Title Page
 Florida, the twin-six
 Agricultural situation
 Agricultural and the national department...
 A national policy for land...
 Perils of democracy
 The farmer's economic problem
 Lessons of the war for agricul...
 Future of the American farmer

Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00077080/00007
 Material Information
Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture Volume 33. Number 2.
Series Title: Florida quarterly bulletin of the Department of Agriculture.
Uniform Title: Report of the Chemical Division
Physical Description: 9 v. : ill. (some folded) ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Dept. of Agriculture
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: Tallahassee, Fla.
Manufacturer: T. J. Appleyard, printer
Publication Date: April 1, 1923
Subject: Agriculture -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Agricultural industries -- Statistics -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Statistics   ( lcsh )
General Note: Title from cover.
General Note: Each no. has also a distinctive title.
General Note: Many issue number 1's are the Report of the Chemical Division
General Note: Issues occasional supplements.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00077080
Volume ID: VID00007
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 28473180

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page 1
        Title Page 2
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Florida, the twin-six
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
    Agricultural situation
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
    Agricultural and the national department of agriculture
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
    A national policy for land utilization
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
    Perils of democracy
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
    The farmer's economic problem
        Page 58
        Page 59
    Lessons of the war for agriculture
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65-96
    Future of the American farmer
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
Full Text

VOLUME 33 Number 2



Rural Topics

APRIL 1, 1923

Florida the Twin-Six.................................. ..... 3
By Hon. W. A. McRae, Commissioner of Agriculture.
The Agricultural Situation.............................. 9
By Hon. Warren G. Harding, President of the United States.
The Federal Department of Agriculture.................... 20
By Hon. Henry C. Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture..
The Land Question...................................... 32
By Dr. Richard T. Ely, Professor of Political Economy,
University of Wisconsin.
Perils of Democracy ...................................... 47
By Dr. F. L. Loveland, Topeka, Kansas.
Rural Economic Problems................................ 59
By Dr. H. C. Taylor, Chief, Bureau of Agricultural Eco-
Lessons of the War for Agriculture ....................... 61
By Hon. H. C. Stuart, ex-Governor of Virginia.
Marketing Problems ...................................... 81
By Hon. L. M. Rhodes, Commissioner of Markets.
Future of the American Farmer .......................... 89
By Hon. T. J. Brooks, Chief Clerk, Dept. of Agriculture.

Commissioner of Agricultn ir

tetson nieritY

Entered January 31, 1908, at Tallahassee, Florida, as second-class matter
under Act of Congress of June, 1900. "Acceptance for mailing at special
rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917,
authorized September 11, 1918."

d__.^ .=


The addresses on rural topics herewith presented will
prove of interest to students of rural problems. The list of
men whose addresses have been included insure a wide
scope of discussion and many angles of viewpoint.
Rural subjects are not confined to production or distri-
bution, but include a wide range of economic, financial, ed-
ucational and sociological subjects.
It is hoped that the discussions herein will furnish in-
structive lessons for all who read them.

Florida, The Twin-Six

By W. A. McRAE

Commissioner of Agriculture

Florida is the Twin-Six State and hits on every cylinder.

Number One: General farming leads in Florida agri-
culture. Of the tilled acreage, field craps lead. Among
the general farm crops may be mentioned cotton, cotton,
hay, peanuts, tobacco, oats, rice, sugar cane, sorghum,
Japanese cane, field peas, soy beans, velvet beans, Irish
potatoes, sweet potatoes, vegetables, fruits, also live stock,
dairy products, poultry and eggs.
A document sent out by the Department of Agriculture
of Kansas says that 5,000,000 acres are planted to corn
in that state, and that the average annual value of the
yield for the last twenty years has been $67,679,016.
With half the number of acres in all crops in Florida
- that Kansas has in corn we produce $80,000,000 worth of
products. We must not forget that Kansas is one of the
richest agricultural states in the Union and in first rank
as a producer.

In round numbers, corn hits off with... .11,100,000 Bushels
Peanuts ............................ 2,100,000 Bushels
Velvet beans ........................ 1,000,000 Bushels
Oats ............................... 600,000 Bushels
Cow peas .......................... 125,000 Bushels
Rice ............................... 113,000 Bushels
Soy beans ......................... 30,000 Bushels
Tobacco ............................ 3,131,000 Pounds
Cotton ............................. 25,000 Bales

Number Two: Truck farming brings in Seventeen Mil-
Sweet potatoes start the spark off with. 3,200,000 Bushels
Irish potatoes ........................ 1,300,000 Bushels
Watermelons ....................... 11,000 Car loads
Tomatoes .......................... 11,000 Car loads
Lettuce ..... ...................... 2,500 Car loads

Celery ............................. 4,500 Car loads
Cabbage ........................... 3,000 Car loads
Peppers ........................... 1,000 Car loads
Cucumbers ......................... 2,000 Car loads
Strawberries ....................... 1,000 Car loads
Beans ............................ 1,200 Car loads
Miscellaneous ....................... 3,400 Car loads

Number Three: Florida has a big bore cylinder in the
horticultural industry. It hits off with 13,000,000 boxes
of citrus fruits, 1,000,000 pounds of grapes, 650,000
bushels of fruits other than citrus, and 30,000,000 nursery
trees to take care of future needs.
During the last season there were produced 70,816 cars
of citrus fruits. It took $1,000,000 worth of tissue paper to
wrap it. The railroads got for hauling it $16,000,000. The
crate mills got $3,300,000 for boxes, it requires an invest-
ment of $4,000,000 in packing houses to handle the crops.
The annual labor bill for operating them is $3,000,000. It
takes $5,000 worth of paste to stick the labels on the boxes,
and the lithograph labels cost $45,000; the picking bags
cost $20,000. It took forty cars of nails, costing $80,000,
to nail the boxes, $80,000 to strip the cars bracing the
boxes for protection in transit. 8he strips on the boxes
cost $55,000. We have not included the investment in
groves, the cultivation, fertilization, and spraying ex-
Dr. J. H. Ross, President of the Florida Citrus Ex-
change estimates the 1923 crop at 15,000,000 boxes. At
$1.67 a box net, this would bring $25,050,000. Add to this
the expense items of growing, picking, boxing, crate ma-
terials, pay roll of pickers and haulers, light, power, labels,
wrapping paper, freight, selling, etc., which approximate
$30,300,000 within the State, and we have $55,000,000.
Outside the State, we must add to this the cost of adver-
tising, freight, wholesale profit, and retail profit-$49,650,-
000, and we have a grand to tal cost to the consumer of

Number Four: The value of live stock on hand for 1922
was $56,717,321. Three meat packing houses in the State
indicate what is thought of the future of this industry.
Thoroughbred cattle are rapidly taking the place of scrubs.
Dairying is just coming into vogue, and creameries are be-

ing established. Hogs to the value of $5,000,000 are add-
ing their portion to the driving power of the State's in-
dustries. In the United States there are 21,000,000,000 .
pounds of meat slaughtered and distributed throughout
the world. Florida has a future in the hog raising as well
as in general live stock raising. That prize cattle and hogs
can be raised in the State has been proved, as they have
carried of the highest prizes when shown in some of the
largest fairs in the country.

Number Five: Forest industries have been the State's
greatest source of income. They are gradually giving way
to the march of agriculture. Florida forests are turning
out $1,000,000,000 feet of lumber annually worth $40,000,-
000. Naval stores, turpentine, rosin, tar, etc., are prod-
ucts of the pine tree. In 1880 Florida furnished 5% of
the naval stores of the United States; 24% in 1890; 31%
in 1900; 36.9% in 1919.
Florida's production of turpentine in 1920 was 136,900
casks, and of resin, 457,500 barrels. A barrel of turpen-
tine is 50 gallons. A barrel of resin is 500 pounds. The
price of turpentine at Savannah December, 1919, was $1.55
per gallon. This would make the Florida output worth at
that market $10,609,750. The price of medium grade
rosins at Savannah, December, 1919, was $19 per barrel.
This would make the Florida output worth $8,692,500.
The two together approximating $20,000,000. This is al-
most the exact value of the naval stores exported from the
United States for that year.

Number Six: Florida has 3,000 miles of fishing shores
in thirty-two of sixty-one counties. The value of the fish
industry is $14,000,000 a year. Shipments of salt water
scale fish from Florida waters amount to 58,457,000 pounds
annually. Ninety thousand barrels of oysters and clams
were shipped and canned last season. Sponges were mar-
keted from Florida last year to the number of 4,603,000.
Shrimp were shipped and canned during last season to
the amount of 9,000,000 pounds.

Number Seven: Manufacturing has a greater variety to
the valume in Florida than in any other State. Tobacco-
cigars and cigarettes, to the number of 580,000,000; tur-
pentine and rosin to the value of $20,000,000; fertilizer to

the value of $15,000,000; crates and boxes worth $5,000,-
000 are some of the leaders. Then we have factories turn-
ing out automobiles; glass; baskets from ferns, pine straw
and many other materials; brushes and furniture from
palmetto; leather from cattle, alligators, sharks and por-
poises; iron bridges; foundry products; brick; print pa-
per from saw grass; crankless engines; tractors; mattresses
and upholstery from Spanish moss; tannic acid; perfumes;
souvenirs; film photos for the movies; ice; canned goods
that range from shrimp, clams and oysters to tomatoes,
marmalades, grapefruit, catsup, etc. One hundred fifty
million dollars a year is a good starter for manufacturing
in a State of only one million people.

