The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, November 1, 1917, Page 9

~i “varmint” is a useless and pestiferous animal, like a gopher, coyote, rabbit or wolf, which damages property and has to be rounded up and killed periodically. istricts where any of these ‘animals are numerous, farmers often form a varmint hunting party, round up the animals and kill them off. Baer has here drawn a icture of a varmint hunt. ‘The old political gang—the office-holding class allied with Big Business and doing its bidding—is the varmint in this picture. ay and he is uttering the new stock phrases of those opposed to the people getting control of the affairs of government, T —————— R e PN =t (ot Tl —Drawn expressly for the Leader by Congressman Bae# Atheists”, “Sooialists”,. “Carpetbaggers”. The new phrases are “Traitors”, “Pré-Germans”, etc. East Sees Need of Organization Something About the Milk Producers’ Fight in New York State—Means to Unite All Farmer BY CARL BECK NE of the big New York papers at the moment of writing car- ries this headline: “Fifteen Cent Milk Before November 30—City Dealers Predict High Prices and Blame Dairymen—State - Regulation Asked.” The farmers have never deceived themselves that the milk question was settled by the suc- cess of last year’s strike. The special session of the 1917 legis- lature heard ‘the voice of the farming interests ' expressed by their duly registered ‘and legitimate lobbyists in .- Albany, but the voice was not strong enough to prevent the passage of an- tagonistic food bills. The professional politicians at Albany figured that the means of collective expression of farm- ing opinion are scattered, that farmers do not always act on the same set of facts,—that they do not always have them at their command—and that sentiment is therefore neither focussed nor constant. The politicians and dealers feel that they can juggle this situation and beat the game, Not long ago the secretary of the Re- ceivers and Distributors association of New York started out to cultivate the - members of the Grange. He addressed the Grange at Lewis, New York. It is reported that among other things he told the Grange members that the ob- ject of his benevolent association was, to prevent legislation interfering with all legitimate busines and schemes pro- jected by fake reformers. ing Elon R. Brown as a high type of legislator, who works in the interests of the farmer and the common people —_PBrown, the “corporation‘lawyer”, the reactionary, the representative of “Big Business”, distrusted by both the working people of the oities and the farmers of the country. PUBLIC OPINION MUST. BE ORGANIZED About ‘the same time the Holstein PBreeders club of St. Lawrence county passed a resolution based on an entire- 1y different set of facts. Their reso- lution stated flatly that Elon R. Brown, the majority leader, was conspicuously working against the farmers’ interests! These fwo contrasting incidents "show~ that no representative of Big Business nor; -in_fact, -any -one _else, -should- ‘be trusted to address meetings where the audience is not free to put the speaker on the witness stand and cross question him about his facts, statements and- connection, r The Grange thereupon sent out literature eulogiz- Organizations Sought—Praises Nonpartisan League Plan Mr. Beck, the author of this article, is @ member of the Butternut - Valley grange and Gilbertsville Farm Bureau, New York state, also one of the directors of the Open Forum National council. He shows that the East has many farmer organizations, but that they are not united or federated, so that they are often found working at cross purposes. It is difficult to get them all united and work- ing together for the common good of all farmers, making-them a power in politics and in enforcing farmers’ demands. He points out the need in the East for an organization like the Nonpartisan league and mentions favorably the work the League is doing in | the West. Mr. Beck offered this article both to the Rural New - Yorker, a New York farm paper, and to the Nonpartisan Leader, and it appears in both these publications. - Today the milk dealers are publicly laying the blame to the farm-producer for the rising cost of living. The third party, the consumer, is consuming, un- awares, public opinion manufactured by the milk dealers, distributed by them and delivered at the front door in the columns of the city newspapers. It is not the business of the city press to run a news pasteurizing plant. So usually all those press-agent state- ments of a small group of greedy mid- dlemen go out as raw as they come in. The real opinion of the public lies lock- ed up in the great mass of city con- sumers , and farm producers. What they think counts, providing their voice can be heard and is backed up by the:( truth and that the machinery for col-.. lective expression o: farming opiniojx is well