Evening Star Newspaper, September 28, 1928, Page 10

THE EVENING STAR, WASHINGTON. D. C, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1928, TEXT OF GOV. SMITH’S SPEECH REPLYING TO FARM CRITICS By the Associated Press. ST. PAUL, Minn, September 28— The text of Gov. Smith's speech last night, as prepared for delivery, fol- lows: Aside from his constitutional duties in connection with the operation of the Government, my idea of the President’s position is that of a leader of thought of the American peoples. And if I were asked today what in my opinion was the fundamental weakness of the last two Republican administrations, I would be compelled to say it was lack of such leadership. It is not sufficient, in my opinion, for the President to state his views on great public questions in his annual message to the Congress or in rare formal addresses. I believe that the duty rests upon him of talking to the American people and laying before them the facts, to the end that when they make their determination on big problems of the Nation they may be in a position to act intelligently and to have their representatives in the Senate and in the House express their well reasoned opinion. I suggest this following my experi- ence ae governor of my own State; it would have been impossible for me to have secured the governmental reforms that I fought for in the State of New York unless I carried the problems di- rectly to the people themselves. Airs His Accomplishments. Reorganization of the State govern- ment; the shortening of the ballot; drastic reform in the manner and method of appropriating public money; rehabilitation of the department of health; the establishment of a system of State parks and parkways; legislation in the interest of men, women and chil- dren working in factories; salutary amendments to the factory code for the protection of their health and well being—all came into existence in the State of New York only after a long and vigorous csmpaign in the course of which I spoke in practically every city in the State, carrying the message directly to the people themselves, who assisted me in wringing these govern- mental reforms from a hostile Legisla- ture opposing - my proposals only for political reasons. Because of lack of such leadership in the national administration not one large, constructive achievement can be pointed to in the record of the last seven and a half years; and if the American people will search back through their minds they can see this in sharp contrast with the Wilson and Roosevelt administrations. Wilson and Roosevelt were leaders. Hints at Hidden Control. ‘The whole history of the last two Republican administrations suggests that some hidden control, strongly re- actionary in its tendencies towards the great questions of the Government, has been in a position to dictate party policy from behind the scenes and delay the progress of great public develop- ments which interfered with its plans or program. For that reason prominent members of the Republican party have walked out of its ranks and openly de- clared hostility to their party and dis- agreement with its reactionary tendencies. t was that hidden reactionary con- trol that drove the elder Senator La Follette to the creation of a_new party for the purpose of giving expression to the progressive views of the State that he represented and the States in sym- pathy with his point of view on great public questions. t was a revolt against the same re- actionary tendencies of the hidden con- trol which drove Theodore Roosevelt {rom the ranks of the party that hon- ored him with public office from youth to well past middle age and when he had closed a long public career as Presi- dent of the United States after nomina- tion by the Republican party. Scores Lack of Farm Plan. What more glaring exhibition of lack of leadership could be found in the Re- publican administration that its han- dling of the farm relief-problem? That it is a critical problem they have ad- mitted in their platform this year, and they recognized it also in the platform four years ago. Shortly atter the advent of the Re- publican administration in 1921 the question of relief to agriculture became acute, and from that period down to and including today the Republican party has been floundering around, with neither the President nor the Re- publican candidate as his chief adviser on agriculture even able to devise a policy, not to speak of executing one. The Congress of the United States, speaking for all the people, offered a program. The President vetoed it, but offered nothing in its place. | If there was any division of opinion | in the United States with regard to the | policy of putting agriculture on an eco- nomic equality with industry, it was the duty ef the President of the United tates to iron out that difficulty. This 1 feel could have been accomplished by