St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-09-28
'IKNOW OF None
Charles A. Pillsbury Told the
Committee There Was No
Combine,
And Yet Amsden Was His Con-
fidential Manager and
Trusted Man.
WOleott. Now a Very Bad Man.
Was Once High in
Favor.
AS Long as He Could Be Used
He Was a Splendid
Man.
Letters That No Amount OF
Abuse Can Change or
Disprove.
How the Merchants of a Sman
Town We're to Be Forced
to the Wall.

The Republican organs that are so
frantlcally denying the existence of a
wheat combination in the Northwest
have been and are very careful to print
none of the evidence that has been pro-
| duced and given to the people. All they
are willing to do is to print interviews
with Chief Grain Inspector Ciausen, re-
ports of the railroad commission, care
fully worded bluffs made by Charles A.
Pills bury and profuse interviews die
tated by Senator Washburn.
Why is it If they are SO certain that
there is nothing IN this exposure of the
great wheat ring that rot one of them
has ever printed the minority report of
Hon. E. j. Moore, of the legislative in
vestlgating committee?
Why has none of them printed
Charles A. Pillsbury's letter to Stuart,
the Paris banker?
term the bad reputation of G. G.. VOL
colt. But the ring did not always have
this opinion of Mr.. Wolcott. who was for
time hand i'll glove with them. AS long
as he was their man he was all right,
but when they tricked and deceived
him they tried to drive him off and COM
menced slandering him. AS has been
stated the character of C. G. Wolcott
has nothing to do with this case.
Ii MIR. WolcOtt has published letters
from Amsden, Plllsbury and their part
nerS that are false, these men have their
remedy. Ii Mr.. Wocott cannot be
reached the papers that have printed
the matter can be. 1t is Just as much a
crime. to circulate libel as it is to
father one, and the law provides the
same remedy for the two offenses. The
members OF the wheat ring and their
defenders all know this, but they are
trying to deceive the people.
Their Small Profits.
The Pillsburys, and all those inter-
ested with them in the wheat combine,
have continuously and perslstently
stated that the elevators make no
money; that the profits are not over II
or III per cent. The same claim was
made several years ago-and it is not
new. 1t has been repeated and reit-
Grated.
March IL, 1892, c. A. Pillsbury went
on the stand in st. Paul. during the seS-
sion of the legislative investigation of
the wheat combine, and stated that the
profits of the elevator companies, far
from being as large as generally sup
posed, really represented but very little
margin on the money invested. 1t was
stated by him that, even in their most
prosperous years, the companies made
only ~ per cent on the money invested.
Yet, i'll the same breath he said that up
to three years ago the elevators were
profitable, but since that time they had
not been so. Now, it may be considered
that the proof of the big profits of the
elevator companies shown here refer to
1887, 1883. and 1889, and that Mr.. Pills
bury might have been telling the truth
when he said they were Improbable
now.
But who will vouch for Mr.. Pills
bury's word in the light OF the manifest
falsehood which lies somewhere be-
tween two letters written by him, one
to H. F. Arnold, under date of June Is.
1889, and another to H. G. E. Stuart,
manager of the American department
of the Credit LyonnaiS, Paris. under
date of April %, 1889? There is not
quite two months of time between these
letters.
Tie following is substantial copy Of
letter written by
Arnold to Pillsbury:
LARIMoRE, Dak., June II, 1SS9.-C.
Dear Sir: l hope you will excuse the
liberty l take in writing to you, but
some other farmers and myself are
thinking of building an elevator at Lari-
more, and, knowing that you are very
large miller and use large quantities of
wheat, we decided before doing so to
write you and get your advice about it.
We need to get all the money we can for
our wheat this fall ii we get crop, and if
we can get any more money Tor our
wheat by building our own elevator we
feel we would like to do so; also, to
handle our neighbors' wheat, but we
have no money to lose, and do not care
TO build without we can make money by
it. Do you think the elevator companies
make any money, and would you advice
US TO build an elevator, aud, if we do so,
can we sell our wheat direct to you? l
am, yours truly, Ii. +. ARNOLD.
Pilishury's Eseply.
CHAS. 4. eILLSBURY & CO.
Cable Address, Pillshury, Minneapolis.
MINNEAPoLIs, Mimi, June IS, 1889.
Mr.. II. F. Arnold, Larimore, Oak.
Dear Sir: In answer to your favor of
18th, would say that our grain elevators
have not paid at all lately, simply be-
cause there have been too many elevat-
orS and too little wheat even on big
crop. The elevator business has been
overdone in your section, and more e1e-
vatorS have been built than can be
profitably run. We think you can buy
elevators to better advantage than to
build them. 1t is very risky business.
The loss during the last year has been
fearful, and wheat was graded one or
two grades higher in the country than
it would pass in Minneapolis and Du.
luth. Yours truly,
CHAs. A. PILLsBURY & Co.
G. A. r.
Note the statement made by Pillsbury
in this letter. designed to prevent a
competitive elevator from being built,
and to give the farmer the idea that the
country elevators run by the combine
graded wheat too high. and were hence
paying more than wheat was worth, and
then study the statements made in his
answer to the following letter:
PARIS, France, April 8, 1859.
Messrs. Charles A. Pilisbury & Co.,
Minneapolis. Mimi:
Dear Sir: Desiring some reliable IN
Continued OF, Fifth Page.