The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, March 22, 1917, Page 3

VOL. 4, NO. 12 In the interest of a square deal for the farmer Official Magazine of the Na Nonpartigan Teader A magazine that dares to print the truth tional Nonpartisan’League THE AUCTIONEER—SELLING OUT THE FARMER HERE 15 A PIECE OF LEGISLATION— VALUABLE TO THE FARMER DBUT { DETRIMENTAL TO YOU WHAT AM I OFFERED = FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA, THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 1917 WHOLE NUMBER 79 =" GENTLEMEN FOR IT ¢ — 56,5-6,56,5-6,5:0 | WHO'LL MAKE IT SEVEN — 6-7) (”71 é"'7‘)4'_7__ e AIN'T T GQOIN TO GET MORE. THAN 7000 DOLLARS? o — ez — N N N / W 1 s’ RS W W s o "§\“ \ 8! fiul I q “Forty-four”--Its Soul Goes Marching On EARLY three weeks having passed since the Fifteenth North N Dakota assembly adjourned. it is possible to look broadly at the whole effect of what happened in that session and to see it in a clearer light. If we thought the legislature was going to give us a new pro- gram or to change the ground upon which we were fighting we must confess now that we were mistaken. The battle that will be on in North Dakota for the next two years —and probably much longer—is to be fought on the same old issue, which is this: Shall the people rule? ‘We pointed out last week the position taken by the League’s opponents in the legislature on this question. We are pointing it out again more specifically this week. We must examine our ground care- * fully. We must not make any mistakes. ® & & NOTHING MUCH TO DEBATE ORTUNATELY the record is clear. Though the Old Gang in F the legislature used all the known political tricks and devices to obscure the issue they couldn’t conceal the facts of their pur- pose. Their words and their votes told the story. They shouted so that all the world should hear: ‘‘We do not trust the people. The peo- ple shall not rule.”’ Really, there isn’t much to debate with the Old Gang. Certainly, . we don’t intend to debate the question: Ought the people to rule? We are prejudiced on that point. We admit it. ‘‘Prejudice’” mean ‘‘pre- . judgment,”” a mind made up in advance—and on that one point we admit we are prejudiced. WE BELIEVE IN THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO RULE. WE BELIEVE THAT THE WHOLE SAFETY AND FUTURE WELFARE OF OUR NATION DEPENDS ON THAT. THE PEOPLE MUST RULE. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE FIGHT- ING FOR. WE LONG AGO MADE UP OUR MINDS TO THAT— AND IF THERE IS ANY MAN IN THE LEAGUE WHO DOESN’T BELIEVE IN THAT PRINCIPLE HE OUGHT TO GET OUT. HE DOESN’T BELONG IN THE LEAGUE. HE BELONGS WITH OUR ENEMIES, THE DISCIPLES OF THE DIVINE RIGHT OF THE PLUNDERBUND TO EXPLOIT THE PEOPLE OF THE NATION, WHO ASSERT EMPHATICALLY THAT EXPLOITATION AND ROBBERY OF THE PEOPLE ARE ‘“NONE OF THE PEOPLE’S BUSINESS.” - ; : LET FORTY-FOUR BE THE ISSUE HE Old Gang since the legislature adjourned has shown that it I wants to make House Bill 44 the issue. All right; so let it be, because in House Bill 44 the real issue is so apparent that all can see. : ‘What was the object of House Bill 44? It was to enable the PEOPLE OF THE STATE.TO DECIDE SPEEDILY ON WHETHER THEY WANTED CERTAIN CHANGES MADE IN THEIR CONSTI- TUTION. The Old Gang said: ‘‘The people must not be allowed to decide. If we let this thing go, the people of the state can vote in state socialism if they want it; at least they can vote in public ownership of important PUBLIC UTILITIES—IF THEY WANT IT—AND WE MUST NOT GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.”’ Note that House Bill 4 DID NOT ATTEMPT TO FORCE STATE OWNERSHIP ON THE PEOPLE. EVEN IF IT HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE SENATE, STATE OWNERSHIP WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. GOING THE NEXT BIG STEP FURTHER, IF IT HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE PEOPLE, WE STILL WOULD NOT HAVE HAD STATE OWNERSHIP. : WHAT THEN? WHY JUST SIMPLY THIS: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE WOULD THEN HAVE HAD THE RIGHT TO ESTABLISH PUBLICLY-OWNED INDUSTRIES IF THEY SHOULD SO DECIDE. IN EVERY CASE AND IN THE MATTER OF EVERY INDUSTRY THE DECISION WOULD STILL HAVE BEEN UP TO THE PEOPLE. - ~ THAT’S WHAT THESE GUARDIANS OF PRIVILEGE MEAN WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT GUARDING THE STATE AND GUARDING THE “PEOPLE OF THE STATE.” THEY WANT TO GUARD YOU FROM THE RIGHT OF MAKING YOUR OWN DECISIONS. L s & ' THE PRECIOUS OLD DOCUMENT HE present constitution is a precious document—to special I privilege. Under it the hands of the people are tied. Their feet are all wound up in a maze of red tape and delay. Worst of all, the people CAN NOT CHANGE THEIR OWN CONSTITUTION IN ANY PARTICULAR without the consent of TWO CONSECUTIVE LEGISLATURES, if the terms of this constitution are strictly enforced THREE o