile-rather friendly.
But | could not say what that
meant"
"Can you say, then, upon your hon
or as man, free from all your pre-
JUDGES as publisher who has perhaps
done remarkable work, and looking
back over all your field, that you
think Mr.. Pillsbury has made enor-
nous profits in wheat except in the &C.
tually necessary lines of commercial
enterprise as they exist?"
"Do you ask" we said whether
Mr.. Pillsbury has played the part of
! a robber individuality"
THAT'S it," he replied with an
emphatic gesture.
''No sir. Our acquaintance with him
is very limited. We met him last year
after the discussion, and he opened
his books freely. If in any way we
found facts to our advantage, and we
thought we did, we were not clogged
by Mr.. P. Indeed, we were perhaps
made a little suspicious by his strong
defence of the farmers against the
evils of option dealing"
"Why suspicious?"
Because he belongs to commercial
system which is wrong we were
not prepared for his position. The
system not only controls prices but
involves unnecessary expenses. He
even admitted that certain elevator
lines were taking advantage of the
farmers. We are willing to admit that
Mr.. Pillsbury's spirit was good"
"Well sir, you talk fairly-but how
much do you really mean by this?"
"Just what you would mean in say
ing the same words"
"Perhaps you have the courage to
admit there things publicly"
"Thereis nothing to admit. Our dis
cussion was very courteous. We are
not fighting persons-but damnable
system"
"But were you not aware that Mr..
Pillsbury fought that system as Bit
terly as you do?"
''No, not so bitterly as that" we
replied.
"But it is true. He is strongly
opposed to wheat gambling he
says SO in the strongest terms"
eve have not a sufficient acquain-
lance to judge of that. We have
however, understood that such
was his attitude. Mr.. Osgood,
from his Office, visited us twice
last year. He was courteous gentle
man, and he stated this matter as
you do. But you must remember
that in dealing with facts so stupendous
we cannot enter into private exam
nations to exculpate certain individ-
| uals because it is the SYSTEM we are
fighting"
did not Mr.. Osgood state that Mr..
P. was always a bull in the mar
ket?"
|Oh yes, but that is an indefinite
expression. One might think he had
political aspirations"
"Senatorial?"
eyes sir"
"Mr. Pillsbury has often said" he
replied, chat he would not take
senatorial election ifhanded him on a
gold platter, and from what l know of
him l believe it. He is too lndepend-
ent to remain in party harness. He
has publicly stated that he was op-
posed to the Mckinley bill, and it is
| we'll known that he does not sympa-
thize with majority of the Republi-
can party as to the Force Bill. "
(There was more of this, but it was
not pertinent to the grain issue, so we
leave it out.)
otis the attitude on the grain traffic
that we are most interested in," we
suggested.
''He has always been on the farmers
side of these controversies" he contin-
| ued. "The firm has made millions
but it has been by square dealing on
market which was made by species
of gambling which he never INDUCED
in. He has never gafhbled in op-
tions except to 'bull' the price
never has sold to depress. Heis known
by every grain dealer to condemn the
bear element. You can refer to any,
member of the Board in this matter,
etc. etc."
We interrupted with the question,
':Do you think we have, injured Mr..
Pillsbury personally by that cele-
brated discussion?"