The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, July 11, 1921, Page 6

Harding Cabinet Credit Plan Rapped |- Other News and Opinion of Interest to Farmers From the National Capital— The New Senate “Soviet” a Hopetful Sign Washington Bureau, Nonpartisan Leader, AILURE of leading farmer organiza- tions to warm up to the plan of Sec- retary of Agriculture Wallace and Secretary of Commerce Hoover to pro- vide a plan whereby farmers could have more extensive storage facilities for farm products, with issuance of warehouse re- ceipts and provision for the loaning of money on these receipts, probably means that nothing of im- portance will come from the project. The meeting of farmer leaders with the above- named members of President Harding’s cabinet took place on schedule, and the matter was discuss- ed. But C. H. Gustafson, president of the United States Grain Growers, Inc., former members of the Committee of 17 and other prominent farmer rep- resentatives did not respond to the proposal as ex- pected. Mr. Gustafson issued a statement after the meeting saying that his organization would have nothing to do with it. The reason for the failure of the cabinet members to arouse enthusiasm for the plan, as they had out- lined it, is not hard to find. Its success, of course, depended on great sums of money being made available to furnish loans on the warehouse re- ceipts, and there was something more than a sus- picion on the part of most of those who attended the conference that the Harding administration intend- ed to have the financing done by Wall street inter- ests, which would, of course, have participated prac- tically on their own terms and indirectly, if not di- rectly, controlled the proposition. A rumor that J. P. Morgan was in Washington during the con- ference did not allay this suspicion. The farmers who, like members of the Nonparti- tan league, are convinced that the success of any tuch plan depends on state or government-owned elevators, cold storage plants and warehouses, and publicly owned banks to furnish the credit, felt the plan weak from the start. Wallace and Hoover ex- pected to work out a plan that the private business and finan- cial interests would follow, us- ing existing storage facilities, or perhaps encouraging addi- tional facilities to be owned and operated privately, and having the big banking and financial in- terests furnish the credit. - PUBLIC WAREHOUSES ARE NECESSARY Where the warehouse receipt plan has been most successful and of the greatest possible benefit to the farmers, as in Louisiana and at Seattle, Wash., the storage facilities are public- ly owned and storage rates thus fixed at actual cost, with no profit to any one. This is the North Dakota plan and is the plan that will be worked out in the state of New York, which is building state-owned elevators. Publicly owned elevators do not play favorites and the storage capacity is open on like terms to all. Despite laws to the con- trary, middlemen usually get better rates and better treatment from private warehouses, eleva- tors and cold storage plants than producers, because of their busi- ness connections with the banks, etc. Many states now have laws providing for the issuance of f/ warehouse receipts to farmers / on stored products. These legal- ly safeguarded certificates have helped the farmer to get credit on his crop while he is holding it for an opportune marketing time, but the difficulty is always to find a ready credit—a place where the farmer can borrow the money on his warehouse re- \ //:' = ARE HOUSE i peCEIPTS N ceipt at low, preferably cost, rates of interest. Had the Hoover-Wallace plan contemplated legislation that would enlarge the functions of the federal land banks so that they could loan on warehouse receipts at cost rates of interest, the farmers would prob- ably have felt more certain about the success of the scheme. They felt no great relief was to be expected if the private moneyed interests were to advance the money and thus control the system. Another group of farmers who went over the cabinet’s plans believed that more is to be expected of the present grain growers’ wheat pool and its accompanying co-operative financing plan. They felt that they should put all their energy back of the plans of the United States Grain Growers, Inc., and that the Hoover-Wallace plan might conflict. This was the attitude taken by Mr. Gustafson. NOT MUCH IS EXPECTED OF INVESTIGATING BODY The agricultural crisis has stirred the politicians at.the national capitol to many forms of activity of which the warehouse-receipt credit plan is only one. It is too early to say what can be expected, if any- thing, of the joint commission appointed by con- gress to investigate farm economic conditions, of which Representative Sydney Anderson