Willmar Tribune

FARM CONDITIONS WORRY OLD PARTY POLITICIANS

By H. G. TEIGAN.

Just as the politicians of the two old parties are getting ready to side-track farm relief, the U. S. department of agriculture rather unwittingly, perhaps comes along with a report that tends to embarrass these two politicians. The report is no indicator of progress for agriculture. In fact it makes no claim that any real improvement has been made but states that a better balance prevailed in 1927 between the different lines of agricultural products than in any other recent year with the exception of feed crops in relation to livestock. The report does express the hope for 1928 that "some improvement is expected if farmers avoid expansion of production and continue their efforts to balance production with demands."

Not Much Improvement Expected in 1928.

On the other hand the report concedes that "foreign demand for the agricultural products of 1928 probably will be no better than it was for those of 1927." Moreover, it is also conceded that the world wheat crops will probably again be large if average or better than average yields are secured and that oats are likely to meet a less favorable market in the next crop year since present prices are largely due to the low average yields for two years. Corn is not expected to improve in price as the acreage is again apt to be large.

It must be remembered that the above report is gotten out under the direction of Secretary of Agriculture Jardine, who is more interested in the welfare of the Republican party than in the welfare of the American farmer. Mr. Jardine has been a consistent opponent of the McNary-Haugen bill and a supporter of the Coolidge program in respect to "agricultural relief."

Farm Wealth Declines, 20 Billions in Five Years.

It is obvious that agricultural conditions are bad. It is in respect to a remedy for these conditions that there is a sharp difference of opinion. Besides, these folks do not stand ready to state the facts as to the actual situation.

Government statistics show that the value of all farm property declined from $77,923,000,000 in 1920 to $57,017,000,000 in 1925; a loss of nearly $21,000,000,000. The loss is a stupendous one and census reports show that at no time before in the history of the United States has agriculture sustained a similar loss during a period of five years. As a matter of fact the total value of farm property has never before shown a loss from one census to the next following.

Iowa Hardest Hit.

These losses were greatest in the north central states. In Iowa the value of farm property declined from $8,500,000,000 in 1920 to $5,600,000,000 in 1925. Minnesota declined in the same period from $3,787,000,000 to $2,761,000,000; North Dakota from $1,759,000,000 to $1,191,000,000; Montana from $986,000,000 to $575,000,000; South Dakota from $2,800,000,000 to $1,659,000,000.

At the same time the farm mortgage indebtedness increased in all of these states except North Dakota and Montana. The indebtedness increased by more than $500,000,000 in the country as a whole. Based upon the purchasing power of the farmer's dollar of 1909-14, the 1926 dollar had a purchasing power of 62 cents. The purchasing power of the farmers' products is somewhat better, being 85 per cent of the value of the same products during the 1909-14 period.

Old Parties Deeply Concerned!

There is no escaping the fact that the farm problem is the one that both old political parties will have to recognize in 1928 as it has never been recognized before. That is to say some attempt will have to be made by both the Democrats and Republicans, in their platforms, to show that they are deeply concerned over the plight of the tillers of the soil. The farmer is so hard pressed that he has become militant in his demand for help. The insistence of leaders of farmers' organizations on the McNary-Haugen bill with its equalization fee provision included shows this clearly enough.

It is a pity though that the leaders of the farmers' organizations should not be able to act with some consistency in regard to their own situation. The support given former Governor Frank O. Lowden by farmer leaders for president is evidence that their vision as to redress is still lazy.

North Dakota Nonpartisans Go Haywire.

In North Dakota for example the Nonpartisan Leaguers as well as their opponents, the old gang Republicans, have endorsed the candidacy of Mr. Lowden. Only Senators Lynn J. Frazier and Gerald P. Nye have shown a disposition to discount the practicability, from the farmers' standpoint, of the Lowden candidacy. Frazier and Nye are supporters of Senator George W. Norris of Nebraska.

There is an ocean of difference in the candidacies of Lowden and Norris. Mr. Lowden is a multi-millionaire and a conservative in politics. As far as the writer knows he has never advocated a progressive legislation with the exception of the McNary-Haugen bill. Lowden has never championed public ownership of water power and railroads; reduction in tariff rates, or reform of the federal reserve system. And as Senator Brookhart stated last July before the St. Paul meeting of the council of agriculture, no candidate is a friend of the farmer unless he advocates the above reforms.

Senator Norris on the other hand is a champion of public ownership of water power. His fight for retention by the United States government of Muscle Shoals speaks for itself. Norris is also an advocate of government ownership of railroads and of other fundamental measures.

The performance of the Nonpartisans in North Dakota is discouraging. Nowhere in the land are the farmers better informed on economics reforms than in North Dakota. To see their leaders give O. K. to a political reactionary of the Lowden type is disappointing to say the least. It is to the credit of the league senators from North Dakota that they have used better judgment and shown greater fidelity to the cause they represent.

But as in other states where the Nonpartisan method of political action prevails the progressive of North Dakota have a connection with the old parties that is bound to affect their vision in respect to intelligent reform. It is the part of wisdom for the Non-partisans of North Dakota to organize a Farmer-Labor party as their fellow progressives of Minnesota have done. By so doing they will free themselves from the influence of old party politicians.