The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, September 23, 1918, Page 10

side of the story; that the commission held public hearings and at the same time spread abroad the impression that the government was to take charge of the meat packing mdustry. “The result of the commission’s course,” says this Packmgtown indictment of the commission, “was, -~ ot to glve information to the public, but to place ~‘the commission in the position of seeking to create .. prejudice which would support an apparently pre- “".conceived purpose to inaugurate government opera- % tion of the business.” This is a strange statement in view of the fact !that the commission did not recommend public ownership of the packing business at all, but mere- ly recommended public operation of the stockyards as public markets, and of the branch houses as _ public wholesale markets for meat products. It .. recommended only that the oppressive and wasteful ,» monopoly of the Chicago packing ring be smashed, and open competition in meat packing he estab- lished. BIG BIZ WOULD NAME NEW TRADE BOARD “The seriousness of the consequence of the com- . mission’s course,” goes on this ‘brazen letter to the ¢ White House, “is apparent from the circumstance that the commission’s representative (Francis J. Heney) took oath that crimes had been committed. If there was crime on the part of any person the public welfare demands its immediate prosecution by the properly constituted authorities. It equally demands that the commission, which has no crimi- Y 'nal jurisdiction, should sedulously refrain from alleging the perpetration of felonies which have 7 : The Leader has been running the re- port of the federal trade commission, which urges that the nation take over the marketing of meat products. This week we have postponed the next in- ‘stallment. Instead, here is the story on this page showmg how the profi- teers hang together. Government ownership is feared by Big Biz and desperate attempts are being made to head it off. not been proved in accordance with~ established legal procedure.” That is to say, the chamber of commerce is sore because Heney took oath that the packers were in conspiracy to control the food supplies of the allies, and it rejoices that the courts refused to let him see the secret correspondence of the packers, in the Veder vaults in Chicago, that would prove the erime. Again, the chamber denounces the commission for speaking of “bare-faced fraud,” and “monop- olistic control,” and “manipulation of the markets by illegal devices,” and “preying with shameful avarice upon consumers.” It winds up with de- claring the commission to be irresponsible, and says:- “The committee (Lawyer Butler) recommends that the board of directors (Wheeler) call the at- tention of the president to the outstandmg defects of the commission’s administration andof the in- terpretation it now. gives to the law under. which. it acts, and at the same time URGE THAT THE PRESIDENT APPOINT TO THE COMMISSION, in whose membership two vacancies now exist, MEN WHOSE TRAINING, TEMPERAMENT, EXPERIENCE AND REPUTATION FOR:SOUND JUDGMENT QUALIFY THEM for the position, and whose interests will be single to the commis-- sion’s work. In no other manner can confidence in the commission be restored.” Unfortunately for the chamber’s prospects, it let slip in its denunciation of the commission a remark that two former members of the commission, as well as Mr. Heney, weére candidates for political office. It happens that both Mr. Davies in Wiscon- sin and Mr. Harris in Georgia have had the strong personal support of President Wilson. Shots aimed. at them must hit the president. Their political work was done with his approval. The present members of the commission, who have disclosed the packers’ graft, have not been running for of- fice. It may be safely assumed that the president will not be won by that sort of argument to side with . big-business against the federal trade commission. And when the chamber turns its guns upon the national war labor board, the war labor policies board, the organized farmers, or upon the secre- tary of war, it will probably get about the same answer from the White House. The danger is in the effect of the lies of big business upon public opinion throughout the coun- try. = The Inside Story of the Maxwell Plot_ Who Were the Enemies of the Farmers Who Paid So High for the Renegade’s Articles Against the League? [ pAVIS ON MAXWELL | NDER date of August 26, 1918, H. M. Van Hoesen of St. Paul, in the course of a letter to F. G. R. Gordon of Haverhill, Mass., wrote as follows: “I learned something today Maxwell story was paid for, I am told, by the “On the Square” Publishing company—just another instance of their insane use of money.” : This statement of Van Hoesen, which fell into £i- the hands of the Nonpartisan Leader, along with '+ <-other correspondence of a sensational nature which “has already been published, is very