taking this question to the people them- selves and bringing to their attention the cold facts and figures which show that the men engaged in the business of taking from the land the necessities of life are compelled to scll their crops at less than the cost of production. Asks Many Questions. How many people in this country would deny justice to the farmer if they knew the real facts? Agricultural depression unquestionably reduces sub- stantially the farmers’ power of pur- chase. How long would the business man, the manufacturer and the store- keeper resist governmental aid to agri- culture if it were brought to their at- tention that that depression is inter- fering with their business prosperity? Organized labor was quick to realize that agricultural depression drove men from the farms to the cities to take up new lines of endeavor in competition with industrial workers and therefore approved the principle of agricultural equality. How many people in the United States are familiar with the bank and commercial failures directly due to the agricultural depression? And how long would it take the business men of the country to realize that these failures are threatening the whole economic structure? How many people in the United States today realize that according to the Department of Agriculture it costs the farmer from $1 to $1.72 in the United States to produce a bushel of wheat which he is compelled to sell today at much less than a dollar? Says Canadian Wheat Higher. It should be brought home to th» people that commodities like wheat really bring a higher price, as a rule, in the Canadian unprotected market than they do in the United States, where the farmer has been deceived into the belief that the tariff alonc will solve his problem. ‘The American farmer asks no bounty. He asks no charity or no financial as- ance from the Government He asks that the Republican promise of putting his business on an economic equality with industry be carried out The Republican party seems unwilling and unable and totally lacking in lead- ership to make that promise good. At Omaha a week and a half ago I took a_definite position on this matter, and after I spoke of the ills that the farmer is suffering from I read a pre- scription. I wish tonight to answer certain criticisms of it. So let me read it to you: . Stands for Farm Bill. vVarious pcople have attempted to misrepresent and confuse my attitude with respect to the McNary-Haugen bill. 1 do not propose to.leave the slightyst doubt in anybody’s mind on that subject. As I read the McNary- Haugen bill, its fundamental purpose is to establish an effective control of the sale of exportable surplus with the cost imposed upon the commodity ben- cfited. For that principle the Demo- cratic platform squarely stands, and for that principle I squarcly stand. Mr. Hoover ct squarely opposed to thy ‘vxfiu“fl hy which the farmer coul get the benefit of the tariff. What re- mains of the McNary-Haugen bill is a mere matter of method, and I do not limit myself to the exact mechanics and method embodied in that bill. Here is a clean-cut issue which the farmers and the voters of this country must_decide. It remains but to work out the details by which this principle shall be put into effect, and I have pledged myself to name a non-partisan commission of farm leaders and stu- dents of the problem to work out these details. I shall make that appoint- ment, if I am elected—not when I take the vath of office as President, but im- mediately after election; and 1 pledge to the farmers and to the people of unturned- to give immediate and ade- quate farm relief, by legislation carry- ing into practice the definite principle for which my party and I stand. Says Hoover Has No Plans. The Republican party candidate in his speeches to date have developed no constructive plan, and I note by the papers that he does not intend to make another speech in the campaign until the 6th of October, and the same papers say that the one following that will be on the 16th of October. I am not in a position to say whether or not the chairman of the Republican national committee speaks for the party, speaks for himself or speaks for the candidate when he says in criticism of my speech on farm relief delivered at Omaha (I quote from him): ‘He enunciated a principle which he ys he finds in the McNary-Haugen biil, but which is not the principle over which the battle has been fought for the last four years.” The Republican chairman displays a lack of knowledge of the whole situa- tion when he attempts to fasten two principles on the plan set forth in the so-called McNary-Haugen bill. He con- fuses the machinery for making the pr]i;wlp)e effective with the principle it- self. Quotes Jardine Speech. ‘The Eocretary of Agriculture, Mr, Jardine, made a speech about by pro- gram at Riverhead, N. Y., on the 21st. He said: “Your