The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1913-04-16
PROTEST Meeting
HELD N CITY
Millers are Opposed to Tar
IFS in the Underwood Bill
Now Before Congress.
STRONG VIEWS
ARE
Congressman From North
west Will be Importuned
to Oppose New Bill.

Mtllers from all parts Of the state
are in the city today. They have been
meeting for the purpose Of discussing
the new tariff bill introduced in con-
gress by Congressman Underwood. The
tariff changes in regard to wheat and
-four are the points considered. Mill
org all over the northwest have pro-
tested strenuously against the new tar
lifts. The meeting here today of the
members Of the so-called Hard Spring
Wheat league Of North Dakota and
northwestern Minnesota resulted m
ed:
Resolved, That we mos earnestly
recommend that every possible effort
be put forth to obtain justice regard
ing the tariff on wheat and -four and
that we ask for a duty of 10 cents per
bushel on wheat and ten per cent ad
valorem on the products of wheat to
be made absolutely; to apply on all
imp%ortations."
The millers feel that their indus
trial establishments are being threat
ened. They maintain that the farmer
and the laboring man will suffer as
well.
The views of some of the prominent
millers of the northwest on the tariff
situation are given below:
The views Of President James L.
Rell of the Washburn-Crosby COM
pany is that 1.-The American millers
any favors Of the government. Al.
they ask Is a fair show. If congress
provides for free flour. then the mill
ers must insist that the raw material,
wheat, be also free. If. on the other
hand. congress determines that the
farmers r entitled to a degree of
protection on their wheat. the millers,
equivalent duty be placed upon their
finished products, flour and feed.
Placing flour and it's ~by-products
upon the free list. while a duty is re-
tanned upon wheat. will, it is submit
ted. not accomplish in any degree the
result expected for the farmer. For
every million barrels of flour imported
grinding tho equivalent in wheat-that
Is. 4,500.0 900 bushels. This means that
there will be less demand for wheat,
yer for domestic consumption in this
country: and. in fact. the millers of
this country cannot afford to pay more
for wheat than will their Canadian.
English and other rivals. who will b.
1ICe ~ cup LkClA llOul lAIO SLlIS
country. The net result Of this. of
course, would be to place the prices
Of wheat in this country upon an ex-
port basis. and. so far as the protec-
ton intended by the proposed bill to
help the farmers, such help would a!
once be negatived.
Get Nothing in Return.
I'm shis connection 1t should be
noted that we open the markets of
this country to Canadian manufacture
ers and get nothing in return. for the
Canadian tariff wall stands against US.
and that, under the influence Of the
mother country. most Of the British,
West Indies have closed their doors to
American flour by giving a prefer
entail tariff to Canada.
II am sure you will agree with us
that such legislation is not favorable
to the prosperity and business of the
northwest. and we cannot but be con-
hdent that If the un%fairness Of such a
proposed tariff measure is really
brought home to those in authority
who are making these laws. they will
not permit such an injustice"
William Stratton Of st. Cloud, man.
ager of the George Tileston Milling
company is quoted as follows:
THE northwest farmer will be on
q basis with the wheat producer of
Russia, Egypt. India and Argentina II
that idea is carried out. 1t will not
only cripple the milling industry. but
the blow will fall heavily upon the
Minnesota and Dakota wheat raiser.
It will hit the manufacturer and hit
the producer ever harder"
John 8. Pillsbury Of the Pillsbury
Flour Mills company Of Minneapolis,
states that the proposal was SO revo-
lutionary that its operation would
paralyze the milling industry Of the
northwest.
THAT the tariff revisionists should
eerfously consider taxing the raw ma
terial that United States manufacture
ers 8 and admitting free the finished
product Of foreign mills is diametrical-