The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1924-08-21
MIILERS OPPOSE WATERWAY
Est. Paul Pioneer Press)


Minneapolis -four milling oppo
sitiOn to the Great Lakes-St. Law
renee waterway has come out il
the open, with an article by JOIN
s. Pillsbury, vice president of tn
Pillsbury Milling company. in tn
National Grain Journal. Mr.. Pills
bury admits that the project wi!
be beneficial in some ways to tn
farmers of the Northwest, hut say!
Il will be wholly bad for the mill
Prs. He says in part:
In my humble opinion, the
construction of the st. Law
renee waterway would he one
Of the worst things that could
happen to the Northwest, in
that water competition en-
courages the movement of raw
materials, and would encour-
age the movement of wheat at
low cargo rates in competition
with the movement Of -four.
While the farmer might gain
some benefit over the cost of
shipping his wheat for export,
he would indirectly more than
lose these benefits.
In the first place he would
encourage the sending out of
the country all of the by-prO-
ducts of wheat which are so
vital to diversified farming
and to the productivity Of the
soil; and. secondly, by encour-
aging the governments spend
ing a large amount of money
for a waterway, largely in
Canada, produce competition
that would make the situation
of the railroads even worse
than it is today, and would
force the railroads greatly to
increase their rates on what
business they had left, which
would be reflected in the cost
of all the materials which the
farmer needs.
In addition to this, the cost
of construction of such a canal
by government money would
mean greater taxation to the
farmers as we'll as the rail-
roads who would be the suffer-
ers; and the chances are that
the operation of such water
way would be at a loss to the
government, in addition to the
tremendous loss of interest on
the money invested.
Competition with the move
ment Of flour" is the chief subjec
of Mr.. Pillsbury's distress. Hi
argument seems to be that tn
farmer should be denied an oppor
tunity to profit by raising wheat
in order that the millers may no
lose any profit in selling f1ou
He does not expect tn
freight on -four to Liverpool to b
reduced proportionately as niue
as that on wheat.
The millers could not increas
the Liverpool selling price of thel
-four. They would sell at the mar
ket price abroad and if they los
anything by having to pay NOR
for their raw material, woul
simply add that amount to the do
nestle price of -four, which al
ready is higher than that of Liv
erpool and has been for years. .
change in the condition might b
a disadvantage to Minneapoli
mills in competition with those c
or Galveston. but it is a
abominable idea that Northwes
farmers should have to rails
wheat at a loss so that MinneaI
oils mills may thrive.
The other argument against tn
waterway are of doubtful weigh
1t is open to question whethe
farmers will have t
pay materially more for bran an
with the waterway in opel
alton, than they now pay, whic
is all that can be exacted in com
petition with mills producing i
other sections The alleged har1
to the railroads and putativ
freight advances would be Limited
if there be any, to roads east c
the Great Lakes. which need ne
disturb the Northwest. Tie I Ii
that the waterway woul
be run at a loss, increasing taxe'
is wholly gratuitous and improt
able.