The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, May 5, 1919, Page 9

. fect on March 5, 1919. . 88 provides: years ago, stirred up milk producers around Kansas -City to form a co-operative concern. A Kansas City newspaper sent a hot protest to Brand. Pres- ently another man was sent to Kansas City with instructions to put a wet blanket on the co-oper- ative scheme. He told the farmers that they would probably get into trouble with the anti-trust law, since they had no proper state law for the organi- zation of co-operatives on the Rochdale plan. Not a hand was turned by Brand or Secretary Houston to help them secure a state law such as was alleged to be needed, nor to secure from con- gress an amendment of the anti-trust law to pro- tect them. A little more than two years'ago the dairy mar- keting division of the bureau of markets became - interested in a very carefully prepared study of the milk supply of New York City, made by a citi- zens’ committee, and showing that the milk trust was shamelessly robbing both the farmers and the millions of consumers in the city and suburbs. The scientist in the bureau who examined- this report decided that it should be published as a bul- letin, and sent out by the bureau of markets as a warning to the country against further delay in putting the milk supply of the United States on a decent basis. “Your ideas,” he was told by his superior, “are likely to lend themselves to propaganda” for co- operative action by the farmers. The bureau of markets did not permit the publi- cation of that report! Similar instances can be found in other divisions . of the work. One Wilson Democrat, nationally known for his services to constructive democracy, summed up the matter in these words: “All of the influences flowing down from the office of the secretary of agriculture to the farmers and the consumers of food in the United States today are repressive and reactionary. Houston and Brand and their agents have this in common—that they want to dominate the minds of the farmers with a zeal to produce more crops with which the middlemen may speculate, and they are determined to crush out all dangerous sentiment against cor- porations either among the farmers or among the scientists who have enhsted in the work of the department.” N.D.Eight-Hour Law{or MmersUpheld Judge Amidon, in Decision, Rebukes Minnesota Coal Company for Efforts HE owner of a coal mine who says that the eight hour law can not be carried out except at a loss is probably mistaken. If he is not, there is some- thing the matter with the con- duct of his business. He should look to that instead of resort- ing to the courts. Such laws can not be evaded by mere cleverness of busi- ness forms.” : This rebuke was administered to a coal mining company which sought to upset the eight-hour law for coal miners, passed by the recent session of the North Dakota legislature, in a decision by Federal Judge C. F. Amidon. The law is the first of the series of measures asked by organized labor in North Dakota to be tested in the courts, and it came through with fly- ing colors. The decision was given in the case of the Beulah Coal Mining company, a Minnesota cor- poration, which asked a temporary injunction to restrain the state coal mine inspector from en- forcing the law, either by criminal prosecutlon or by closing down the mine. Judge Amidon, in his decision filed recently in Fargo, said: “This is an application for a temporary mJunc- tion to restrain defendant as state: coal mine inspector from enforcing a statute of the state, either by crim- inal prosecution or by closing down of plaintiff’s mine. The bill shows that the plaintiff is the owner of a coal mine near Beulah, N. D. On February 25, 1919, it leased its mine to a part- nership for a term of two years. By the lease the partnership agrees to operate and produce and deliver to the plaintif a minimum of 100 tons of coal per day. Plaintiff agrees to pay therefor $1.50 per mine car. The part- nership just referred to was formed on the same day that the lease bears date, February 25, 1919. The mem- bers are 42 employes who had pre- viously been working in the mine for _ plaintiff. These men entered into carefully drawn articles of copartner- ship to take the lease and work the mine for two years. The agreement provides for monthly or daily ¢om- pensation for certain members. SCHEME TO EVADE LAW IS EXPOSED “As to others, called ‘miners,’ the compensation is fixed on the basis of the quantity of coal mined. It further provides that" the partnership ‘shall not engage any employe whatsoever in.carry- ing on the said mining operations.’ “The statute here involved took ef- It regulates all coal. mines in the state, provides for their inspection and for the ap- pointment of an inspector. Section . “‘A period of not over eight honrs shall constitute a day’s work on all works or undertaking in any coal mine or open pit mine, except in cases " of emergency where life or property is in imminent danger.’ ~ “Other sections make provision for criminal .prosecutions and empower the inspector to close a mine that is operated in violation of the law. “The bill charges that the plaintiff’s mine ean not be operated except at a loss if the men em- ployed at the mine are limited to an eight-hour day and states that unless the holders of the plaintiff’s lease are permitted to. work 10 hours a day, as they desire to do, the mine will have to be closed. It sets forth numerous particulars which it claims supports these averments. “The gist of the bill is that the state law is not intended to apply to owners who work their own mine, but only to hired men, and that under the " lease the partnership is the owner of the mine for the term' of two years. It is further contended that legislation which attempts to limit the number of hours which a man may work about his own busi- ness would be clearly unconstitutional. “A comparison between the dates of the lease and the contract of copartnership with the date when the law took effect, makes reasonably clear that the plaintiff’s business plan is\a mere subterfuge to escape the provisions of the state law. Courts of equity do mnot exist to further such schemes. The plaintiff is asking that the enforcement of a state law by criminal prosecution shall be restrained by an injunction. To declare a law unconstitutional is | A LIVELY CORPSE : I —= | vou JEE THAT FRRKE\'_%“KID 5 SWAT TH e HERE ue? THE NONPR%!ZRM Leas” /7 —Drawn exprossly for the Leader by W. C. Morris . “What’s the matter, son?” “Wow! - We’re playing he’s dead, but’ every time I go to nail him up he busts me in the eye. Bah! Wah!” PAGE NINE - to Evade Statute Fi 1xmg Maximum Working Day a high exercise of judicial power, and to restrain ordinary criminal prosecutions for the violation of criminal law is an exercise of even more unusual powers. A plaintif who seeks such relief must present a case of the most substantial merits, and support the same by convincing proof. The bill exhibits no such case. “Reports from Paris indicate that an eight- hour day is likely to be made the law of the civilized world. The owner of a coal mine who says that it can not be carried on except at a loss, on the basis of an eight-hour day, is probably mistaken. If he is not, there is some- thing the matter with the conduct of his busi- ness. He should look to that, instead of re- sorting to the courts. Such laws can not be evaded by mere cleverness of business forms, such as the plaintiff here has devised. i “The application for a temporary injunction will, therefore, be denied.” TWIN CITIES GRAIN MEN MOBILIZE FOR FIGHT The coal mining case is not the only instance of the attempt of Minnesota interests trying to kill the laws passed by the farmers of North Dakota. Grain interests of Minnesota have raised thou- sands of dollars in an effort to beat the flour mill and elevator system and have insti- tuted suits in the federal court seek- ing to have these laws declared in- valid. It is alleged that public owner- ship, such as the North Dakota farm- ers propose, is in violation of the Con- stitution of the United States! This is a ridiculous claim. The port of~ Seattle and the state of Louisiana have operated for years terminal ele- vator systems. The government of the United States has operated, ever since the nation started, a government postoffice system and has more recent- ly spread out with government-owned and operated shipping, government- operated railroads, telegraphs and telephones. J. H. Adams, secretary of the Tri- State Country Grain Shippers’ asso- ciation of Minneapolis, is the collect- ing agent for the grain interests in the fight against North Dakota laws. In spite of the camouflage name adopt- ed by Adams’ “organization” he is known to everybody as a tool of the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. Four years ago Adams started the “Co-Operative Manager and Farmer.” This is another instance of the use of people into thinking that it was a farmers’ co-operative affair. As a matter of fact Adams’ paper was used by the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce in the fight against the late George Loftus. It circulated the blackest kind of lies against this great fighter for the people. It is still in existence; still keeping up its fight against the farmers, but nobody pays any attention to it any more. This is the kind of a fight that North Dakota farmers have to face in putting their program into operation, but in spite of all obstacles placed in their. way by Twin Cities interests they are going straight ahead. [Donadl. a camouflage name in an effort to fool’ e e rm @ 2. [¥