Number Eight: The mineral products of Florida con-
sist mainly of phosphate, Fuller's earth, kaolin, coquina
and limestone. The combined value of the output of these
minerals is approximately $25,000,000 annually.

Number Nine: Merchandising in Florida shows a much
lower percentage of failures during the last five years than
the average of the United States. There is a more constant
income to producers than in other states, due to the great
diversity of products placed on the market during a year,
and this redounds to the advantage of the merchant. He
is.not expected to "carry" his credit customers as is done
in one-crop agricultural states. Where there is population
there is business. The growth of our leading cities indi-
cates the growth of business.

1900 1910 1920
Jacksonville ............... 28,429 57,699 91,558
Tampa .................... 15,839 37,782 51,608
Pensacola ................. 17,747 22,982 31,035
Miami .................... 1,681 5,471 29,571
St. Petersburg ............. 1,575 4,127 14,237
Orlando ................... 2,481 3,894 9,282
West Palm Beach.......... 564 1,743 8,659

Number Ten: That Florida finances have kept pace
with the growth of other interests is shown by the follow-
ing table of bank statements:


Loans and discounts........ $33,850,047.27
Overdrafts ............... 42,850.36
U. S., state, county and mu-
nicipal bonds .......... 2,124,230.66
-Other bonds, stocks and se-
curities ................ 1,800,499.31
Banking house, furniture
and fixtures ............ 2,981,385.20
Other real estate owned. .... 718,826.05
Claims and other resources. 294,691.88
Due from banks .......... 13,643,105.43
Checks and cash items..... 620,275.22
Cash on hand ............ 2,671,647.24





$58,747,558.68 $127,381,563.65


Capital stock ............$ 7,458,000.00
Surplus ................. 2,380,119.95
Undivided profits ......... 834,239.99
Dividends unpaid ......... 126,627.57
Individual deposits ....... 27,727,597.29
Savings deposits .......... 12,120,211.93
Certificates of deposit ..... 4,443,641.47
Certified checks .......... 158,706.76
Cashier's checks .......... 527,692.52
Due to banks ............. 1,955,207.09
Bills payable and redis-
counted ............... 612,255.15
All other liabilities ....... 328,658.96
Bonds borrowed .......... 174,600.00



$58,747,558.68 $127,381,563.65

There are 222 State banks with resources
of ................................ $127,381,563.65
There are 53 National banks with resources
of ................................. $100,000,000.00

Number Eleven: Education is constructive the same as
material production. The value of all public school prop-

erty, equipment, lots and buildings is $18,060,697. We
have 318,939 school population, attending 2,528 schools.
On these schools $8,906,604 are spent annually, which is
$39.17 per capital of school age. This fund is raised from
taxes on property assessed at $383,118,938.
There are also 272 high schools, four State schools for
higher education, sixteen denominational schools and two
industrial schools. Some Northern educational institutions
have opened up branches in Florida. The Taft School, a
preparation institution, is to move from Connecticut to
Florida. The number of students attending Florida
schools and colleges is surprising. The advantages offered
here are being recognized throughout the country. The
enrollment in both the Florida College for Women at Tal-
lahassee and the University at Gainesville could be doubled
if the capacity were increased sufficiently to meet the re-
quirements. The liberal increase in proportions last year
indicates that we shall soon expand the educational work
of the State to place Florida in the front rank in Educa-

Number Twelve: There is another cylinder that never
fails to pull in Florida-it is labeled Tourist. Approxi-
mately a million people visit Florida annually in normal
times. It is the winter playground of the United States.
As more and more good roads are built the tourists will
come in greater numbers. Tourists are necessarily spend-
ers, and it is no small advantage to have these visitors so-
journ with us, whether for a day or a season. Many a
tourist becomes an immigrant and an investor. Every one
of our twelve cylinders are hitting and Florida is going in
the race for the good things of life.



At National Agricultural Conference, Washington, D. C.,
March 3, 1922

Secretary Wallace and Members of the Conference:
It is an occasion of the greatest satisfaction to me that
Secretary Wallace's invitation has been so widely and cor-
dially accepted. I confess the firm belief that in the public
life of a people so intelligent as the American Nation most
problems may be regarded as well on the way to solution
when they are once reduced to their simplest terms and
generally understood. This conference was called with the
aim to bring about such a general understanding of the
critical situation now confronting American agriculture.
We all understand that this conference is not a legisla-
tive body. Its recoomendations will require to be written
into the statute books by other authorities, or applied in
administration, after sanction by those who must assume
responsibility. But we do confidently anticipate that the
considerations here had will be helpful and illuminating
to those immediately responsible for the formulation of
public policy in dealing with these problems. Therefore,
it has seemed to me, I can make no more appropriate ob-
servation than that your work here will be of value pre-
cisely as you address yourselves to the realities, the mat-
ters of fact, the understanding of conditions as they are,
and the proposal of feasible and practicable methods for
dealing with those conditions.
Concerning the grim reality of the present crisis in agri-
culture, there can be no difference of opinion among in-
formed people. The depressions and discouragements are
not peculiar to agriculture, and I think it fair to say there
could have been no avoidance of a great slump from war-
time excesses to the hardships of readjustment. We can
have no helpful understanding by assuming that agricul-
ture suffers alone, but we may fairly recognize the funda-
mental difficulties which accentuate the agricultural dis-
couragements, and menace the healthful life of this basic
and absolutely necessary industry.

I do not need to tell you or the country of the supreme
service that the farmer rendered our Nation and the world
during the war. Peculiar circumstances placed our allies
in Europe, as well as our own country, in a position of
peculiar and unprecedented dependence on the American
farmer. With his labor supply limited and in conditions
which made producing costs high beyond all precedent, the
farmer rose to the emergency. He did everything that was
asked of him, and more than most people believed it was
possible for him to do. Now, in his hour of disaster, conse-
quent on the reaction from the feverish conditions of war,
he comes to us asking that he be given support and as-
sistance which shall testify our appreciation of his service.
To this he is entitled, not only for the service he has done
but because if we fail him we will precipitate a disaster
that will affect every industrial and economical activity of
the Nation.
The administration has been keenly alive to the situa-
tion, and has given encouragement and support to every
measure which it believed calculated to ameliorate the con-
dition of agriculture. In the effort to finance crop move-
ments, to expand foreign markets, to expand credits at
home and abroad, much has been accomplished. These
have been, it is true, largely in the nature of emergency
measures. So long as the emergency continues, it must be
dealt with as such; but at the same time there is every
reason for us to consider those permanent modifications of
policy which may make relief permanent, may secure agri-
culture so far as possible against the danger that such con-
ditions will arise again, and place it as an industry in the
firmest and most assured position for the future.
You men are thoroughly familiar with the distressing
details of present conditions in the agricultural commu-
nity. The whole country has an acute concern with the
conditions and the problems which you are met to consider.
It is a truly national interest, and not entitled to be re-
garded as primarily the concern of either a class or a sec-
Agriculture is the oldest and most elemental of indus-
tries. Every other activity is intimately related to and
largely dependent upon it. It is the first industry to which
society makes appeal in every period of distress and diffi-
culty. When war is precipitated, the first demand is made
on the farmer, that he will produce the wherewithal for

both combatants and the civil population to be fed, and in
large part also to be clothed and equipped. It is a curious
fact that agriculture has always been the first line of sup-
port of communities in war, and too commonly the victim
of those distresses which emanate from great conflicts.
Perhaps I may be pardoned a word by way of developing
this idea. Until comparatively very recent times the land
was the first prize of victory in war. The conqueror dis-
tributed the subjugated soil among his favorites, and gave
them his prisoners as slaves to work it. Thus the owner-
ship of the land became the symbol of favor and aristoc-
racy, while the working of it was regarded as the task of
menials, dedicated to ill-paid toil in order that the owners
of the land and the rulers of the state might be able to
maintain themselves in luxury and to enforce their political
Coming down through the ages, we see the advance of
civilization gradually emancipating the soil from this low
estate. We see the institutions of serfdom and villenage,
under the feudal order, succeeding those of slavery. Later
we see the creation of a rural peasantry, comprising broad-
ly those who till the soil, but in most cases do not own it,
and whose political rights are very restricted. It is, in-
deed, not until we come to very recent times and to our
own country's development that we see the soil lifted above
the taint of this unjust heredity and restored to the full
dignity and independence to which it is entitled.
Even in our own times and under the most modern and
enlightened establishments the soil has continued to enjoy
less liberal institutions for its encouragement and promo-
tion than many other forms of industry. Commerce and
manufacturing have been afforded ample financial facili-
ties for their encouragement and expansion, while agri-
culture on the whole has lagged behind. The merchant,
the manufacturer, the great instruments of public trans-
portation, have been provided methods by which they en-
list necessary capital more readily than does the farmer.
A great manufacturing industry can consolidate under the
ownership of a single corporation with a multitude of
stockholders, a great number of originally separate estab-
lishments, and thus effect economies and concentrations,
and acquire for itself a power in the markets where it must
buy, and in the markets where it must sell, such as have
not been made available to agriculture. The farmer is the