important. It . throws new light on the exploit of one “Rev.” = S. R. Maxwell, whose name is already familiar to 5 Leader readers and whose story we have promised for several weeks to tell you in full. The farmers of Minnesota were surprised about two months ago by the announcement of the St. Paul Dispatch, an anti-farmer, anti-labor organ, that this paper would publish a series of articles entitled “The Nonpartisan League From the Inside,” by “the Reverend” Maxwell, “former national speaker of the League and one who is familiar with the inmost secrets of the organization.” . WHOEVER BOUGHT | HIM WAS STUNG The surprise over this announcement -quickly turned to amusement as the announced articles be- gan to appear. They consisted of chatter and ‘gossip by a self-seeker who joined the League or- ganizing staff last year and who, finding he could not run the League to feed his own ambition, had " sold out to the enemy. :The articles contained no 5. had not been made time ‘and time again during + the four-year life of the organization, for Max- well, a minor employe of the farmers, of course knew no more about the League than its members or the public generally.. There are no secrets about the League, and ‘Maxwell’s “inside facts” were merely distortions of well known facts and mis- representations of League. officers and workers, smixed with pure fiction dished up in a sensational _‘but unconvincing manner. While the St. Paul Dispatch claimed to be pub- lishing the Maxwell “exposure” as its own feature, friends of the League knew that Maxwell had not . sold out and permitted the use of his name to substantiate the charges of the opposition, without getting a good, round price for it. Through sources that were reliable the League learned that Maxwell that may interest you — the" charges against the League or its officers which ‘had received $10,000 for his act of treason to the - farmers——-Sl0,000 for lying about and mxsrepresent-‘ : ing an organization whose moniey he-biad sccepted farmer-labor candidate for attorney general of /e state. ‘Here’s how this trained:legal mind disposes of the traitor: “Caesar had his Brutus, Jesus of Nl;:- reth lns Judas, Washington his Benedict Let’s ask him what he thinks of Maxwell. Here Is the Answer as salary for several months and whose principles he pretended to.believe in. The actual amount that . Maxwell got has never been verified, but certain it was from the start that the St. Paul Dispatch had NOT paid it. Big interests bent on discrediting or breakmg up the League pald the ‘oney, and the Dispatch was merely used as a vehicle to exploit the “find.” The Dispatch denied that the money was paid to Max- well by the traction interests, the packing interests or the grain combine interests, and also refused to make public the sum pald the renegade for his dirty work. ' A GANG THAT ROLLS IN WEALTH AND PROFIT Since then, however, some important correspond- ence has fallen into the hands of the Nonpartisan Leader, and we are able to throw some light on the ~ matter. '~ According .to the statement by Van Hoesen, made in a letter to Gordon, quoted at ‘the outset, of this article, Maxwell was paid by the 74On the Square” Publishing company. First let . it be said that Van Hoesen ought to know: the - facts. He was editor of “On the Square” during the life of that publication, which blew up some’ weeks ago and discontinfied publishing. The com- pany. that got out the magazine, however, is still in existence as the “On the Square” Publishing company. If the information of the former editor of “On the Square” is correct, as.it ought to be, as he is stillin close touch with the backers of this-anti- . 1S . farmer pubhshmg company, Maxwell got a hand- some price for his treason, for the “On the Square” Publishing company is backed by some of the big- gest interests and most influential men in the Twin. .- Cities financial and’ political circles. Therefore it - becomes - of interest to give a brief explanation of -“On the Square” and show just where,Maxwell got ° his money, if indeed he did get it from the source alleged by the former edltor employed by these blg mterests ‘ "The “On’ the Square” Publishing company Was - i organized by big business opponents of the Non- - partisan league to issue a beautifully printed and profusely illustrated “farmers’” magazine to: cope. ' . with Nonpartisan Leader. At an expense which . probably reached -a half million ‘dollars, “On the . . ey < Square” got out two issues before it blew. up, each = ~/issue being mailed free to a list of 200,000" people, e Here is Tom Davis of Marshall ‘an. He is the ; +“all in Minnesota and all living on rural routes” . accordmg to the boast of the magazine promoters.. - The money, for this gigantic anti-farmer enter- pnse was contnbuted by big business men, corpora~ “tions and wealthy politicans: of anesota, through - Charles Patterson of St. Paul, presxdgnt -an : : of the Patterson Street Lxxh