organized. ‘It is not to be understood that the . farmers at present have neither opin-' “munity might be found part of the ion nor voice, or have not the facts to "' back them up. The Grange, the Dairy- men’s league, the Farm Bureau, the breeding and growing and co-operative associations give evidence that educa- tion, propaganda and organization are making progress. And were it not for certain farm journals, farming opinion would have had only half the force it has had. : If the Dairymen’s league expresses anything, it is organize, organize, or- ganize! Without organization the big milk strike of 1916 could not have been won. The voice of 30,000 dairymen was backed by ‘orgdnization ‘that bargain- ed for them collectively, and handled their - educational - -publicity. . Behind them stood the alert and efficient Farm Bureau,. as the educatipnal agency that on demand collected the facts on the cast of milk production. The right hand of fellowship and moral support ‘breeding association, was extended by the Grange. All this work was ably supplemented by Com- missioner John J. Dillon, and the state department of foods and markets. In this particular crisis, all farmers’ or- ganizations were either sympathetical- ly or actively with the dairymen, THE OBVIOUS NEED OF THE FARMERS " In defeating unfriendly food bills in .-Albany it was not a question of “col- lective bargaining’” with one class of middlemen, or the leadership of one strong organization reinforced by sym- ;pathetic farming opinion. It was a question of the solidarity of ALL farmers’ organizations, a united farm- ers’ sentiment, and educating public opinion of all urban. At the source in every farming com- trouble. No stream rises higher than its source. At the source the energy ;and the attention of progressive farm- ers of New York state are” divided among three or four good organizations —the Dairymen’s league, the Grange, the Farm Bureau, this exchange, that that club. Al bid for interest, dues paying member- ship, meetings, programs. and speakers. Each has to do organization work, each separately tries to carry on public edu- cational work, and each aims to propa- gate public opinion from its special poiut of view. But the proportion that each orgdnization itself can. do suc- cessfully is the question, and whether or not pooling some of ‘their effort in a joint work. leaving each organization autonomous and independent, would not be as profitable to each farmer as pooling orders for fertilizer, It woud seem therefore that there is the -state, rural and He is at The wolf used to holler “Agitators”y an acute need for some method for co< ordinating the effort of all those bodies, wherever their lines of work overlap or duplicate. The farmers’ organization - can profit by the example of the vari- ous trade un.ons of the cities that have their joint assemblies, which on one hand disseminate common information to all the groups represented, and on the other, prosent a solid front to all the forces opposed to the-common in= terests of the organized wage earners. FARMERS MUST WORK OUT OWN SAL.VATION Certain phases of publi¢ educational work carried on by all the existing farm organizations, could be pooled. Better programs’ and bigger speakers would be the result. A co-operative platform would be a community forum, Being a straight pooling proposition; a Farm Forum would be managed and directed by representatives.appointed by the co-operating organizations, A joint board of delegates appointed by the Grange, the Dairymen's league, the Farm Bureau and other bona fide farmers’ organizations, would arrange for the hall, the program and the speakers. Meetings could be monthly. Churches have union meetings, and, in the same way, the local farmers’ or-. ganizations might hold union meetings, or regard the forum as a union meet- ing. This would be one more practice in co-operation, and it is the spirit of co-operation which greases the wheels . of co-operative creameries and selling organizations. The Farm Forum would be conduct- ed by working farmers. Farmers have got to do things themselves and work out their own salvation. Politicians and men hunting the lime light in preparation for political careers should not be allowed to hold office. A Farm Forum would be strictly nonpartisan in politics. Of the three, education, propaganda and organization—the pur- pose of the Farm Forum would be primarily education. The expert as speaker would provide information, the “leader” as speaker would discuss issues; the audience would add or sub- tract by asking questions and con- tributing a variety of experience and point of view. The local newspaper should find in the Farm Forum “copy” and news, and public-opinion-in-the- making which it is the business of thr press to reflect. It was the successful milk strike in Chicago that made the New York dairymen feel that they could (Continued on page 17) e m— "J &