most individualistic and independent citizen among us.
He comes nearest to being self-sufficient; but precisely be-
cause of this he has not claimed for himself the right to
employ those means of co-operation, co-ordination, and con-
solidation which serve so usefully in other industries. A
score or more of manufacturers consolidate their interests
under a corporate organization, and attain a great increase
of their power in the warkets, whether they are buying or
selling. The farmer, from the very mode of his life, has
been stopped from these effective combinations; therefore,
because he buys and sells as an individual, it is his fate to
buy in the dearest and sell in the cheapest market.
The great industrial corporation sells its bonds in order
to get what we may call its fixed or plant capital, just as.
the farmer sells a mortgage on his land in order to get at
at least a large part of his fixed or plant capital. I am
not commending the bonding or mortgaging system of
capitalization, rather only recognizing a fact. But there
in large part the analogy ends. Both the manufacturer
and the farmer still require provision of working capital.
The manufacturer, whose turnover is rapid, finds that in
the seasons when he needs unusual amounts of working
capital he can go to the bank and borrow on short-time
notes. His turnover is rapid, and the money will come
back in time to meet his short-term obligation. The mer-
chant finances his operations in the same way. But the
farmer is in a different case. His turnover period is a long
one; his annual production is small compared to the
amount of investment. For almost any crop the turnover
period is at least a year; for live stock it may require two
or three years for a single turnover. Yet the farmer is
compelled, if he borrows his working capital, to borrow for
short periods, to renew his paper several times before his
turnover is possible, and to take the chance that if he is
called upon untimely to pay off his notes he may be com-
pelled to sacrifice growing crops or unfinished live stock.
Obviously the farmer needs to have provisions adapted to-
his requirements for extension of credit to produce his
working capital.
Under the necessities of war time consolidation and cen-
tralization of credit resources and financial capabilities
went far to sustain the struggle. Essential industries were-
extended the help and support of society because society
recognized its dependence on them. Much that was eco-

nomically unsound and unfair was perpetuated under
cover of this effort to uphold necessary industrial factors.
But the lesson was useful and justifies inquiry as to
whether, properly adapted to peace conditions, the meth-
ods of larger integration and wider co-operation might not
well be projected -into times of peace. The need of better
financial facilities for the farmer must be apparent on the
most casual consideration of the profound divergence be-
tween methods of financing agriculture and other indus-
tries. The farmer who owns his farm is capitalist, execu-
tive, and laborer all in one. As capitalist he earns the
smaller return on his investment. As executive he is little
paid, and as laborer he is greatly underpaid in comparison
to labor in other occupations.
There is much misconception regarding the financial
status of agriculture. If the mortgage indebtedness of
farms shows over a given period a marked tendency to in-
crease, the fact becomes occasion for concern. If during
the same period the railroads or the great industries con-
trolled by corporations find themselves able to increase
their mortgage indebtedness by dint of bond issues, the
fact is heralded as evidence of better business conditions
and of capital's increased willingness to engage in these
industries and thus insure much larger production and
better employment of labor. Both the mechanism of
finance and the preconceptions of the community are
united in creating the impression that easy access to am-
ple capital is a disadvantage to the farmer, and an evi-
dence of his decay in prosperity, while precisely the same
circumstances are construed in other industries as evidence
of prosperity and of desirable business expansion.
In the matter of what may be called fixed investment
capital, the disadvantage of the farmer so strongly im-
pressed public opinion that a few years ago the Federal
Farm Loan Board was established to afford better supplies
of capital for plant investment and to insure moderate
rates. But while unquestionably farm finance has bene-
fited, the board has thus far not extended its operations to
the provision of working capital for the farmer as distin-
guished from permanent investment in the plant. There
should be developed a thorough code of law and business
procedure, with the proper machinery of finance, through
some agency, to insure that turnover capital shall be as
generously supplied to the farmer and on as reasonable

terms as to other industries. An industry, more vital than
any other, in which nearly half the Nation's wealth is in-
vested can be relied upon for good security and certain
In the aggregate, the capital indebtedness of the coun-
try's agricultural plant is small, not large. Compared
with other industries, the wonder is that agriculture, thus
deprived of easy access to both investment and accommo-
dation capital, has prospered even so well.
The lines on which financial support of agriculture may
be organized are suggested in the plan of the Federal Farm
Loan Board, and in those rural finance societies which have
been so effective in some European countries. The co-
operative loaning associations of Europe have been effec-
tive incentives to united action by farmers, and have led
them directly into co-operation in both production and
marketing which have contributed greatly to the stabiliza-
tion and prosperity of agriculture. Whether we examine
the co-operative societies of Russia, now recognized as the
most potent support in that disturbed country for orderly
society, or whether we turn to the great and illuminated
co-operative associations which have strengthened the Cali-
fornia agricultural industries; whether we examine the
co-operative societies of Ireland and Denmark or the like
organizations which handle the potatoes of Maine, or the
cantaloupes of Colorado; whether we consider these organi-
zations as means to buying the farmer's requirements in a
cheaper market or to selling his products in a more re-
munerative one, the conclusion is in all cases the same.
It is, that the farmer is as good a business man as any
other when he has the chance; that he is capable of organ:
ization, co-operation, and cor-ordination; that he will ap-
ply sound methods to his business whenever he has the
chance; that his credit can be better established, his par-
ticular needs of capital on terms suited to his require-
ments can be met; that, these things accomplished, he
ceases to be an underpaid laborer, an unpaid executive,
and a capitalist with an unremunerative investment.
It can not be too strongly urged that the farmer must
be ready to help himself. This conference would do most
lasting good if it would find ways to impress the great
mass of farmers to avail themselves of the best methods.
By this I mean that, in the last analysis, legislation can do

little more than give the farmer the chance to organize and
help himself.
Take co-operative marketing. American farmers are
asking for, and it should be possible to afford them, ample
provision of law under which they may carry on in co-
operative fashion those business operations which lend
themselves to that method, and which, thus handled, would
bring advantage to both the farmer and his consuming
public. In countries where these facilities and opportun-
nities have been afforded such co-operative organizations
have been carried to the highest usefulness and are recog-
nized as aiding both farmer and consumer. They make the
farmer's selling price higher and the consumer's buying
price lower.
But when we have done this, the farmers must become
responsible for doing the rest. They must learn organi-
zation and the practical procedures of co-operation. These
things we can not do for them, but we can and should give
them the chance to do them for themselves. It will be for
them to demonstrate their readiness and willingness and
ability to utilize such instrumentalities. There is need
for wide dissemination of information and understanding
of methods, and for development of what I may call the
spirit and purpose of co-operation. The various excellent
societies of farmers which are represented here have a large
responsibility in that regard. They have already done
much, but they have much more to do if the American
farmer shall be brought most effectively to help himself
through organization and co-operation.
One of the most serious obstacles to a proper balancing
of agricultural production lies in the lack of essential in-
formation. All too frequently such information is gath-
ered by private interests whose concern is private profit
rather than the general good. Agriculture can not thrive
under conditions which permit the speculator, the broker,
the forestaller, because of superior information, to become
chief beneficiaries. The element of speculation in crop
production is at best so great as to dictate that other spec-
ulative elements, always liable to be manipulated to the
disadvantage of the producer, shall be reduced to the min-
With proper financial support for agriculture, and with
instrumentalities for the collection and dissemination of
useful information, a group of cooperative marketing

organizations would be able to advise their members as to
the probable demand for staples, and to propose measures
for proper limitation of acreages in particular crops. The
certainty that such scientific distribution of production was
to be observed would strengthen the credit of agriculture
and increase the security on which financial advances could
be made to it. The disastrous effects which arise from over-
production are notorious. The congressional joint commit-
tee on agricultural conditions in the valuable report which
it has recently issued, declares that a deficiency of one-
tenth in the production of a particular staple means an
increase of three-tenths in the price; while a deficit of two-
tenths in production will mean an increase of eight-tenths
in the price.
The converse of this is just as emphatically true. In a
recent address to the Congress, I stated this situation thus:
"It is rather shocking to be told, and to have the state-
ment strongly supported, that 9,000,000 bales of cottin,
raised on American plantations in a given year, will
actually be worth more to the producers than 13,000,000
would have been. Equally shocking is the statement that
700,000,000 bushels of wheat, raised by American farmers,
would bring them more money than a billion bushels. Yet
these are not exaggerated statements. In a world where
there are tens of millions who need food and clothing which
they can not get, such a condition is sure to indict the social
system which makes it possible."
It is apparent that the interest of the consumer, quite
equally with that of the producer, demands measures to
prevent these violent fluctuations which result from un-
organized and haphazard production. Indeed, the statistics
of this entire subject clearly demonstrate that the con-
sumer's concern for better stabilized conditions is quite
equal to that of the producer. The farmer does not demand
special consideration to the disadvantage of any other class;
he asks only for that consideration which shall place his
vital industry on a parity of opportunity with others and
enable it to serve the broadest interest.
No country is so dependent upon railroad transportation
as is the United States. The irregular coast lines of Europe,
its numerous indenting arms of the sea as well as its great
river system, afford that continent exceptional water trans-
portation. The vast continental area of the United States is
quite differently situated, its greater dependence upon rail-

