The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, March 25, 1918, Page 8

’ formed a “protective association” and began to fight the patents. Then it was they found how handy it would be to have .political power. The cases dragged through five expensive, weary years, but at last the farmers won. The man who fought their legal battles for them was a rising young attorney named Albert B. Cummins, -and his success in leading this great farmers’ fight to victory in 1885 was no doubt the cause of his.going to the Iowa legislature in 1888, which thus became a stepping stone to his pres- ent position in the United States senate. Throughout the decades of the '70s, '80s and ’'90s, the people’s fight in Towa against the monarchy of Big Business, found voice in “anti-monop- oly parties,” “independent parties’ and the Alliance, and all the time these political movements were inter- locked with the economic. But Iowa farmers sacrificed their best chance to win freedom when the “Northern” alliance from Illinois refused to join with the “Southern” alliance from Texas and Oklahoma, because the latter was secret, and thus the two organizations alike in purpose fought each other. After the failure of the People’s party in 1892, the other two great parties' absorbed it, and it was this infusion of Populist blood into both of them that has made the platforms of the ’80s and 908 now “respectable”’ and has indeed put many of their planks on the statute books as law. ) bt “Political ‘parties learn new tricks. . So do ‘the great business interests seeking special privileges. They learn new tricks faster than the farmers. They learned how to beat the farmers in other Here are some Iowa hogs. Iowa produces grain and meat and the producers of these products outnumber all' other classes in the state—yet the farmers of Iowa have as yet failed to get fair markets, and the business men and bank- ers are now trying to prevent the farmers from organizing. ways while the farmers were correcting the vanoua abuses already mentioned. The old, old fight against discriminating. rates is being ‘fought out -again today in Iowa by the Corn Belt Beef Pro- ducers’ association. These Iowa farmers find that the nearer they live to the big livestock markets, the more freight they have to pay, and there are other abuses. . They have found that the prices on livestock are manipulated, that poor feed is furnished in the Chicago stockyards to prevent the livestock getting a “fill” and thus causes the selling of them at a tremendous aggregate loss. HOW TODAY’S FIGHT IN IOWA IS LINKED WITH THE PAST Today the farmers of Iowa are fichting over again the old economic war. They have an Iowa State Grain ' Dealers’ association with over 400 elevators in Towa, through which they are seeking relief from the corn ring of Chicago and the grain ring of the . Twin Cities. They have gained splendid results in these two organi- zations. Their fight for relief from rates conducted through the beef pro- ducers’ association has made famous another young Iowa attorney, Clifford Thorne, and today wherever rate making is talked about, Thorne, the champion of the Iowa farmers, is’ well known. Likewise the 10-year battle of E. G. Dunn for the grain association has * (Continued on page 23) Railroad Stockholders Run Congress At Least Congress Votes to Protect Them Rather Than the Public—Senate . Washington Bureau . Nonpartisan Leader WO months from the day that President Wilson announced the taking over of the railway property throughout the United States for operation by the government during the period of the war, both branches of congress had voted to give the * railroads back to the private * control of the stockholders. The senate had voted to return the roads within 18 months after the close of the war. The house had voted to return them to private operation within two years after : . the war should end. There had been two months of discussion of the question of government ownership, as well as gov-' ernment operation, of the railroads. 2 _ Representatives of nearly 2,000,000 men em- ‘ployed in railroad service had sent a petition to all members of the senate and house, protesting against the fixing of any limit of time, after the war, for the return of the railroads to the old in- efficient scheme of management and operation. _ Through every possible medium of expression— massmeetings, petitions, the press, individual let- ters, telegrams and arguments before committees —the ordinary American citizens had been trying to. make congress understand that government ownership-and operation of railroads would alone satisfy the great producing and consuming classes in America. But congress was not impressed. A life-time habit of thinking that the railroad stock- holders are entitled to first consideration could not be overthrown in those 60 days. Not even the in- fluence of President Wilson and Director General McAdoo could make congress leave open the date of restoration of private control. : RAILROAD STOCKHOLDERS GET FIRST CONSIDERATION ~In the house the Esch amendment, which would . -have restored private control just one year after the signing of the treaty of peace, received 164 votes. - There were 205 votes opposed. Among -those who voted for this early return of ‘the prop- erty to the stockholders’ control were most of the Republicans, including Anderson, Davis, Ellsworth, Knutson, Miller, Steenerson and Volstead of Min- i nesota; Davidson, Esch, Lenroot and Stafford of i .