The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, September 8, 1919, Page 11

J - » S PN & o R » 3 . > > N 0 Rl o fle -~ - JE0e AR A Trick Fails . Reactionaries in Futile Attempt to Hit -Farmers in Bill Aimed at Profiteers Washington Bureau, . Nonpartisan Leader. Y DEFEATING the efforts of a group of farmer-baiters in the house, who would have had co- operative associations of agri- cultyralists subject to heavy fine or imprisonment as “profi- teers,” congress bas %aken a long step in the direction of 2 securing for the farmers the unquestioned right of organizing and engaging in collective bargaining in the sale of their’ produce. In the debate preceding the passage of the en- larged Lever food control act on August 22, altered by Attorney Gerferal Palmer to make the measure effective against profiteers in food or food con- tainers, feed, fertilizer, fuel oil and clothing, stren- uous efforts were made by Representatives Griffin of New York, Dyer of Missouri and a few others to strike out the special exemption granted farm- ers’ co-operative organizations. A division de- manded by Mr. Dyer on an amendment to this end showed 79 votes in favor of exempting the farmers to 26 against, the North Dakota congressmen vot- ing with the majority. Unless the senate reverses the house decision, which is unlikely, this action will provide tempo- rary protection for the co-operative associations, now beginning to rouse the hatred and opposition of the great food trusts. Moreover, an entering wedge has been afforded for the passage of the pending Capper-Hers- man bills, which would make it clearly lawful from a national stand- point for any association sof farmers, ranchmen, dairymen, etc., corporate or otherwise, with or without capital stock, to make collective sales “prescribing the terms and conditions thereof.” The point about the house vote on the Dyer amendment is not that this small protection to the farmers went through undefeated, but that a belligerent mjinor- ity, which would have been increased- at least fourfold if there had been a full attendance at the time of the vote, actively sought to deny the farmers the right of collective bargaining, and to subject them to a penalty of $5,000 or two. years’ imprisonment for exercising that right. Like the anti-trust laws, the enlarged Lever-act was intended to circum- scribe the profiteering combinations which dom- inate both producer and consumer. Big business, as -clever as it is un- scrupulous, has succeed- ed in perverting the for- mer by making it de- gtructive to the organi- zation being built up by the farmer in self-de- fense. The attempt to prostitute the' supposed anti-profiteering law to the same end was only a little too glaring to fail of similar success. Prosecutions and per- secutions of farm or- ganizations engaged in the. - collective 'sale of their farm products have been’ sufficiently numer- * ous lately to warrant the conclusion that an organ- " ized campaign is on foot to prevent this natural development in the fight to curtail living costs ever reaching maturity. Recent attacks on the milk producers in New York, Chicago and Indianapolis are well remembered. And in Cleveland, only the other day, there occurred an atrocious incident which should bring home to every farmer the ne- cessity of giving his full attention to this matter. On August 9 seven prominent Ohio farmers, serving as representatives of the Ohio Farmers’ Co-Operative Milk company, were arrested without warning late at night on the ground of conspiring to advance the price of milk, were thrown into jail and released only on appeal after furnishing $2,000 bail and after receiving a severe reprimand from the judge on the score of “profiteering.” The full story of the Cleveland incident was re- lated to the house agriculture committee the other day by W. H. Ingersoll, a vice president of the National Milk Producers’ association, and one of the seven victims. The Northern Ohio Milk Pro- ducers’ association, of which Ingersoll is president, had asked the distributors of Cleveland for an in- crease in price to cover the cost of production and make their returns equivalent to those received by the dairymen in nearby markets. - The dairymen were getting less than half of every dollar spent by the consumer for milk; feeds had risen $25 a ton in price during the last few months and costs had soared 200 per cent. Ostensibly these seven Ohio farmers were thrown in jail on the ground of conspiracy to raise the price of an essential food. Against the Big Five packers damning evidence of real profiteering has been brought. How long before they will be in cells ? ] ' | TRYING TO GET RID OF THE CHILD . | _ PAGE ELEVEN —Drawn expressly:for the Leader by W. C. Morris. As usual, the reactionaries and the special interests are trying to place the blame for the high cost of living at the door of the farmers. Biit they are less successful than usual this time, - . “and at least one attempt failed, as‘a story on this page tells. . ; The Packers’ Defi Government Is Not Strong Enough to- Regulate Big Five, Official Boasts Washington Bureau, Nonpartisan Leader. HEN the manager of the Union Stock Yards at Omaha, a pack- er-controlled concern, gave out an interview recently to the effect that the government is not strong enough to regulate the meat packing industry, he aptly. voiced the challenge of big business, which is now con- - fronting congress. The undying shame of the situ- ation is that the packer spokesman in question spoke the truth. Facing what may well be a su- preme crisis in the affairs of this nation, the Sixty- Sixth congress is shaking like a broken reed, afraid to offend the power of entrenched interests which have dominated at the capitol for decades, and at the same time plainly frightened by the mutter- ings of unrest now surging in from those classes which have never had the essential “friend at court.” If the packers stood alone across the No Man's Land which separates the public from the great. profiteers it is improbable that they could escape the just wrath of those who see the daily struggle of existence grow harder and harder in order that a few may live in luxury. But they are not alone. Through interlocking directorates and the great New York banks they are linked up more or less directly with almost all tions in the country. They know the full value of the motto that in union there is strength and it is a foregone con- clusion that any attack upon the packers will bring to their defense the unlimited funds, the stupendous influence and the great moguls of Wall street. In their recent flood of propaganda they charge that the Kenyon- Anderson bill is an en- tering wedge which would eventually mean federal regulation of all private monopolies. -Re- alization of this has ral- lied all financial Amer- ica to the support of the food trust, and this is probably what Mr. Buck- \] ==\ W N AN R\ A ¥ 4 mind when he indicated that the government is not strong enough to control the packers. The recent nation-wide outburst against the soaring cost of living has demonstrated two things clearly to every honest man—that during and since the war there has ‘come into being an era of the most --flagrant profiteering, and that this profiteering has been at the expense of pro- ducer and consumer alike, giving them a'clear and mutual interest in its elimination. That the present situ- ation is intolerable and provocative of the most serious consequences has been stated by authori- ties ranging from the, spokesmen of the rail- 45 road brotherhoods: to - President Wilson. In his recent message to con- gress on the cost of liv- (Continued on page 15) the other great corpora- - inexhaustible finances of ingham of Omaha had in - ing the latter said: “The R AN R A R T AR S I