road transportation being attested by its possession of
nearly one-half the railroad mileage of the world; and even
this is not adequate. The inevitable expansion of popula-
tion will enormously increase the burden upon our trans-
portation facilities, and proper forethought must dictate
the present adoption of wise and farseeing policies in deal-
ing with transportation.
If broad-visioned statesmanship shall establish funda-
mentally sound policies toward transportation, the present
crisis will one day be regarded as a piece of good fortune
to the Nation. To this time railroad construction, financing,
and operation have been unscientific and devoid of proper
consideration for the wider concerns of the community. To
say this is simply to admit a fact which applies to prac-
tically every railroad system in the world. It is as true
regarding the railroads of Canada and Great Britain as it
is in reference to those of the United States. It is equally
applicable to the railways of continental Europe, in whose
development considerations of political and military avail-
ability have too far overweighed economic useful-
ness. In America we have too long neglected our water-
ways. We need a practical development of water resources
for both transportation and power. A large share of rail-
way tonnage is coal for railroad fuel. The experience of
railway electrification demonstrates the possibility of re-
ducing this waste and increasing efficiency. We may well
begin very soon to consider plans to electrify our railroads.
If such a suggestion seems to involve inordinate demands
upon our financial and industrial power, it may be replied
that three generations ago the suggestion of building 260,-
000 miles of railways in this country would have been
scouted as a financial and industrial impossibility. Water-
way improvement represents not only the possibility of
expanding our transportation system, but also of producing
hydroelectric power for its operation and for the activities
of widely diffused industry.
I have spoken of the advantage which Europe enjoys
because of its easy access to the sea, the cheapest and surest
transportation facility. In our own country it presents one
of the world's most attractive opportunities for extension
* of the seaways many hundred miles inland. The heart of
the continent, with its vast resources in both agriculture
and industry, would be brought in communication with all
the ocean routes by the execution of the St. Lawrence water-

way projects. To enable ocean-going vessels to have access
to all the ports of the Great Lakes would have a most stimu-
lating effect upon the industrial life of the continent's
interior. The feasibility of the project is unquestioned, and
its cost, compared with some other great engineering works,
would be small. Disorganized and prostrate, the nations of
central Europe are even now setting their hands to the
development of a great continental waterway, which, con-
necting the Rhine and Danube, will bring water transporta-
tion from the Black to the North Sea, from Mediterranean
to Baltic. If nationalist prejudices and economic difficulties
can be overcome by Europe, they certainly should not be
formidable obstacles to an achievement, less expensive, and
giving promise of yet greater advantages to the peoples of
North America. Not only would the cost of transportation
be greatly reduced, but a vast population would be brought
overnight in immediate touch with the markets of the
entire world.
This conference needs have no fear of unfortunate effects
from the fullest development of national resources. A nar-
row view might dictate, in the present agricultural stress,
antagonism to projects of reclamation, rehabilitation, and
extension of the agricultural area. To the contrary, if agri-
culture is to hold its high place, there must be the most
liberal policy in extending its opportunity. The war, as was
recently well said by the Secretary of Agriculture, has
brought our country more quickly, but more inevitably, to
the necessity of deciding whether this shall be pre-
dominantly an industrial country, or one in which industry
and agriculture shall be encouraged to prosper side by side,
and to complement each other in building here a community
of diverse interests. If our policy shall be, as it ought; to
encourage the dual development, then we have need to con-
sider the early and continuing reclamation of those great
areas which with proper treatment would become valuable
additions to our agricultural capacity. To this end every
proposal for watering our arid and semiarid land, for re-
claiming cut-over forest areas, for protecting fertile valleys
from inundations, and for draining the potentially rich and
widely extended swamp areas, should be given the full
encouragement of the Government. All this should be a
part of recognized permanent policy. Not otherwise will it
be possible to keep the Nation self-supporting and as nearly
self-contained as it has been in the past.

There must be a new conception of the farmer's place in
our social and economic scheme. The time is long past when
we may think of farming as an occupation fitting for the
man who is not equipped for or has somehow failed at some
other line of endeavor. The successful farmer of today, far
from being an untrained laborer working every day and
every hour that sun and weather permit, is required to be
the most expert and particularly the most versitile of
artisans, executives, and business men. He must be a good
deal of an engineer, to deal with problems of drainage, road
building, and the like. He requires the practical knowledge
of an all-round mechanic to handle his machinery and get
best results from it. The problems of stock-raising and
breeding call for a wide practical knowledge of botany and
plant pathology.
In handling his soils for best results, in using fertilizers,
determining rotations, and in selecting and using feeds for
stock, he has need for a working knowledge of chemistry.
As our timber supply is reduced, his service in conserving
and expanding the timber resources of the farm will be in-
creasingly important, necessitating an intimacy with
forestry and forestation. There is no business in which the
executive talents of the skilled organizer and manager are
more absolutely necessary than in successful farming; and
this applies alike to the producing, the buying, and the sell-
ing phases of farming. Along with all this, the farmer must
have untiring energy and a real love and enthusiasm for his
splendid profession. For such I choose to call their vocation
of the farmer-the most useful, and, it ought to be made
one of the most attractive among all lines of human effort.



Secretary of Agriculture, at convention of Iowa Fair Man-
ager's Association, December 13, 1921.

"Gentlemen, I am glad of an opportunity to meet with
the Iowa State Board of Agriculture and the representa-
tives of the County Fair Association.
"I was interested in what the preceding speaker said of
the relation of your county fairs to the agriculture of the
state. He said very truly that the prosperity of your fairs
depended upon the prosperity of the farm.
"I presume that what you would like to hear from me
is the conditions as we see them down there. I have not any
prepared speech. I have made a few notes to talk to you on
some of the different things that have come up down there
in the way of giving an account of my stewardship to you
people to whom I really owe my allegiance. I don't want to
talk to you on the general depression of agriculture; you
realize it here. I suppose at times you have felt it more
severely out here than anywhere else. I want to say this to
you that this depression is general through practically all
the United States. It is true that some large sections have
suffered perhaps more than others. The farmers of the east
for example have not felt it so severely as in this great corn
belt surplus producing section. There are two reasons for
that. Their agriculture is more diversified in a way and
they have not felt the full burden of the freight rate-
advance as you have out here; in other words they are
nearer the market. Another reason for it, their land is not
nearly as valuable, not worth nearly as much per acre. And
there is still another reason; a good many of them, at least
the territory to the south, are accustomed to take things.
very comfortably and have not been accustomed to push as
hard to get ahead as we have in this western country.
Throughout the south, the cotton producing section;
throughout the range country of the west; throughout the

small grain country of the southwest and northwest, this-
depression has been felt just as much as in Iowa. In the-
northwest conditions are even worse.
One of the first duties, practically the first duty laid upon
me was to loan two million dollars to the grain farmers of
the northwest, particularly Montana and North Dakota.
Congress made the appropriation on March 3rd aid fn,
March 5th when I took office the first duty I had was to say
how we would handle that loan. They simply turned it over
to us to be paid out to the farmers of these sections to bel
used for buying seed grain and under such rules and regu-
lations as we might prescribe. We loaned that to more than
13,000 individual farmers and got it all out in time for
spring seeding. Now we are in the process of collecting it
and I want to say to you in some parts of the northwest.
conditions are very, very serious. Many of these people are.
in actual want for food and for clothing and for the ordi-
nary necessities of life. I am saying this to you not to try
to paint a dark picture, but to try to make you see that the
Iowa farmer is in about the same boat as farmers of other
sections of the county. Naturally you want to know what we
are trying to do about it, what we are doing about it there,.
and I think there is a feeling over the country that not all
is being done -that can be done or that should be done.
The first thing Congress undertook to do in the way of
relief was the enactment of the emergency tariff. Ordi-
narily when we have a great surplus a tariff is not supposed
to do so much good; the surplus itself ought to constitute a
sufficient measure of protection against the importation of
the same sort of things. We had a most unusual situation;
while prices here were ruinously low last spring yet we had
a constant flow of stuff into this country. Wool, for
example, furnishes a very good illustration. Wool was sell-
ing at a ruinously low price; we had a great surplus piled.
up, notwithstanding that we were getting over sixty million
pounds of wool a month coming into the United States. The
reason for it was simply this, that this was the only country
that had a market at all and these people were sending it
here because they could not sell it anywhere else. So the
imposition of the tariff duty did help some and it has helped
I think along other lines. The second measure was enabling-
joint stock land banks to get into business by allowing them
to spring their interest rate on the bonds they sold without
making the same advance in interest rate to the borrower

