The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, August 23, 1917, Page 3

-the food administration following the signing of In the interest of a square deal for the farmers TNonpartisan Teader A magazine that dares t) print ths trath Official Magazine of the National Nonpartisan League VOL. 5, NO. 8. FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA, THURSDAY, AUGUST 23, 1917. WHOLE NUMBER 101. Food Bill Passed What Now? First Announcement of Administration Not Very Encouraging— “Patriotic Co-operation” of Millers and Packers Not Satisfying ONGRESS has passed the fuel and food control bill. It has been signed by the president. Mr. Hoover has been officially appointed as food administrator. The bill confers extraor- dinary and unprecedented powers on the administration at Washington. Under its terms, if the administration deems it advisable, the government can take over and operate all the coal mines, grain ele- vators, warehouses, mills and packing plants. In addition the bill guarantees a price of $2 a bushel to farmers for wheat next year—that is, the government will buy wheat from the 1918 crop from the farm- ers at that price if the market price is under that figure. There is no price guarantee in the bill for this year’s crop. The administration now has the power—prac- tically unrestricted—to put the food and fuel gamblers out of business, to prevent hoarding by speculators to boost prices to consumers, to see that the farmer gets a priee for his products based on the cost of production plus a fair profit and to see that millers and packers also base their prices to consumers on cost of production plus a fair profit. The Leader later will print a complete summary of the details of the bill. S0 FAR SO GOOD— BUT THERE IS A RUB How the administration intends to proceed under this bill to get justice for producer and con- sumer is partly explained in the announcement of the bill by the president. This announcement is hot. very encouraging in several respeets. In the first place the administration has an- . nounced that it will first of all determine a fair price for wheat of the present crop. This price is to be determined by a commission appointed by the food administration. What the price will be there is no way of guessing, except that it is in- dicated by the government’s statement, taken as a whole, that the government considers the price of wheat too high at the present time. This is in- dicated by the length to which the government goes to-explain that ‘‘ordinary price fixing ma- chinery’’ is out of gear, owing to war excitement and the removal of the usual restraints that enter into price fixing by supply and demand through the grain exchanges. So far so good. As yet it can not be com- plained that the price to be fixed on wheat will not be based on due consideration of the fact that farmers’ costs have more than doubled—he is paying now over twice as much for seed, provi- sions, binder twine, machinery, labor and all the things that go into the making of a crop. The administration announces that farmers will be heard on these things before the price is fixed for this year’s crop by the commission. *PATRIOTIC CO-OPERATION”’ WILL NOT SOLVE IT However, the food administration’s an- nouncement is that the prices and profits of the packers and millers are to be fixed this year and next on an entirely different principle. They are not to be fixed by a commission, which will take testimony and do independent investigating before determining the price. Not at all. The prices and profits of the millers and packers are to be ¢‘fix- ed”’ by ‘‘patriotic co-operation’’ of the packers and millers. In other words, the government is going to absolutely fix farmers’ profits, but is go- ing to depend on the ‘‘patriotism’’ of the millers and packers to fix their own profits at a reasonable figure. As far as it is explained this looks bad. The millers and the pack- ers should have the same treatment as the farmers. Let the govern- ment fix their prices and profits. The ‘‘patriotism’’ of the millers and packers can not be depended upon to ‘‘co-operate.”” We have had examples of their ‘‘patriotism’’ in the past. We had an example of it the other day. The millers announced that if wheat was sold for $2 under the government guarantee next year, they would sell flour at $11.50. Everybody knows this is allowing outrageous profits for _millers. There is no patriotism in it, as the Leader pointed out on this page last week in an article dealing both with the millers’ and coal “barons’ promises of reduction in price. It was shown there was no patriotism in it. The Courier-News sums the matter up as follows: ““The farmers of the Northwest will be found as willing as any- body to bow to necessities of the nation, to accept loss for the na- tional good if need be, but they certainly will insist that the men who have been fattening themselves off the grain production of the Northwest at the expense both of the farmers and the consumers, be given equal treatment. - WHY NOT TAKE OVER ABSOLUTELY THESE INDUSTRIES “They will be quite frank in saying that they- are not wholly Uncle Sam—*“I may not be able to squeeze blood from a turnip, but—"’ urawn by W. C. Morris expressly for the Leader willing to trust to the patriotism of the grain and milling combine and see no reason why the country shvuld trust to it.”’ ' The government has all the authority it-needs under this bill to throttle the fellows who are using the war to hold up American-pro- ducers and consumers alike. Shall the government hesitate and com- promise, or shall it do business for the people without fear or favor? We wait for a'reply. Actions will spesk louder than words. : Why should the government not take over outright all the ele- vators, warehouses, railroads, mills, packing plants, coal mines and operate them for the people? Then there would be no need to depend on the questionable patriotism of profit takers to be reasonable. Half way measures will not do. Let the government get down to business and make good the declaration that this is a war for democracy—that is what the people want. PAGE THREE S S A S S AR e SR e Ve Yy