governor is in the West to solve the wheat problem, and I hope he will do so. I've been trying to do it for seven years and haven't entirely succeeded. Yet, in spite of that, for several years we've managed to get you a pretty good price for wheat and po- tatoes. I am certain that we will dur- ing the next four years if given the op- portunity.” He added: “If you will cut down the acreage of potatoes, then I can help you get to- gether and plant less and get a better price. Always keep in mind the de- mand. The wheat crop is having the same trouble—too many acres.” Now there are three points in this speech of Secretary Jardine's: First. He is entirely right when he says that he has not succeeded in solv- ing the wheat problem. Neither has anybody else in his party. Second. I do not think there is a farmer in this country who will agree with his statements that he has man- aged to get for the farmer a pretty good price for the wheat. He is the only man I ever knew who would call a price below the cost of production a pretty good price. Scores Hoover Stand. Third. He continues to hold out the old plan which was advocated by Mr. Hoover of cutting down acreage. He continues to advocate this despite the report of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics of his own department which stated that it was substantially impossible to control the output of wheat by a reduction in acreage. Mr. Hoover took a similar position back in 1924 when he wrote that surplus crops could “only be corrected by prices low :g&ug_h to make production unprofit- Substantially they both stand for the astounding proposition that the way to help the farmer is to beat him down and drive more men from the farms in addition to the 4.000,000 who ?;;:l already been compelled to leave Senator Charles P. nye of North Dakota declares. for onZ method of making effective the principle of im- posing the cost of surplus control on the commodity benefited—namely, the so-called equalization fee—and then makes the’ remarkable statement that t.mhgmpcypé;l t‘acre rgrced to choose the de and available Hoover has outlined. A Says Hoover Opposed Fee Plan. “It 15 well known that Mr. Hoover, as adviser to the President, declared in no uncertain terms not only against the method known as the equalization fee for control of the exportable surplus with the cost fastened on the commodity benefited, but against the whole prin- ciple of assessing the cost to handle the surplus back on the crop benefited. “Senator Nye says thet Mr., Hoover has a definite and available plan. What is it? It has so far not been disclosed by Ilhch(j.‘:ndidn!:. ‘ “In speech of acceptance he said that the {ariff was the foundation of | farm relief. That I dispute. The tariff is a help, but everybody familiar with the subject, including Senator Nye, knows that the tariff standing by itself will not bring relief. He urges co- operatives. There is no argument about that, they are helpful; but standing by themselves, without machinery by law for making them operate effectively, they will not solve the problem. “He speaks of voluntary stabillzation corporations. He knows, and Senator Nye knows, that they, too, are ineffect- ual. This is apparent from the words of Senator Nye himself, who says: “I am still partial to the plan (mean- ing the machinery of the McNary-Hau- gen biil) as the best foundation upon which to build a broad and lasting agri- cultural program.” Criticism Is Answered. ‘The criticism of my Omaha speech made by the Republican national chair- man and Senator Nye is met and demol- ished by the statement made by Senator Norris of Nebraska, the chairman of the committee on agriculture of the United States Senate and one of the foremost students of this problem in the United States today. He said: “Men who believe in the theory of the McNary-Haugen bill should be satisfied with the Omaha speech of Gov. Smith. Gov. Smith proposes to take care of the surplus and charge the cost to the pro- ducer. That is the real object of the McNary-Haugen bill. He properly re- serves the further consideration of the machinery. I do not know, after long study, how any one can improve on the machinery in the McNary-Haugen bill, but Gov. Smith is to be complimented in holding himself open for a better rem- edy, if one can be found.” Nothing that I could say would go farther to dispose of the state- ments of Dr. Work and Senator Nye than what I have just read to you from the statement of Senator Norris. They are all members of the same political v, cxcept that Senator Norris be- s in progressive leadership and the other two men are content with things 1s they are. Quotes Lowden Stand. He sees and understands that the equalization fee is but one method to make effective the principle. It is noteworthy at this point to recall to mind that Gov. Lowden, in the very front of the leaders of his party, strug- gling