and the decision of the Supreme Court which allowed them
to get back into business, and this law which made their
bonds more marketable, because at that time bonds were
not as marketable as they are now, resulted in making large
sums available as loans on real estate and helped to that
extent. Another measure was the provision for the increase
of the capitalization of the farm loan bank, authorizing the
treasurer to spend as much as twenty-five million dollars so
as to bring that capitalization up to the legal limit, and the
farm loan banks as joint stock banks have been functioning.
Within the last three months farm loan banks marketed
sixty million dollars of bonds at par. Captain Smith of that
board tells me he anticipates no trouble marketing at least
twelve million dollars worth of bonds in a month, which
means spending that much in loans on farm mortgages.
Then the act which amended the war corporation law and
which empowered that corporation to immensely extend its
loans has been very helpful. Up to last month some sixty-
five million dollars, if I remember rightly, of money had
been loaned for export purposes, and under the new powers
given by the law enacted by Congress probably seventy-five
million dolalrs-I am not undertaking to quote the exact
figures-have already been loaned for relief within the
states. Now I understand that there is a feeling that that
money has not gotten down to the individual farmer as
rapidly as had been hoped for. There is a feeling also that
the corporation might properly loan to the individual
farmer. I don't think that feeling is entertained by anyone
who understands the difficulties of such proceeding. It is
simply out of the question for the corporation to undertake
to deal with the individual farmer here and there. It is im-
possible to set up a machine short of years that could
function in that way. The money has been helpful in this
way, that it has been gotten out to relieve the stress of the
banks in the agricultural districts, and the process of get-
ting it out is being simplified just as rapidly as possible.
We have got a tremendous organization back there now and
putting in large numbers of additional men, and the
machine is being brought into action more rapidly than
those of us who were in close observation of the work had
even hoped, and as time goes on, especially if the bankers
themselves avail themselves of the opportunities offered by
that act the results cannot help but be very helpful in re-
lieving this whole situation of agricultural credit stress.

Those were the laws which Congress enacted looking to-
wards relief of the credit situation. I think they have
been more helpful than people generally realize.
In addition to these laws they enacted a law which for the
first time brought the packers, and the stockyards and the
live stock commission merchants under Federal supervision.
That law is now in force, but part of it is being held up
temporarily by an appeal to the courts for the purpose of
testing the constitutionality of the law. The appeal has
been made by the commission merchants. There were
reports when the law was enacted that the teeth had been
taken out of it, that the amendments adopted by the Senate
had almost emasculated the law. There is nothing to that
kind of talk at all. It is a very strong law. It gives all the
lmpervision and all the power that anyone who is sensible of
his responsibility under it cares to exercise to begin with. It
gives power to go in and examine that whole business, meat
packing and the live stock marketing, all along the line and
if it stands the attack now being made upon it, within a
year or two we will be able to speak from accurate know-
ledge of the conditions affecting live stock marketing and
meat packing. It gives the supervising agency authority to
go so far as to fix charges in the stock yards and fix com-
mission rates, authority which has never been given over
any large business except in times of war.
As I say the commission merchants have attacked the con-
stitutionality of the law on the ground that they are not
interstate agencies and that therefore Congress has no right
to impose restrictions which that law imposes. The case
comes up as a test case from the Chicago yard. Every time
we have one of these periods of agricultural depression
there are always large numbers of people who attribute low
prices very largely to the operations of the boards of trade.
All of us, particularly here, can look back to the depression
previous to this and remember this same sort of agitation.
There has never been enough exact knowledge about the
operation of these future exchanges to justify such legisla-
tion as has often been proposed and certainly no knowledge
which would justify putting them out of business forthwith
as some people think should be done. The act which Con-
gress passed gives us the same sort of authority over the
exchanges and very much the same authority that the pack-
ing and stock yards act gives over the packers. It gives us
authority to go in and examine everything that is going on

on these boards of trade; to study the effect of future trad-
ing on prices; to go into the books of every individual con-
cern. We have authority to require them to make such
reports as we think are necessary to enable us to get at what
is going on there, and if that law stands up within a year
or two we ought to be able to express an intelligent opinion
based on solid facts as to the effect of future trading on
these open exchanges. That law also has been attacked by
a small group of traders on the Chicago board of trade who
are attacking the constitutionality of the law, and on much
the same grounds as the attack on the packer law. The
Supreme Court yesterday issued a decree which suspends in
part all activities in enforcing that law and then has set
the case for hearing on its merits on January 3rd.
I am speaking these things to try to make it plain that the
people in Congress have been trying to do whatever seemed
to be practical to do to help this whole agricultural situa-
tion. I think there is no well considered measure that
seemed to be practical which has been proposed there which
has not met favorable support and which will not become
There are two matters pending which I assume will be
acted upon favorably. One of them is to clear away the
obstructions to the formation of farmers' co-operative mar-
keting organizations. As you know, now and then in this
state and the other states the officers of such organizations
have been arrested by over-zealous local attorneys on the
ground they were a combination in restraint of trade, and
this law is designed to take away any excuse for that sort of
thing. It has passed the House and is on the Senate
calendar and I assume will be acted on at an early date. The
other bill is a proposal to put agricultural representation on
the Federal Reserve Board, and that grows out of the feel-
ing on the part of a large number of people that the policy
of deflation which was inaugurated by the Board a little
more than a year ago has had a disastrous effect upon agri-
culture and has been in considerable part responsible for
the severe drop in agricultural prices without corresponding
drop in other prices. What will happen as to that law I do
not know. Naturally the bankers feel that the Federal Re-
serve Board should be composed of bankers, it is to admin-
ister the credit machinery of the country and only men of
wide banking experience should be on it. On the other side
of the question they point to the fact on the Bank of Eng-

Iand Board there is not a banker, it is composed of repre-
sentatives of the various businesses and industries, and that
the administration of the credit machinery in that country
is with due regard to all industries and businesses. Clearly
if the Federal Reserve Board is to be a board simply to
administer credit, without undertaking to administer that
credit in a way to influence business, then it is a bankers
business. If on the other hand it is to be the sort of an in-
stitution which undertakes to encourage or depress business
according to its judgment, then I think the argument is
good that representatives not only of agriculture but manu-
facturing and labor and other business interests should
have a seat on the Board. That matter is going to come up
for discussion this winter and it will be a very interesting
So much for what Congress has done. And I want to
say aagin that if Congress has not done more it is not for
lack of desire to do more to solve this whole situation. The
difficulty has been to determine what is the practical thing
to do, what will work, what will do more good than harm.
That is the difficulty of the whole affair. It is not an easy
matter to bring about all at once a condition of prosperity
following such a period as we have been through. Here we
had thirty million men in the field with guns in their hands
set to work to kill one another; taken from the walks of
business. We had practically all the civil population of the
world working and planning for that war work and to sup-
port these men in the field; a complete disorganization of
all our ways of doing things up to that time, and you can-
not expect in going through a period such as this that there
is not going to be some disturbance in getting these men
back and started again in the walks of business.
We must take to ourselves a good deal of the blame for
not anticipating such a thing as has come upon us; and
we are to blome here in Iowa as we are elsewhere. Haven't
you men in this room heard men talk two years ago that
you would never see low prices of grain and live stock in
Iowa again, that we were on a permanent war level of
prices and you would never see cheap food again? You
heard men talk also, not only farmers but bankers and bus-
iness men, that Iowa land would never stop until it went
to a thousand dollars an acre. I heard that. I talked in
twenty different counties in Iowa in the spring and early
summer of 1920. I tried to talk and say what all scholars

and economists said, prices were on a war level and we
would go through the same period we had gone through
after every war, an they used to say to me: "Wallace, you
are all right, but you have got this thing sized up entirely
wrong. This land won't go back again, it is never going t6
stop until it gets a thousand dollars an acre." I think all
of you have heard the same kind of talk. I see no use in
bemoaning a fact, but I say we ought to have seen some-
thing of this severe period of restoration which has come
upon us, we are in part to blame just as everybody else is;
not any more to blame than other people for not anticipat-
ing some of it.
Now I want to tell you what the Department of Agricul-
ture tried to do. The Department of Agriculture for forty
years has been seeking increased production. We have
searched the world for new plants and animals. We have
studied in every field of scientific research for ways of
cheapening production, increasing production, to produce
better. The Department had not given the same attention
to what I call the business side of farming; had not studied
the economic side, and it seemed to me that side of the
department work needed strengthening. Very shortly
after I wen there I began to strengthen that by combining
various economic units in the department, getting them
together where they knew one another's work, one man
knew what the other man was working on, was given in-
spiration working together. I sent men over the seas to
look into the foreign market. Our trouble we all said
came from two causes: first, we had stimulated production
as a result of war demand in the hope and in the expecta-
tion no matter if peace did come there was the starving
world overseas to take all we produced at a good price,
and then we felt when peace did come and these people did
undertake to came back to normal times, they did like ev-
ery sensible man did in his own business, they found they
were about broke and they said "we won't buy anything
that we don't have to buy, we will wear our old clothes.
We will not eat more than we need and we will go to work
and pay off these debts." So our foreign demand de-
creased while our production had increased and our costs
of production were the highest ever known.
Then the trouble came to this country and our indus-
tries began to slow down, men were thrown out of work,
our consumption at home decreased, so you had a situation

