The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, November 22, 1917, Page 7

the European countries, instead of the diplomats and the rulers, had had their say, there would be no war today. But .this right of the people only to make war and peace, must be universal, in all coun- tries. The world will not be safe for democracy if, for instance, it prevails in all but one country. The one eountry where the right does not exist could throw all the rest of the world into the war at any time, by action of its rulers. We are making progress, slowly but surely, in making peace and democracy safe in the world. The doctrine, announced almost simul- taneously in America and Russia, that the people must make the peace when it comes, is a step—and a big one—toward the one great end. NEW TACTICS NOTICEABLE change in the attitude of the big city press A toward the farmers’ political and economic movement has de- veloped during the last week. The tactics of the politicians and interests opposed to the League, shown by a perusal of the big city press, seem to have taken a more sensible turn. Until recently, the League was a ‘‘graft,”’ a ‘‘passing agitation,”’ ‘“a body of a few malcontents.”” It was ‘‘bankrupt,”’ ‘‘disloyal’’ if not ‘‘treasonable,’’ and ‘‘bound to fail.’’ Now the press campaign against the League seems_to be taking the position that the League DOES amount to something, “has a tremendous, solidified membership and will carry the elections next year in a number of states, unless ‘‘something is done’’ to stop it. In other words, the press is now trying to scare the League’s enemies into more united and effective opposition, by the new method of picturing the farmers’ movement as a big and important thing, growing by leaps and bounds. A recent -issue of a Twin City paper that has been fighting the farmers has an account of the League organization work in South Dakota, which is an instance of this new attitude. The article, while it misrepresents the movement and overlooks no chance to discredit it, admits that the League has more than 25,000 members in that state, with prospect of having 50,000, or enough to carry the primaries, be- fore the organizers have completely covered the state. The article also admits that the South Dakota League membership is ‘‘sticking,”’ that . Mr. Townley is considered a real patriot by the farmers, and that the League program appeals to the people. The Twin City paper, which has just ‘“discovered’’ these things, _could have learned them a year ago by reading the Nonpartisan Leader or by listening to somebody besides Big Business lobbyists and politicians anxious to discredit the movement. OUR FAVORITE DEPARTMENT HAT do you think is the most interesting feature of the Leader? There is probably one department of the paper you turn to first every week—one feature of the Leader that draws your attention before all others. Whether this is the fact with you or not, it is true with us—there is one feature of the Leader that we (who make this paper every week with your help and en- couragement) like the best. Can you guess what OUR favorite part of the Licader is? You would never guess it, but we will give the secret away. YOUR letters—we print as many of them as we can every week—are what WE like the best. If you have not been doing it anyway, try reading OUR Tavorite Leader feature every week, as well as YOUR favorite. If you gef started reading these letters from the firing line—these suggestions, words of encouragement and praise, these big ideas on all the things that the Leader’s great family of readers are thinking about—you will read them every week. 1t is worth while to be a part of a great movement like this, whether a cog in the machine here at the Leader office getting out this paper, or a soldier in the trenches back there on the farm, think- ing, working, ‘‘sticking’’ and voting to make the world a better place to live in, through the reforms the great farmers’ and people’s move- ment is carrying out. We don’t know whether you read ALL we write, but we do know that we read all YOU write; and if the work wasn’t enough of a re- ward in itself, the mail each day would bring payment in full—your letters! We can’t print them all—if the Leader were twice as big it wouldn’t suffice—but be sure we read them, every one. LET THE PEOPLE DO IT HEN the plan of the Big Interests to divorce the people from ‘; ‘/ possession of the billions of dollars worth of phosphate de- posits on public lands in the United States was announced, certain agricultural papers hailed the news with unstinted approval. Of course, it wasn’t announced that persons and corporations seeking to throw open these publicly owned fertilizer resources intended to create a monopoly and hold up farmers who have to have fertilizer. Lither the agricultural papers referred to did not know the facts, or did know them and kept them from readers. In either case the ap- proval of farm publications of this steal was just as damaging. Farm editors pictured the intended deal as a great boost for agri- culture. They said that if the government threw open these deposits for private development and exploitation that it would mean plenty of fertilizer, and cheap fertilizer, for the farms. And they pointed out, truly enough, that the vast stretches of agricultural land in the West, on which fertilizer is not now being used, would soon of necessity have to have it, and here was the solution of the problem, they said. But what these agricultural papers overlooked, either intention- ally or through ignorance, is the fact that these great fertilizer re- sources owned by the people, if they are to be a substantial aid to agriculture, must be DEVELOPED BY THE PUBLIC, not by private monopoly—they must be developed to furnish fertilizer at COST OF PRODUCTION to the farmers, with profits in it for no one. Why not? ‘Why should the public domain be thrown open for private profits and to create a private monopoly? God knows that agriculture in this country needs every encouragement, and one of the greatest things that could happen would be the opening of the almost priceless fertilizer resources of the public domain—for the benefit of farmers, not exploiters of farmers. The Leader is for the development of these deposits—sure! But let the government, not private monopoly, do it. Read the Leader’s Washington bureau report on this proposition in this issue. FOR THE WAR ONLY? HERE is much food for thought in the recent action of the I United States government in taking over the marine transporta- tion business for the duration of the war. Few people, perhaps, have realized that in this case something has been done that far-seeing people, who in the past have been looked upon as ‘‘agitators’’ and ‘‘cranks,”’ have been trying to bring about for many years. The fact is that the United States government has commandeered, to operate as a public utility for the benefit of the people, the business of American ocean transportation. There are three kinds of transportation: air, which has not been developed yet on a commercial basis; water, now a public utility run by the government; and land, still monopolized by private capital and “initiative’’, - We all know about the fight for nationalization and government ownership of railways. The move for government ownership of ocean transportation has not been so spectacular, but it has been an equally important move—and now it is a reality! What now has become of the arguments that government ownership of transportation facilities is “‘impossible,’’ ‘‘Socialistic,”’ etc., ete? And how 'long is it going to be before the government also takes over land transportation? It is easy and practical enough to do—in faet, it has been done in the case of ocean shipping without any great stir at all; the change scarce- ly has been noticed. It is commonplace to say that things are happen- ing now, in a day, equal in importance to events that it took years to bring about in the old days. But it is true. But shall this government business of ocean transportation— efficient, logical and necessary—be for the war only? Shall we give back to ‘‘private capital and initiative’’ the means to exploit us again. after the war is over? NEXT WEEK'’S LEADER MONG other good things next week, the Leader will have an A article by E. B. Fussell on ‘‘Fighting the Tobacco Trust,’’ the story of how organization won for the tobacco growers, with reference especially to the Wisconsin tobacco growers. And then there will be an article from our Washington bureau, ‘‘Public Ownership— At Last!’’ an account of the taking over by the government of the marine transportation facilities and what it means. PAGE SEVEN