to assist the farmer, 'said that if there were any better method to ef- fectuate the principle of surplus con- trol, he would be for it. Mr. Hoover promises the development of our inland waterways for relief for the farmer. This subject gives us again a glaring example of absolute lack of leadership and constructive thought or action. It parallels the farm-relief ques- tion as far as promise and performance are concerned on the part of the Repub- lican administration. Let us go back over the record. The Republican platform of 1920, eight years ago, said: “We declare it to be our policy to en~ this country that no stone will be left | courage and develop water transporta- tion and service and facilities in con- nection with the commerce of the United States.” Cites Waterways Promises. The report of the advisory commit- tee on policies and platform of the Re- publican party, responsible for that declaration, said: . “The development of inland trans- portation by water under a broad and comprehensive plan which shall include all the uses of the waters and benefits to be derived from their control is a policy equally of the Republican party.” It is a matter of history that from 1921, when the Republican party came into power, until 1924, when they again adopted a platform, nothing was done about a comprehensive plan for the de- velopment of inland waterways. Conse- quently they found it necessary again 1 1924 to make practically the same prom- ise which is to be found in the Repub- lican platform of that year in the fol- lowing language: “Fully realizing the vital importance of transportation in both cost and serv- ice to all our people, we favor the con- struction of the most feasible waterways from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico, and improvement and development of rivers, harbors and waterways, inland and coastwise, to the fullest extent justified by the present and potential tonnage available.” Says Disaster Unnecessary. Let us look at the platform of 1928, which again speaks of cheaper trans- portation for bulk goods from the Mid- west agricultural sections to the sea, and they say that it is recognized by the Republican party as a vital factor for the relief of agriculture. They speak of the continued development of inland waterways. What is meant by the continued development? No com- prehensive plan has yet been put forth to develop them, although it was prom- ised in 1920 and promised again in 1924 and now in 1928. They claim to have initiated the systematic development of the Mississippi system. What plan have they for such development and what have they done to finance it? I hold in my hands the only sub- stantial piece of legislation I have been able to find with regard to development of the issippi River and that is entitled, “An act for the control of floods on the Mississippi River and its tributaries and for other purposes.” But I can find no other purposes indi- cated in the bill except flood relief, un- less by “other purposes” is meant the preparation of maps required to further the project of flood control. It con- tains no reference to any comprehen- sive plan or scheme of inland water- way development. It does not even refer to any substantial development on the upper or northern part of the Mis- sissippi River. ‘This is as far as we have been able to get on Republican promis after eight years of neglect and delay, and this much has been accomplished only after a great catastrophe, which might well have been avoided had action been promptly taken on the promises. Scores Lack of Funds. Even this action is entirely unsatis- factory, and so far as a definite plan is concerned, gets us nowhere, As far as flood relief is concerned, the bill is not thoroughly honest. Leading the people to believe that financial provision has been made for flood relief, the bill appropriates only $15,000,000, although it authorized future appropriations of $325,000.000. The amount made available, unnecessary for me to say, would scarcely scratch the surface of any comprehensive plan or bring about any degree of flood relief. At this point I call your attention to a policy that has grown up in the Federal administration that can have no other purpose except to deceive the people. Three hundred and {wenty- five million dollars authorized but not appropriated is another means of dela; One of the great troubles with th it is | | | | | project and with many others is that had adequate appropriations been made | for them, the Republican party would be unable to make the boasts of econo- my in the present administration that they have spread broadcast throughout the length and breadth of the land You cannot get results promising de- velopment as one policy hhold- ing the funds to carry other policy. Would Let “Economy” Interfere. By comparison with the Republican platform, the Democratic platform