where forty per cent of our people depending on agricul-
ture were selling their products at far less than cost of
production and are still going down to pre-war prices,
while things they had to have maintained a war level. I
sent men overseas to seek cotton exports, meat exports,
grain exports and other products to see where we could
sell our stuff. People had been saying all we needed to
do was to give these people credit and they would buy our
stuff. We found that was not true. There was no way by
which we could extend credit and get business and increase
materially the stuff we sold overseas. Those people were
doing exactly what we were doing here. The markets were
full and they were not buying as they had done in days
past, buying and storing there, they were buying a hand
to mouth market, they didn't want to take any they didn't
need in the next two or three weeks. That is exactly the
same thing each one of us did.
I think our investigations overseas have been helpful;
they will be especially helpful to us in the future. We
have not been able to greatly stimulate our sales over there,
although I may say this, that until the last two months
our exports of agricultural products have been very, very
much above exports in years just preceding the war. And
until these people get back on a pre-war basis and es-
pecially until they get their financial system stabilized and
quit printing money turned out on the printing presses,
until they stop doing that we must expect a slow trade
from over there.
Then at home as I say I have reorganized the economic
work of the department with a view to not only study this
present emergency but looking into the future and trying
to anticipate such periods as this or less severe periods,
and guard against them. I feel very, very deeply that if
our department of agriculture and our agricultural col-
leges and our farmers' organizations had given even a
half as much study to the economics of agriculture and the
things which influence prices and the operation of the law
of supply and demand and kept in touch all the time with
foreign production and foreign consumption and various
factors influencing the demand for our products-if they
had given even half as much thought to that as they gave
to increased production, we could have anticipated in
large part this trouble that has come upon us. I think
that our whole method of agricultural education and work

,of the experiment stations and work of the federal depart-
ment of agriculture itself and the work of your state
boards of agriculture have got to be reorganized and re-
constructed with a view to getting an understanding of
these great fundamental forces that influence agricultural
prosperity. We find ourselves just in about the same situ-
ation the people of Paris were in when the shells of that
great gun began to fall; they didn't know where they
came from, didn't know what was hitting them, and it took
them a little time to find out and locate it and see where
the trouble was. We have been in about that same condi-
tion in this period of agricultural repression; we haven't
been able to size up our trouble, see what it was hitting us.
We have gone through three of them in my life time and
we have come out of every one of them without realizing
or knowing what was behind them, and studying the busi-
ness side of agriculture.
I hope we will not come out of this without fully appre-
ciating the importance of marketing our crops intelli-
gently, of adjusting production to the needs of consump-
tion and the study of all the factors which influence pro-
duction and price, and if we have learned that lesson from
this then the experience will not have been wholly lost.
Now looking toward the future, we are going to come
through this emergency, we are going to be hurt some, but
the world is going to settle down and pre-war conditions
will largely be restored, and when we get through this as I
see it we are facing an entirely new period in American
agriculture. Heretofore the young man who got a tight
hold of a piece of land and had enough money to buy a
very modest farming equipment and had a good wife and
who had in him a capacity for work, was almost certain to
get ahead. He had to economize; he didn't make money
one year with another on his farm operations, but that
piece of land was steadily increasing in value and he could
see that. He could afford to economize, he could afford to
live almost penuriously because he could see he was getting
ahead through the advance in that piece of land. Now we
have taken up practically all of our easily tillable land.
We have millions of acres which can be brought under cul-
tivation when conditions justify, 'and especially when
prices justify, but all of the easily tillable land has been
taken up and we have come to a period now when we have
skimmed the cream off of the advance in land. We have

'come to the point where we cannot expect these rapid ad-
vances. We have come to the point where the farmer
cannot afford to lose money in his farm operations with
the idea he is going to get it back through increase in value
of land, because the value of land will not increase rapidly
-enough to enable him to do that.
So I see it we are coming now into an entirely new period
in agriculture where farming has got to be put on a solid
business basis just as any other business and where one
year with the other the farmer can be able to make a fair
profit in addition to interest on his investment, and it is
going to take the combined wisdom and judgment of the
best informed men in this whole country to maintain our
agriculture under those conditions. We have loaned for-
eign nations ten or eleven billions of dollars. I say we
have loaned it in dollars. As a mater of fact we have
loaned that much value in commodities. There is not
enough money over there to pay even the annual interest
charge on the money we have loaned them which means
that if they pay back these debts they have got to pay them
back in the same form in which we loaned them, in com-
modities of one sort or another. That means our manufac-
turing industries are going into a period of the most se-
vere competition, and all the more severe because of the
disparity of the money values of the United States and
practically all foreign countries. This is a good country to
sell in, not a good country to buy in. That means our
manufacturers are against the most severe competition
they have ever experienced. To meet that competition they
have got to reduce production costs in every way possible.
That means they are going to demand the cheapest possible
food. They are going to insist on their grains and live
stock products to be just as cheap as they can possibly be
furnished, and they are not going to be particular as to
where they come from.
Then you take the third factor; down to the south of us
is a great agricultural empire, Argentine and Brazil and
Uruguay constitute a tremendous agricultural empire. In
Brazil they can grow anything we grow in Iowa and in
addition grow a lot of tropical products we can't grow.
Shipping rates to these South American countries going to
our consumption centers along the eastern coast and for
250 to 300 miles this side are lower than the shipping rates
from Iowa to those same points. Now you take these three

or four circumstances which I have indicated, and I say
that they challenge the very best thought of our ablest men
both on the farms and in the cities, because when all is said
and done our national prosperity is dependent upon our
farm prosperity; forty per cent of our people depend on
what grows on the farm. That forty per cent, because of
this present condition, their purchasing power is reduced
and the effect is felt upon the remaining sixty per cent.
We have come to the time when we have got to check up
carefully on our marketing as well as on our production of
agricultural products. Speaking of Iowa in terms of Iowa,
seems to me the challenge comes up squarely to the State
Board of Agricultutre, to the State Agricultural College
and to all other agencies instead of Iowa agriculture, in-
cluding bankers, merchants and every citizen of Iowa,-
because we all know Iowa is an agricultural state, the basis
of our prosperity is in the Iowa farm, and it presents a
problem which must have the most careful attention of all
citizens of Iowa.
This tendency for the farmer and business man to regard
their interests as antagnoistic has got to be overcome if
Iowa meets this problem ahead of it in the next twenty
years. We have here thirty-five million acres of the most
valuable land in all the world. Nowhere in the world are
there thirty-five million acres lying in one body that equals
in value of fertility the thirty-five million acres in Iowa.
We have in Iowa the most intelligent farm citizens that
can be found in any similar body of land in the world.
Nowhere can there be found the same number of farmers
having the capacity for large production and intelligent
production. The problem is to organize this whole thing,
reorganize the process with a view to the future. It is a
problem I think the State Board of Agriculture, and you
gentlemen interested in the county agricultural fairs must
take to yourselves seriously. There is not any question
about our coming out of this period. As I say, some of us
are going to get hurt. The problem is not this emergency
now, because I think most men who are familiar with all
conditions which are likely to affect us now are agreed that
we have reached the bottom. We may have some tempo-
rary depressions in the price of corn and other crops, but
we have a right to assume we have turned the row and
are headed now towards better times. The problem is not
alone this present emergency, it is a problem of the future

agricultural policy of Iowa. It brings with it the challenge
to every man who loves his state and loves his fellow citi-
zens here. I would like to see the Iowa fair men and Iowa
State Board of Agriculture take the lead in this. I would
like to see them in a reorganization and directing of the
various agencies which are standing for better agriculture.
I would like to see you set up a state marketing organiza-
tion which would enable us to market our crops more in-
telligently than we have.
The day I left Washington the manager of the Co-opera-
tive Fruit Growers of California was in my office. They
handle mostly oranges. Oranges are a luxury. These Co-
operative Growers of California marketed their oranges and
made a profit on their production and on their marketing.
It simply came about by attacking that marketing problem
as a business organization, and does its marketing intelli-
gently. They grade their fruit, they don't market poor
stuff, they throw it out. They have a co-operative lumber
mill up in one of the California forests where they make
their own boxes. They have inspectors all along the way.
They operate their own refrigerator cars. They study the
demands of the customer in every large city. They do not
flood the market of one city with oranges. They start a car
east and they direct that car wherever they find the market
for oranges is likely to be good by the time they get there.
If something happens before they get to that destination,
the market goes off, they stop it and send it some place
else. In other words, they apply business principles. In
all frankness, we have not done that, and have not made
intelligent organization in Iowa. We have got to do that
if we maintain Iowa agriculture as we must maintain it.
We have got to get the Iowa-farmon a basis where it yields
a fair return on the money investedd in land; where it
yields in addition a fair labor return to the man who
farms, to enable him to live decently, maintain his schools
and churches, maintain his lodges and bring up his chil-
dren and give them educational advantages and social ad-
vantages, to take care of his wife and give her home con-
veniences she has a right to demand and at the same time
maintain the fertility of Iowa land for the generations to
come after us.



