The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, August 16, 1917, Page 7

American Political Science association and the American Sociological society—asking each member to express his opinion on various subjects in connection with the financing of the war, especially on conscription of wealth. At the time of going to press for its current issue 1017 replies had been received. 5 These answers were classified as follows by ‘“Equity’’: Number for conscription as ‘‘chief reliance’’ of war finance, 323. Number for conscription in connection with other forms of taxa- tion, 314. Number indicating that they are favorable to conscription of in- eomes on prineiple, 216. Total affirmative, 853. Number voting against the principle of conseripting incomes for war finance, 164. ® % x ~“All 1 know is that it were much more godly to encourage agricul- ture and lessen commerce; and that they do the best who, according to the scriptures, till the ground to get their living, as we are all com- manded.”—Martin Luther, 1483-1546.- * % = v PEACE TERMS AL SECT ‘‘AGRICULTURAL CONNECTIONS’’ PROPAGANDIST hired by the politicians to fight the Non- A partisan league, denies that the farmers were not adequately represented in the last Minnesota legislature. He says that the fact there were only nine farmers in the senate out of a member; ship of 67, does not really state the facts. He explains as follows: A majority of the legislators might have answered to other profes- sions in furnishing their biographies for the legislative blue book, but more than a majority of both houses HAD AGRICULTURAL CON- NECTIONS OF SOME SORT AND THEY WERE PROUD OF THE FACT. Sure, there were. But why doesn’t the correspondent name them? There was Senator Gotlots, the banker, for instance. He has ‘‘agricultural connections.”” He lends the farmers money at big. rates. Also, he is ‘‘proud of the fact.”’ k There was Representative G. Whiz, the real estate man. He sells the land of Farmer A, who-has found he can’t make farming pay, to Farmer B, who thinks he can, and charges each of them a nice little commission. He ‘‘has connections’’ and is proud of the fact. There was Senator B. Biz, the flour manufacturer. He has ‘‘agri- cultural connections’’ two ways. He buys for $4 enough Feed D wheat to make a barrel of flour and sells the flour back to the farmer for THE slogan, ‘“‘Crush Ger- l : : ::::::] . many bhefore talking peace IT’S HIS COUNTRY, TOO! $16. He is prouder than most any terms,’’ > seems still to be the slogan of the majority of the American press. The newspapers, big and little, and the great magazines, apparently are trying to work American patriotism up to a point where it will aceept this base formula, and will furnish lives and money generously and without protest to carry it out. For a time (even yet in some quarters), to suggest that the United States ought to “declare definitely on what terms it will make peace;was denounced either as pro-German or treason, accord- ing to the degree of bitterness the person doing the denouncing had let get into his system. Now, however, despite the distraction of the jingo press, the . people have had time to think, and wherever they have had a chance to express their opinion they have repudiated the doctrine that Ger- many must be ecrushed before peace is diseussed. The crushing of Germany or any other nation is not a legitimate object of war. ‘And the only way to prove that we are not in this war for glory or imperialism or to make money for war profiteers, is to state on what terms we will make peace, _and to require our allies to do the game. If we are not fighting simply #o crush Germany, what are we fighting for? To make the world safe for democracy, you say; to de- feat the plan of the German autoeracy to rule the world. Very well Those are worthy objects. But how can the allies prove to the German people that is their object, and that these phrases are not merely words put forward to cover the real motives, unless they are willing frankly to announce to Germany and to the world on what terms they will make peace? The German people also believe they are fighting for liberty. They are willing to spend their last cent and pour out their last drop of blood for liberty, just like we are. As long as thé German autocracy can make them believe that our object and the object of our allies is to erush them, they will support the autocracy that they have been led to believe is protecting them from foreign aggression. Let all the nations at war, including the United States, state the terms on which they will make peace. Is there anything dishonest in this? Is there anything unpatriotic in it? Is it un-American? ® & » X The patriotism of the coal barons is only to be exceeded by that of the big ‘millers. The coal men reduced prices “voluntarily” half what they should be reduced, just as the government was about to force a re- duction. The millers, while a federal investigation was under way, also “voluntarily” promised to reduce flour rates, as an act of patriotism— only the promised reduction, like that h coal, is half what it should be. of the others. ‘We might mention Represent- ative Sellum, the merchant, and Senator I. Ketchium, the insurance man, and Representative U. Skin- num, the lawyer. They all have ‘‘agricultural connections.’’ They are all proud of it. We really ought not to ae- cuse this writer (who is paid by somebody or other) with depart- ing from the truth VERY FAR. He merely understated his case. He said a-majority of the Minne- sota legislators had ‘‘agricultural connections.’’ If he had told the full truth he would have said that ALL of them have ‘‘agricultural connections.’’ But for the farmer, they would all have to go out of busi- ness. * * * An ecastern paper that looks on the Nonpartisan league as a piece of insolence by the farmers, says: “The farmers got the railroads that make their land valuable as a gift from the nation, which gave land to the companies to build the roads.” This is advanced as a reason why farmers shoul! not be kicking about economic conditions. Why argue with a type of mind that gives off stuff like that? * * * LABOR TROUBLES - HE proclamation issued by I the farmers’ governor of - North - Dakota to the sheriffs of the state expresses the views on labor troubles held by every thoughtful citizen who is _not swayed by prejudice or unreasoning bitterness. Governor Frazier tells sheriffs that the law of the state is going to be upheld. Any person burning or attempting to burn erops, destroy harvest- ling machinery or commit disorderly acts of any kind against employers of labor will be attended to under the law, the governor says. On the other hand, the governor says that any attempts by peace officers to violate the law on the other side, will likewise be suppressed. Laborers are not to be clubbed and driven out of the community be- cause they ask wages higher than peace officers may think justified; they are not to be mobbed because they assemble peacefully to hold méetings or because they are ‘‘broke.’’ : In other words, the governor knows that labor riots, Iynchings and other disgraceful proceedings are usually the result of enforcing the law against one side of the controversy and failing or refusing to en- foree it against the other. We have laws to take care of persons at- tempting to destroy property, and it should be enforced vigorously against them, says the governor. But it is not for peace officers, or mobs or ‘‘vigilance’’ societies to take the law into their hands. When they do, they can not blame the laborer who thinks he has a grievance, when he takes the law into his hands. We do not want civil war in the United States, now of all times. : PAGE SEVEN 4 % {