spe- cifically commits the Democratic party to the building up of water transporta- tion through the immediate improve- ment of the inland waterways and goes further and declares for prompt ap-| propriation of the necessary funds to effectuate a comvrehensive plan. So far as the Mississippi River is con- cerned. there can be no comprehensive plan that contemplates the develop- ment of only a part of that river, as proposed in the Republican legislation I have just referred to. It must in- clude the Mississippi River as a whole and its navigable tributaries. I will carry out that platform in its letter and spirit, and the political expediency of reducing appropriation bills will not stand in the way of making good that promise in the interest of the commerce and agriculture of the whole country. Mv attention has been called to an article in the St. Paul Dispatch of Wednesday of this week, in which it is claimed that I was advised not to speak on the subject of waterways because it would cause me embarrassment to speak about the St. Lawrence route from the Great Lakes to the sea. “Never Embarrassed on Issues.” I am never embarrassed talking on any public question. The embarrass- ment, if it exists, is upon the Repub- lican party on this question, because the platform of 1928 simply provides “cheaper transportation for bulk goods from the Midwest agricultural sections to the = N ys nothing about the route. It does not mentions the St. Law- rence River nor the all-American waterways. It dodges that question. For that matter, it does not speak about a canal at all. In 1924 the Republican party dodged the question in the same way when they said that they favored the construction of the most feasible waterways from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic sca- | board without mention of the route. Let us look at the speech of accept- ance of the Republican candidate and find out what he says about it. Speaking of the modernization of our inland waterways system, he says: “It includes not only the great Mis- sissippi system with its joining of the Great Lakes and the heart of the Mid- west agriculture to the Gulf, but also a shipway from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic.” Followed Republican Predecessors. I do not see that he says anything about the St. Lawrence waterway or the all-American route either. If ihere is an embarrassment, according to the record of the Republican party and the Republican candidate, they are suffer- ing from it and not I. I frankly told the people of the United States in my speech of accep- tance exactly where I stood on this subject, and I will repeat it here to- night. 'As Governor of New York State, representing the interests of that State, I took the same position as my Re- publican predecessor and declared in favor of the all-American route, from Lake Ontario, by way of the Erie Canal and the Mohawk River, to the Hudson, and down the Hudson to tidewater. I frankly stated what everybody knows—that there was a question as to the figures submitted by the engi- neers with respect to both routes. I would call your attention to the fact that all of the States affectedvwere not in accord on any one route. I have here a_telegram which states that the Mississippl Valley Association, now pro- moting the candidacy of my opponent, at its convention in St. Louis in vember two years ago, adopted a reso- lution indorsing the all-American route from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic ‘ Will Make Good His Pledge. | If I am called to the office of Presi- | dent by the American people I will make good to the last degree exactly what I said in my speech of accept- ance: “As President of the United States, | therefore, it would be my clear duty to | restudy this question impartially upon engineers' reports, the accuracy of which must be above question. When | the results of such study are given to | Congress T a mentirely willing to abide /by the decision of Congress. | . My interest will be just the same for | the great Northwest territory affected | by the improvement as it will be for | any other place in the United States, | including my own State. Again 1 declare that what is needed | is action. What is needed is leadership. What is needed is the disposition on the | part of the responsible authority to carry these promises into effect. They cannot be dragged from the moth bag getters to the American people, with no evidence that there ever was any inten- tion of carrying them out. Says G. 0. P. Is Whispering. The whispering forces of the Repub- lican national committee are at work on this question of the St. Lawrence waterway, and | plain statement in the speech of ac- | ceptance, they are attempting to put |into the minds of the people the | thought that T will be opposed under |any circumstances to the St. Lawrence | waterway, because of my early