At National Agricultural Conference, Washington D. C.,
March 3, 1922:

The subject assigned to me is, you will admit, a large one.
It is a subject of urgent and immediate importance. Upon.
our measure of success in solving this problem depends, not
solely, but largely, on our measure of success in achieving
national prosperity and national welfare. On the other
hand, in the measure that we fail we must in that measure
fail in our efforts to maintain and improve the splendid
heritage handed down to us by our fathers. Land utiliza-
tion embraces, roughly speaking, the land problems of our
Let me give two quotations to show what thoughtful men
have said about the questions with which we are dealing-
questions summed up in the words, the land question. First
of all, let us listen to the words of a scholar, the well-known
economist, Prof. Frank A. Fetter, of Princeton University.
Prof. Fetter says:
"My own conviction has long been that the land question
far transcends any restricted field of economics, and that it
is fundamental to national survival and national welfare. It
is truly a problem calling for statesmanship of the broadest
Let us turn from the scholar to the practical man of
affairs, ''The Empire Builder,'' the late James J. Hill. Mr.
Hill says:
"Land without population is a wilderness and population
without land is a mob. The United States has many social,
political, and economic questions-some old, some new-to-
settle in the near future; but none so fundamental as the
true relation of the land to the national life. The first act
in the progress of any civilization is to provide homes for
those who desire to sit under their own vine and fig tree. A
prosperous agricultural interest is to a nation what good
digestion is to a man."


By policy we mean planning in order to reach desired
ends. A national policy for land utilization means planning
for desired ends with respect to the use of the land. It sig-
nifies that we ascertain what kinds of land we have and
that we put each kind to its best use. The very fact that
we use the term "land policy" signifies the inadequacy of
laissez faire. A land policy includes regulation for the
present and the future of all those natural resources which
we include under the term "land." This regulation means
that we supplement individualism by social control, and
social control by land policy embraces, then, those relations
among men which arise out of land utilization. Social con-
trol, as the experience of the world demonstrates, becomes
more intensive as time goes on, and that with an ever in-
creasing emphasis upon social welfare; but this control may
proceed from private agencies as well as from public
In the United States we have never had a real land policy.
Our course of action has been happy-go-lucky. In other
words, such a plan as we have had has been partial, incom-
plete. Our land settlement has not been based upon any
well-thought-out principles. The Wakefield theory of settle-
ment was advanced in the first half. of the last century.
Whether this theory was correct or incorrect, it was very
carefully worked out and so far as applied in New Zealand
and elsewhere it reached fairly satisfactory results. Accord-
ing to this theory a sufficient price should be asked for new
land to prevent an excessively rapid expansion to bring
about a close, compact settlement of the land with a right.
combination of land, labor, and capital. This theory and
other theories could have received, and, indeed, should have
received, careful consideration in the formulation of an
American land policy, but we taught "Uncle Sam" rich
enough to give us all a farm and we took as a standard for
our homestead act the conditions of the Mississippi Valley,
in which, generally speaking, 160 acres is a rich heritage
and furnishes adequate support for a desirable standard of
living for the farmer. We now know, however, that there
are parts of the country in which 160 acres is not large
enough for decent starvation. We have clear demonstration
of the fact that what we need in a land policy is to take
as our measure not physical area but the economic sig-

nificance of the area; in other words, satisfactory land set-
tlement presupposes quality classification.
It has already been said that a land policy means the
determination of ends that we desire and the adoption by
appropriate means to reach the desired ends. We have not
reached the ends that we desire.
Even before the World War the situation was not satis-
factory and the World War has made a bad situation still
We have the present crisis which requires attention, but a
land policy is fundamental and far-reaching. A land policy
can not be changed radically to fit any temporary emerg-
ency. It must reach across this and succeeding emergencies
and make them less acute and alarming.
Let us, however, give a few words to the present distress-
ing situation. Our farmers have not raised more food and
raw material than the world needs or than the world under
normal conditions could purchase and consume. The first
fundamental fact in our situation is the destruction of a
large proportion of the purchasing power of those who are
normally our customers-the buyers particularly of our
agricultural products. The poverty of Europe is the chief
factor in the distress of American farmers and the conse-
quent general distress of our country.
The populations of European countries are strong and
virile, and only the sheerest ignorance can think of Europe
as decadent, but they are impoverished and they are dis-
couraged. The trouble with our European customers is
partly material, the result of the loss of life and the de-
struction of wealth, but of even more importance is that
part of the trouble which is psychic-in other words, the
state of mind. They feel disheartened. Hope seems to have
abandoned them. In too many cases they feel that this
greatest and richest country in the world is cold and indif-
ferent to their fate.
In establishing a national policy for land utilization, at
the present moment nothing is of more importance for the
American farmer than revival of hope and courage upon
the part of other nations of the world and particularly those
in Europe. They have tremendous productive power and
corresponding potential purchasing power. Let us lend
them a helping hand; let them feel that we are friendly
toward all-Austria and Germany as well as France. We

shall see then a revival of demand for the products of our
American farms.
Another feature of the existing distressing situation is
found in the fact that the high prices of food products dur-
ing the war led to abnormal uses of the land, and a return
to normal conditions must necessarily involve distress. To
this distress we are not indifferent, but it can be remedied
only partially, as it results from social, economic, and
natural laws. As President Harding told us in his opening
address, we have no magic word, no magic wand with which
to work miracles; we achieved our purpose in the W'orld
War, and we think our victory worth the price-but the
price must be paid.
The area of crop land was greatly expanded during the
war, the census showing an increase between 1910 and 1920
of 55,000,000 acres. This expansion was due in part to
higher prices, but it was also due to the splendid response
of the American farmer to patriotic motives. A large in-
crease of production of the staple crops resulted from this
increased acreage. With the coming of peace the effective
dmand for agricultural products diminished, and as a con-
sequence a large agricultural surplus developed.
Pasture land decreased in acreage during the war, owing
to the plowing up of the better pasture land for crops and
reversion of some of the poorer pasture land to forest.
Labor was concentrated on the better lands. In the eastern
half of the United States the area of improved land was
practically the same in 1920 as in 1910, while the area in
crops increased 34,000,000 acres, which must have come
almost wholly from improved pasture. Much of this pasture
land which was plowed up for crops must now revert to
pasture with the return to pre-war or even lower prices for
farm products.
Let us pass now from the present temporary situation,
which before long will belong to history, and consider the
main outlines of the national policy for land utilization. Do
not expect any panacea; there is none outside the disordered
phantasies of cranks. If the program is complex it is be-
cause life, individual and social, is complex. The kind of
world we live in knows no short cut to general prosperity.
No land policy is worthy of a moment's consideration
that is not based upon the classification of land. Let us
place, therefore, first of all, land classification. Call to mind
the most general statements that you hear about land and

ask yourself the question, To what extent does this apply to
all kinds of land? We hear a great deal about conservation,
but not too much about conservation, so far as what we
hear is sense and not nonsense. If you think about it you
will see that a policy of conservation as applied to agricul-
tural land does not apply to forest land or mineral land.
The taxation of land is vital in a national land policy, and
a great deal of the trouble of the present time is due to
faulty policies of taxation of land, but we must have
separate measures of taxation for different kinds of land.
iThis simply calls to mind what all experts on forestry are
agreed upon.
Take the question of pubic ownership versus private
ownership. One can not say that land should be publicly
owned or privately owned. It all depends upon the kind of
land that we are dealing with. The experience of the world
shows that farm land should, in the main, be privately
owned, but with equal clearness world experience shows that.
forest land must be largely publicly owned, if we are to
have suitable areas of forest land suitably distributed over
the country and to raise the forest crops that we need with
the least expenditure of labor and capital on the smallest
area of land.
We can not consider one kind of land alone and reach
satisfactory solutions of the problems involved in a national
policy of land utilization. Here we come to something that
is often overlooked. Forest land must be considered in its
relations to agricultural land; forest land is, after all, one
kind of agricultural land. A good deal of the timberland
of the country is found on farms and the farmers use a very
large proportion of the forest products. The forest is
simply one kind of crop. It has its peculiarities as have
other crops, one of the chief being the time it takes to plant,
care for, and harvest a crop. With forests go certain
by-products, in some cases game, in other cases pasturage,
but the forests of a country should be handled in accordance
with sound, agricultural principles; anyone who has ad-
vanced even through his A B C's in land economies must
condemn most vigorously the policy to separate out the
forest land from the United States Department of Agri-
culture and transfer it to another Department.
But urban land has to be considered in its relations to
other kinds of land; otherwise we make very serious mis-
takes in our land policies. The line separating urban areas

