The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, March 31, 1919, Page 3

In the interest of asquare deal for the farmers Official Magazine of the National Nonpartisan League VOL. 8, NO. 13 I A Amfigazine that" dares to - print the truth " ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, MARCH 31, 1919 Another Anti-League Book on Market WHOLE NUMBER 184 Walter E. Quigley, Discharged for Irregularities, F ollows “Rev.” S. R. Maxwell’s Example—Now Trying to Sell His Product to Anti-Farmer Interests BY E. B. FUSSELL WAS at Camp MacArthur, Texas, when the armistice with Germany was signed, Novem- ber 11, 1918. A few days later I had a pass to go down to Waco, Texas. I dropped- into League headquarters for Texas, and there I met Walter E. 5. . Quigley, a League organizer who lived at Lincoln, Neb. It was the first time I had met Quigley, though I had heard of him before as a man who had dick- ered with F. H. Carpenter, millionaire lumberman and Republican leader of Minneapolis, to sell out the Nonpartisan league. Quigley had taken money from Carpenter, I knew, but had afterward ad- - mitted his dealings with the millionaire and had exposed the attempt to buy out the League. I had .an open mind in regard to him. Quigley told me he had just enlisted in the of- ficers’ training camp that was being conducted at MacArthur. But, as he didn’t get down until after the armistice had been signed, and the training camp was being broken ‘up, he was going back to Nebraska immediately, without having put on the . uniform or slept under canvas. I wondered why a man should want to enlist after the war was all over, when it was known that the men in the train- ing camps-were going to be discharged immediately. - QUIGLEY FOUND SHORT IN ACCOUNTS Quigley explained. “I wanted to get an honorable discharge. It will help me in organization work in Nebraska,” he said. That, apparently, was the extent of Quigley’s pa- triotism. ; ; Later, when I was discharged ‘from the army, I learned that Quigley had been discharged as a League organizer. He was short in his accounts with the League, having collected fees from mem- " bers that l}e had failed to turn into the League. He had also collected several hundred dollars from’ farmers in Saunders county for the organiza- ‘tion of a newspaper which failed to mate- rialize. Since his discharge by the League Quigley has " -attempted the “Rev.” S. R. Maxwell trick. He has turned traitor. Quigley, evidently learning that Max- well received several thousand dollars for his articles “expos- ing” the League, has written a book, also “exposing” the League. He is at- tempting to sell the book for $20,000 or $25,000. The book has been offered to interests, well sup- plied with money, that are fighting the League. "It has been handed around in Ne- braska and in Minne- sota among League enemies, in an at- tempt to sell it. So. far Quigley has been unsuccessful in his . -efforts to get the money. Y5 e to divide the money. -after the style of Maxwell’s. The interests that bought the Maxwell articles evi- dently realize that they got a gold brick, not worth anywhere near the thousands that they paid for it. They are a little chary of getting stung so soon again on the same kind of a deal. But Quigley may reduce his price to $10,000 or $15,000 and find a buyer and the book may be published. That League members may get some kind of an idea of what it contains, the Nonpartisan Leader herewith reviews the book in advance. ; A good deal of Quigley’s book is pretty much He tells the old lie that the League is really a Socialist organization in disguise. He includes a sort of “Who’s Who” of League workers, from A. C. Townley to the chauf- feur who drove C. A. Lindbergh’s car during the Minnesota campaign. Quigley tries to prove, by this list of men, that the League is in control of Socialists. He lists many League workers as “party Socialists.” Man after man, called a “party So- cialist” by Quigley, has never voted anything but the Republican or Democratic tickets. _Quigley’s “Who’s Who” is grossly inaccurate. So is much of the rest of the book. Fact$ and falsehoods are . cunningly sandwiched in together, making it dif- ficult to separate thém. % -But there are some falsehoods so gross that they can be readily recognized as such. ! Quigley begins his book by telling of a conver- sation in the League office at Lincoln, Neb., which he says took place October 8, 1918. He says Jesse Johnson, League manager for Nebraska; C. A. Sorensen, a lawyer who has handled cases for the League; H, J. Greenwood, a League clerk, and him- self were present. Quigley says that Greenwood said that the war was caused by the Catholics and that if he were drafted he would be a conscientious objector. - He says that Sorensen advised him (Quigley) not to enlist in the officers’ training camp. Quigley was discharged by the League November 17, about six weeks later. The next day, Novem- ber 18, Quigley wrote a letter to all members of the state committee of the League in Nebraska telling about the statements that Greenwood is As a part of his book Walter E. Quigley “challenges” President .A. C. Townley of the Nonpartisan league :for a series of debates for which admission of 25 cents is to be charged, Townley and Quigley ¢ Quigley proposes that if ‘Townley is. too busy to' make all the debates, Arthur . - LeSueur or William Lemke, whosé¢ name Quigley misspells, substitute for him. reproduces’ a part of Quigley’s challenge and his signature. Needless to say, the League is not -~ going to stage any debates to help Quigley or any one else get rich on admission fces. PAGE THREE R R 1 LB S BT e alleged to have made and demanding an investiga- tion. He also wanted to be put back in his' job as organizer. . The state committee had a meeting in response to Quigley’s demand. The committee went over the matter thoroughly, heard-from everybody, exoner- ated Greenwood and made Quigley’s discharge per- manent. Then Quigley started out to try to sell his book, which he had evidently written long before. The men who were present with- Quigley and Greenwood deny absolutely that Greenwood made the statement attributed to him about the Catholics and so forth. They say the Catholics were never mentioned. : SORENSEN DID NOT 5 ADVISE AGAINST ENLISTIN Nor did Mr. Sorensen advise Quigley against en- listing. What Mr. Sorensen did say, the committee found, was something entirely different. Mr. John- son, the I.aague manager, was strongly against the kaiser’s aulocracy and in favor of the war. Mr. Johnson was not eligible for military service, but was talking of giving up his job as League man- ager temporarily and going to work in an eastern munitions factory. What Mr. Sorensen said was that the war was practically over, that other men could be found for the munition factories as able as Johnson and that Johnson was needed in Ne- braska to help make that state safe for democracy. It is significant that Quigley didn’t enlist until after the armistice was signed. There is another charge made by Quigley in his book that is a gross falsehood. It is such a mon- strous untruth that its very absurdity kills it. Quigley says that the League expects to elect a president in 1520 and to get a majority in con- gress then or shortly thereafter. He says that the League leaders decided a couple of years ago to run Governor Frazier of North Dakota for presi- dent in 1920. Later, he says, and before Senator La Follette made his St. Paul speech, the League decided on La Follette. After La Follette made his St. Paul speech, Quigley says, the League aban- doned him and decided to run Frank P. Walsh, the labor leader, for presi- dent. He says, however, that the League is also considering Senators Bo- rah of Idaho and Norris of Nebraska for presi- dent. As soon’as the League . has elected the president " and a majority of con- gress, Quigley says, the plan is to have the gov- ernment repudiate all Liberty loan bonds. ) Such a monstrous prop- osition has probably nev- er entered the head of any one except Quigley. In the first 'place, if the - League cast every vote in the 18 states in which it has members it could not elect a majority of congress. In the second place, the idea of farm- ers, who have bought millions of dollars’ worth of Liberty bonds, elect- _ing men to cancel these same bonds, is too ridic- ulous to hold water. - It ‘i’ even more ridiculous -than the claim of: soms - The Leader herewith