of ‘Minne- sota is chairman. This commission, if it wants to, can do much to gather and publish concrete infor- mation that will aid congress in passing agricul- tural relief legislation. On the other hand, it can make a windy report like so many investigating bodies do, and nothing may come of it. Congress- man Anderson is a Minnesota Republican wheel- horse. He defeated a man indorsed by the Nonpar- tisan league in the last campaign and it is not thought that he believes in any fundamental re- forms in economic conditions. He talks a lot in favor of the farmer, as they all do who come from farming districts, but there is much skepticism expressed about his leadership of the investi- gating commission. Senator Capper is a member. Probably the ization of what Senator Lodge and other reac- tionaries at the capitol have dub- bed the “senate soviet.” This is a group of west- ern and southern senators who hold regular meetings — . most hopeful thing for agricul- | THE DIFFERENCE l e e WE WwWANT Foa: We wANT TO 5TORE OUR araN N QUR OW l, N [ gLEVATOR AnD cAsH OUR § RECE ¥ -eC nC ” L}E \Jh‘ / ) e | | AN / : ==\ —Drawn expressly for the Leader by John M. Baer. PAGE SIX ¢ WE AGREE WITH ywOoUu ON THE PLAN BUT to discuss progressive legislation and legislation for farmers. As high as 26 senators have participated in some of the meetings, and they always bring out from 18 to 22 senators. The caucus, or “soviet,” as the reactionaries contemptuously call it, was form- ed primarily to work out agreements as to progres- sive and agricultural legislation which the sena- tors interested will stand back of as a unit, with every chance of being the balance of power in the upper house. \ It is remarkable that these southern and western senators have been able to break down party lines and wipe out the line dividing the North and the South. In the first place they agreed not to take up any legislation or propesed legislation, which like the tariff, was a direct party issue. Secondly, they agreed to lay off all propositions on which the North and the South could nothagree upon, which does not include much in the way of agricultural legislation, since the problem of the southern farmer is practically the same as that of his north- ern brother. Senator E. F. Ladd of North Dakota, Nonparti- san leaguer, is a prominent member of this new senate group. Capper of Kansas and La Follette of Wisconsin are two other leaders. Senator Ken- yon of Iowa presided over a recent typical meeting of the “soviet,” at which the following senators were present: The Republicans were W. S. Kenyon of Iowa, Frank Gooding of Idaho, R. N. Stanfield of Oregon, J. W. Harreld of Oklahoma, E. F. Ladd of North Dakota, Bursum of New Mexico, C. L. McNary of Oregon, G. W. Norris of Nebraska, Arthur Capper of Kansas, R. M. La Follette of Wisconsin, S. P. Spencer of Missouri, Peter Norbeck of South Da- kota and W. L. Jones of Washington. WILL BE IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REALIGNING SENATE FORCES Democrats were T. A. Caraway of Arkansas, E. D. Smith of South Carolina, D. U. Fletcher of Flori- da, Thomas E. Watson and W. J. Harris of Georgia, J. B. Kendrick of Wyoming, Pat Harrison of Mis- sissippi, J. T. Heflin of Alabama and Morris Shep- pard of Texas. According to informed observers this group is going to be an important factor in sooner or later bringing about an open break in the old parties and a new alignment in which old party lines will van- ish and senators will line up as progressives against conservatives. The group lost one of its first fights in the senate, that for the passage of the senate agricultural committee bill to regulate the packers. The vote was 37 against the bill and 34 for it. Instead the senate will pass the house regulation bill, with some slight amendments. The house bill is the one it i5 charg- ed was drawn by the packers and is not obnoxious to them. But this outcome has strengthened and more firmly united the “soviet.” Senator Kenyon, indignant at the defeat of the only packer bill that had real teeth in it, openly says that this is the signal for a break be- tween progressive and conserva- tive Republicans who stuck. to- gether during the last few years to assure Republican victory at the polls in 1920. Kenyon says there will be another Republican insurgent movement like there was a few years ago. That re- sulted in the formation of the Progressive party, which had such great prospects but which Roosevelt wrecked. The present Republican ma- jority in congress is top-heavy. Such majorities do not hang to- gether as do those which are Jjust barely majorities, and they are harder to handle. It is natural for majorities such as the one now existing in congress to develop factions. That is a healthy sign and the hope of progress.