~ Wisconsin, and Haugen, Green, .Towner, Kennedy, Woods, Good and Sweet of Iowa. _ ] - The Esch-Lenroot argument-for a quick restor- o ation of the property to private hands was that the government is paying too much for it, but the most violent enemies of public ownership voted for their . amendment. Lenroot argued. that if the govern- ment wanted to operate the railroads in time of peace it should take them under the constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce. He said that it was unfair to hold them under “false pre- tense” of war necessity when the war was ended. The house voted, by an overwhelming majority, to pay the stockholders the excessive rate of rental provided in the bill, which amounts to about 8 per cent on the value of the railroads of the coun- .try. Then it came to a vote on the Esch amend- ment, to get rid of the public operation of rail- roads in record time. - If the railroad stockholders had elected majori- ties to the senate and house, and those majorities ‘had been compelled to block the public ownership and operation of railroads under the same con- ditions, it is probable that they would have done two things. First, they would have paid the roads an extravagant rental for the property. Second, they would have made the extravagant rate of this payment their excuse for bringing public oper- ation of railroads to the quickest possible end. PROVISIONS OF BILL : FOR GOVERNMENT CONTROL Be that as it may, there was no straight-out measure before either the house or the senate, during. these crucial 60 days, providing a plan for immediate government purchase of the roads. The most that was done, insofar as members of either ‘branch of congress were concerned, was the oc- casional statement that public: ownership “is in- evitable,” and a few words in its favor. The most notable defense of the principle of -public owner- ship came from Senator Johnson of California, but not even he had drafted a bill proposing to carry out the idea. In this situation, the Public Ownership League of America drafted a government-ownership bill. The Public Ownership league has among its members prominent liberals, such as Carl Vrooman, .Charles Ingersoll, Frederick C. Howe, Louis F. Post, Gifford and ‘Amos Pinchot, David .J. Lewis, Scott Nearing, State Senator Jones of Duluth, Ray McKaig and others. Albert- M. Todd, a former member of congress from Michigan, is its presi- dent. The bill which it has submitted -to various members of the house represents, it is understood, the average opinion of these men as to how ‘the ' 6. That ;ny:.olie who.‘ahall—,"k;x‘owingl ly inur!m and House Vote Against Government Ownership of Transportation Jjob of taking over the ownership of the railroads should be done. - A The bill provides: . 1. That the president shall, under the war power, immediately take over the land and water trans- - portation systems of -the country “for and in be- half of the United States of America under actual - national ownership and possession as well as gov- ernment operation.” : 2. That the private owners shall be paid an amount to be determined by the interstate com- merce commission, this amount to be the actual cost of construction and original purchase, together with any sums invested in improvements which have added to the net value of the property after the depreciation has been written off. 3. That where the bona fide costs of purchase and betterment,. less depreciation, can not satis- factorily be determined by the interstate com- merce commission, the commission shall make a final and conclusive estimate “based on the fair market value at the time of purchase.” 4. That during the time this valuation is being secured, the commission shall allow the stockhold- ers a rental for the railroads, “distributed as nearly as possible at a uniform rate of net income on the legitimate investment.” This rate shall be 5 per cent a year. : In making this valuation for purchase and rental, the values “shall not include any increased values due to the growth of population, the en- larged needs of the publie, or from any other cause; and where lands or moneys have heen ob- tained through fraud or corruption of public of- ficials, either as grants, gifts, loans ‘or otherwise from the government of the United States, any . states, cities or counties, the value of such grants, gifts or loans wrongfully obtained and not repaid shall be deducted from the compensation to be paid, and shall be returned to the federal govern- ment or -to the states, cities or counties which made the gifts, grants or loans.” . WOULD VOTE BIG SUM TO.CARRY OUT PLAN 5. "!'-he railroads are to be operated under the direction of a secretary.of transportation; who shall rank as a cabinet officer. Labor organization shall :be encouraged, the eight-hour day ‘recognized as the standard of.employment and wages shall not fall below a certain minimum level: ta be deter-. - mined, nor.below the. current recognized . union rates.