The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, October 4, 1917, Page 14

& | 1 ! iz T e e e e e B them partially “during the war". 7 When the United States department of agriculture proposed the present federal grain grades, the Leader devoted all The Leader was the only publication in the country that made a fiaht on these grades—the only paper that showed th not to help the farmer but to further penalize him. printed many cartoons, editorials and articles on the subject. \\\\\\g\\ g&\\ \ MHRTN then for the farmers' rights—rights which the government now. recognizes and seeks to protect, if even in a small way. A Fight That is Bearing Fruit The Nonpartisan Leader’s Opposition Last Winter to the Adoption of the Present Federal Grain Grades—Officials Now Recognize Justice of Complaint t AST winter the Nonpartisan Leader opposed with all its power—by articles, editorials and cartoons—the adoption of the present federal ' grain grades. TFor this the Leader was call- ed a “malcontent”, an “agitator”, a “demagogue”. If we had been in the war then the Leader would have been called “disloyal” and “unpatriotic”. Today the injustice of the federal grades is generally realized. Gover- nors of states are protesting against them. TFarm papers are asking their modification or repeal. The food ad- ministration also has recognized their injustice and has issued an order to make them less onerous. But all these officials (except those in North Dakota), all these farm papers and individuals—*“friends of the farm- er’— were silent last winter when the Leader was making the fight alone. If they had joined in the protest THEN, the farmer's side of the matter might have been heard and the pro- posed grades defeated. TAFT SEES INJUSTICE OF FEDERAL GRADES The Leader opposed the adoption of the present grades® and had the full co-operation only of Dr. E. I\ Ladd of the North Dakota Agricultural college and the state officers of North Dakota, elected by the farmers through the Nonpartisan league—notably” John N. Hagan, North Dakota Commissioner of Agriculture, who carried the protest personally to the United States Secre- tary of Agriculture. There was no pro- test by the governor of Minnesota then, or by any other Minnesota officials. They let the government put the un- fair grades over on the farmer. A few weeks ago the food adminis- { tration sent an agent to North Dakota to consult the farmer government of that state in regard to certain things connected with the food administration. This agent’s name was Taft, a son of Former President Taft. He hadn’t come to the state about the federal grain grades, but the North Dakota farmer officials got him in a corner and told him a few things about those grades—how they are grain-combine and mill-trust grades, and how they penalize the wheat farmers beyond all reason, and how they help the grain buyers and mills. 2 Mr. Taft is a reasonable man. He saw the justice of the complaint of the farmers as shown by the facts produc- ed by the North Dakota officials. He promised to go bhack to Washington and take it up with Hoover. He was as good as his promise, and he told Hoover about it when he got back to Washington. The sending of a reason- able and fair man like young Taft to North Dakota is appreciated by the farmers and the farmer officials of the state. The farmers like to talk to that sort of a chap. He is a lot differ- ent from the arrogant and egotistic Brand of the federal department of markets, who came to North Dakota for the grain grade hearings last win- ter. . ‘Well, due to the facts that the farm- ers in office in North Dakota told Mr. Taft, and which he told Hoover, the latter wired the North Dakota farmer railroad commission asking if it was their belief that the grades ought to be suspended during the war. The railroad commission sent back the answer: “Yes, by all means”. Then Hoover asked the same gquestion by wire of the governor of Minnesota and the Minnesota railroad commission, and this let them in cheap. They said also that the grades should be repealed— that they were too severe and com- plicated, and generally unfair to the farmers. : HOOVER DESERVES CREDIT FOR ACTION The Minnesota officials are welcome to front seats on the bandwagon, but where were they last winter when the North Dakota farmer officials, Dr. Ladd and the Leader were fighting for justice for producers? Never mind, we are glad they have come around to our view, even if the gang press is giving * them all the credit and not giving the credit to the North Dakota officials, who were in the fight alone last win- ter, and who really were the ones who got the matter before the food admin- istration recently. Following Hoover’'s question to offi- cials and the answer, an order was is- sued making the federal grades less onerous. The order provides that grain under No. 3 shall be sold on sample, judged by its true milling value. This helps. It is not full relief. Some in- structions issued in connection with the enforcement of the grades by the government will also help. The Leader is glad the injustice of the grades as they stand has been realized at Wash- ington, D. C., and it thanks Mr. Hoover for svhat has been done. But the grades should be repealed entirely and new ones, based on the milling value of wheat, along lines laid down by Dr. Ladd, should be adopted. THERE SHOULD NOT BE A RETURN TO THE OLD MINNESOTA GRADES, They were unfair to producers also, as is conclusively proved, and as every farmer knows. But new grades, fair to producers and to mills and grain PAGE FOURTEEN WA HQ\U\GHT THE NE EDERAL\ GRAIN GRADE AE TO\PROTE its energy in opposing the grades proposed. em up as grain-combine and mill-trust grades, In connection with that fight, the Leader, in its issue of March 15, 1917, printed the above cartoon. The Leader But the department of agriculture laughed at the Leader and its fight; sneered at the evidence pro- duced; ignored the protest. The grades as proposed were adopted. Now the injustice of these grades is being generally realized. Sever of Minnesota and others who were silent then are taking up the fight on the federal grades now. farmers might have prevented the grades being adopted. Recently the government food administr. This helps, but it is only half-way relief. We con grades should be repealed entirely and fair ones, based on the milling value of whe above reprints its cartoon of last March for the benefit of the papers, al farm papers, the governor With the help of these papers and these officials last March the ation recognized the injustice of the federal grades and suspended gratulate Hoover for doing something to make the grades less onerous. But the at, adopted—not only “during the war” but for peace times also. The Leader officials and individuals who called the Leader an “agitator” and “demagogue” for fighting buyers should be adopted. And the Leader is still in the fight to obtain such grades. So is Congressman John Baer of North Dakota, elected by Non- partisan league farmers. A start has been made by Hoover, but more ac- tion is needed. Go to it, Hoover, we are with you! And let it be said also, that the farm- ers want fair grades in peace as well as “during the war.” Any changes that are made should be Permanent, As a matter of fact it is more reasona-~ ble to alter the grades for peace times than for war times. Farmers are pa- triotic and loyal. They expect to make sacrifices during the war—everybody does, and by rights they should. So the farmers might think, it was the part of patriotism to submit to robbery dur- ing war times—they would dislike it, of course, but the natural thing would be to protest less about injustices during war than during peace. We all feel that way. So let the reform in the grades be for peace times as well as war—in fact let us get back of the government in making the to all, for all time. P —_— / WHAT OUR STANDING AND . OUR CREED Not with scythe and axe and blud- geon, seek we that for which we live; Not with murder and rude venge- ance, seek we what the world should give. We but come, my moneyed mas- ters, with the little thing you note— Yes, with ever growing thousands, wo are coming with the VOTE] —STANLEY WATERLOO. >