advocacy of the all-American route. I would be able to meet these arguments if they | mere made in the open, but it is diffi- |cult to answer them when they are | whispered. When you again hear them, refer the whisperer to my speech of acceptance and to my remarks from this platform tonight. In the course of the last two weeks I have discovered another whispering every four years and offered as vote- | in spite of my clear, | campaign about my attitude toward the question of immigration. The Congress of the United States, backed up by the President, has adopted a definite policy of restriction of ime | migration into this country for the pro- | tecticn of all citizens, both native and | foreign-bern. Th: whispors would | have the people believe that I favor a ‘etting-down of the restriction bars and an opening of the floodgates that im= | migration may pour into the country. Nothing could be further from the | truth. ‘The Democratic platform upon which I stand reads: “Laws which limit immigration must be preserved in full force and effect.” The Republican party. in different lan- guage, makes the same declaration in its platform. Th speak of amend- ation laws which ndue hardships that deprive the immigrant of the com- fort and soclety of those bound by close family ties. The Democratic platform provides for the same thing in a differens | language. The Republican candidate in his speech of acceptance parallels the Republican platform with relation to unnecessary har s upon fam- ili~s, but he further say: “As a member of the commission whose duty it is to determine the quota basis under the national origins law, I | have found it impossible to do so ace curately and without hardship.” Agrees With Hdover. With this 1 agree. Therofore there is no issue between either the parties |or the candidates on the question of sustaining and keeping in_full force and effect the restrictive features of the present immigration laws. Where they are to be amended for the relief of hardship we are in accord. I take my hat off to no man in re- gard and respect for immigration pop- ulation. No man can read the history of this country aright and deny the fact that in d a_great share " (Conti Americas Oldest Millinery House Will Now Sell DirecHothe Public al Wholesale Pri After selling at wholesale to dealers for 123 years, we have decided to change our merchandising policy from Wholesaling to Dealers to Wholesaling to the Public Beginning tomorrow, Saturday, September 29th, our doors will be open to the people of Wash- ington and closed to dealers—this change is un- questionably the most spectacular in the annals of American business but we have confidence in the ability of Washington women to judge values—and we know that they will whole-heartedly support o L4 our new policy. Come in—look around—you will not be hurried in your selection or urged to buy because of our self-service method of selling. Go leisurely through our showrooms—every item marKed in plain fig- ures. The price tags and the merchandise tell the story. Our new policy will enable the women of Washington to buy the newest in Millinery, Hosiery and Handkerchiefs at absolutely whole- sale prices. This is not a clearance sale of a temporary policy but a new method of merchandising—we shall continue to manufacture the newest in milli- nery and sell to you at the same prices that we have been selling to dealers. K3 o0 K3 LX From the Manufacturer . Direct to You— Eliminating the Middleman’s Profit ) — . 0‘0 Cur Formal Opening to the Public Will Take Place Tomorrow, Saturday, at 9:15 A.M, MILLINERY Our designers are ever on the alert to sense the latest decrees of Fashion as they emerge from the salons of the famous Pari- sian stylis ufacture. select from at one price than most stores show at all prices, and the materials used We offer a wider varie are the finest obtainable. Usual Retail Wholesale- Prices $1.50 3.00 5.00 6.00 7.50 10.00 15.00 $1.15 2.25 3.00 4.00 4.75 6.50 8.75 ts and apply them with expert skill and judgment to the models we man- Retail Prices of styles to You Save $0.35 75 2.00 2.00 2.75 3.50 6.25 PrepGitl Hasiezy. .. ....... .. Char Mag Hosiery. . HOSIERY Tudor Full Fashioned Hosiery Semi-Service Weight..................$145 Service WElgHE. .. ... oohiinnge. 900D Chiffon Weight . .y Pointed Heel, semi-service weig| Pointed Heel, service weight. ...... Pointed Heel, chiffon weight. .. ... Double Pointed Heel, chiffon we Bemberg Full Fashioned. . ht. .. ight. ... ...Thread Silk Usual Wholesale- Retail Retail Prices Prices $1.10 $1.25 $1.25 $1L.15 $1.35 $1.35 $1.85 85¢ $1.65 $1.50 $1.95 $1.95 $2.50 Two Nationally Known Brands 70c 70¢ Handkerchiefs For Men, Women and Children Children’s Hat Dept. We have a special department devoted to children’s hats. HARMSTRONG CATOR C 12th & G Sts. N, W. (Entrance, 1202 G St.) You Save 35¢ 40c 40c 35¢ 60c 60c 65¢ 15¢ 30¢ 30c