from agricultural areas is a purely artificial one. A great
deal of food production takes place within urban areas, and
this food production may be increased very largely. We
may consider urban areas from many different points of
view. We may discuss the taxation of urban land and the
extent to which the taxation of unimproved urban areas
defrays the expense of the Government and helps to keep
down the tax rate. We may also consider urban areas as a
reserve to be used in emergencies as in the case of the World
War, when it was said that our war gardens saved the
But there are other respects in which the urban area
has significance from the point of view of agricultural pro-
duction. We find in cities the great terminals of our rail-
way systems and also in cities we find the great harbors
with their shore lands. The cost of carrying farm products
depends in no small measure upon the way in which we
handle these urban areas. Urban land must be considered
along with other kinds of land in framing a national land
From the point of view of agriculture it is imperative to
classify land with a view to determining what areas should
be devoted to crops, to grazing, to forests, since we must
have distinct policies for each one of these kinds of land. In
so far as we depart from wise policies by putting one kind
of land into use which is appropriate for another kind of
land, we become involved in difficulty. This is illustrated
by what has already been said regarding the trand of land
utilization during and after the World War.
With respect to control we may say that crop land should
be mainly privately owned and controlled. It is so now and
it should be left so. Grazing land is largely under private
control, but increased social control is imperative. Unfor-
tunately, land suitable for grazing only has been plowed up
in an attempt to use it as arable land, and there are cases
where once played up the destruction has been such that 100
years would not be sufficient to repair the damage. In fact,
the good elements in the land have blown away. There is a
difference of opinion on the part of authorities with respect
to the extent to which the grazing land in the far West
should be publicly owned and in the extent to which it
should be privately owned with a measure of social control.
The chief difficulty is with range land publicly ownedfi pri-
votely used, without adequate control of the mode of use.

Students agree that the value of live-stock production could
be increased by millions of dollars by the scientific use of
the range land. The grazing homestead act is a most inade-
quate solution. In any case the grazing land of the country
requires its own policies, and, if these policies are not wise,
the county must suffer seriously. How few people east of
the Rocky Mountains know that the area of natural grazing
land approximates the area of arable farm land.
Forest land should eventually be mainly in public
lands in order that the forest crop may be suitably located
and properly managed. There are technical reasons for
this which belong to the science of forestry and into which
we can not now enter. The experience of the world, how-
ever, confirms the position taken here. We see the harm
done by unwise policies in cases where mountain sides have
been used for farming, where they have been plowed up,
where the soil has washed away, and where it would tage
hundred os years to restore the damage. What we need is
an economic survey, utilizing the results of land classifica-
tion of the Geologival Survey, of the soils survey, and the
admirable work os the surveys conducted by the division of
land economics, and of any other surveys that may have
been made-a survey which will be continuous, but which
each year shall yield a crop, as it were; that is to say, in-
crease our knowledge.
The suggestion of a continuous survey should alarm no
one. We should use the knowledge we have gained, which
is sufficient for many practical purposes, but, on the other
hand, we should work along without end, expanding as
time goes on and as the use of land becomes more and more
intensive. It is to be hoped that in time, through the co-
operation of various agencies, a map of each selection
of the United States will be made, giving soils and all other
features, not only physical but economic. This survey
would serve not only the purpose of providing inadequate
information for the most economical use of the land, but
also to make possible scientific valuation of the land as the
basis for credit, taxation, and sale.
Corresponding to this general survey of natural re-
sources, we need the cultivation of the field of land eco-
nomics-a field of work upon which an excellent beginning
has been made in the United States Department of Agri-
culture. But in addition to public agencies, it is essential
to the establishment of a sound national policy that we

should have the help of a private organization, supported
by voluntary gifts and contributions, like the Institute for
Research in Land Economics, because the institute, cover-
ing the entire field of land economics, is able to gather to-
gether in a synthesis the results achieved by all public bu-
reaus and departments.
I have attempted to frame a definition of land economics,
which I will quote, although on account of lack of time I
am forced to do so without note or comment.
"Land economics is that division of economics, theoret-
ical and applied, which is concerned with the land as an
economic concept and with the economic relations which
grow out of land as property.
"As science, land economics seek the truth for its own
sake. It aims to understand present facts pertaining to
land ownership in all their human relationships, to explain
their development in the past, and to discover present
tendencies of growth. As an art, it aims to frame con-
structive land policies for particular places and times."
But to make this definition more thoroughly intelligible
I will add the definition of what a land policy signifies:
"A land policy takes as a starting point the existing sit-
uation with respect to land, land as here used being equiv-
alent to all the natural resources of the country. It exam-
ines the processes of evolution by which the existing situa-
tion has been reached and proceeds to develop a conscious
program of social control with respect to the acquisition,
ownership, conservation, and uses of the land of the coun-
try and also with respect to the human relations arising
out of use and ownership."
Our country does not stand alone. American economic
life has become a part of world economic life. Economic
evolution has carried us beyond national isolation as a
possibility. We need not argue this, because we are dealing
with facts, and to the economist it must seem like denying
the rotation of the earth to dispute this proposition. Noth-
ing that anyone can say will change this fact any more
than the commands of Canute could change the rising of
the tide.
More than this may be said. We are unworthy descend-
ants of the fathers of this Republic if we do not advance
beyond their knowledge and practice to correspond with
economic evolution. They were progressives. They ad-
vanced beyond the knowledge and practice of their fath-

ers. Shall we cease to be progressive and attempt to
frame our policy upon conditions of George Washington's
Credit has already received attention from other speak-
ers. It becomes a land utilization problem in newer sec-
tions of the country where settlement is being developed,
and the credit policy must be somewhat different from that
which is suitable for regions or established farming.
No matter how long interest rates may ultimately fall,
and it is recognized that suitable credit machinery may
help in bringing about the result, the interest level must
ultimately be governed by the amount of capital and the
demand for it. The issue of paper money and other similar
schemes, no matter how useful in certain political exigen-
cies, is but the beating of the tom-toms, as witness the re-
sults in Europe today. The continually recurring sugges-
tion of the political charlatan that the interest rate may be
lowered by putting the printing presses to work or other-
wise inflating the currency, was sufficiently disproved by
the experience of all countries during the recent war when
the process of inflation resulted in continually mounting
rates of interest. The slightest breath of suspicion, the
very suggestion of repudiation or repayment in cheap
money raises the rate of interest which farmers must pay.
A land policy must look toward the maintenance of peace
in the world, not merely international peace but what is
even more essential, peace at home. The prosperity of war
is temporary and illusory. War spells poverty. Our land
policies must have relation to world land policies and be
of such a nature as to provide the nations of the world
with food and raw materials.
In our own country there must be a proper proportion
between agricultural production and the production of
non-agricultural goods and services. This is fundamental
in the establishment of a national land policy.
It is an elementary proposition in economics that we can
not have absolute overproduction; in other words, we can
not have too much production in general. The purpose of
production is the satisfaction of human wants, and human
wants know no limit. They expand with their satisfaction
-"they grow by what they feed on." It has also been
laid down as a general principle in economics that the sat-
isfaction of any lower want creates a want of a higher or-

der. We satisfy the animal man, then the intellectual,
spiritual, aesthetic man demands his satisfactions.
Today, as never before, we must emphasize the truth
that man can not consume except as he produces. If we
produce less beef we must consume less beef. This is true
as that two and two make four and not five, and that hu-
man beings, by the large, can not get something for noth-
ing. The crying need now is for more production. To thing
that we can become generally more prosperous by reducing
hours of labor below a proper normal length of the working
day, and by cutting down efficiency in production, is sheer
insanity if it is not revolutionary.
Now while this general elementary proposition in eco-
nomics can not be stressed too strongly, it is just as true
that we may have particular and special overproduction
and generally this means disproportionate production. The
problem to which attention is called as a land utilization
problem is that of proper proportion in the different kinds
of economic production. It is this which must be borne
in mind if we are not to have a recurrence of agricultural
distress. Never has enough food been produced to satisfy
the hunger needs of all human beings, but there have been
times when in parts of the world we have had a very seri-
ous disproportionate development of food production.
Food has been produced at a loss and has frequently found
no market. Wants have existed, but purchasing power has
been lacking. There has been a lack of co-ordination and
balance of economic forces.
Price fixing will never bring prosperity. No price can
be mentioned which would make all the farmers prosper-
ous. It is quite conceivable that with the price of wheat
at $5 a bushel we should decrease the number of those pro-
ducing wheat at a loss. At the same time we would have
a price which would spell poverty to the non-agricultural
Price fixing tends to stratification and to a stationary
economic condition, and especially would this be the case if
it took the form of price stabilization through the purchase
of surplus by government, apart from possible national
bankruptcy. The tendency, if carried far, would be, to use
a phrase of the late Theodore Roosevelt, "to Chinafy" our
country; but I do not like to use the word "Chinafy," be-
cause it does injustice to China. It would tend to prevent
progress, which is dependent upon ready transfers of labor

and capital from pursuit to pursuit, so that all of the pro-
ductive forces may be employed. If there is a permanent
and general tendency in agriculture to give unduly small
returns, it signifies investment of labor and capital in
agriculture and those producing under unfavorable condi-
tions should seek other occupations.
Price stabilization is desirable in so far as it can be ob-
tained through adjustment of production to demand, the
full use of all obtainable information, and the better ad-
justment of marketing machinery.
All land policies must have as their aim general pros-
perity; otherwise they are doomed to failure. The farmer
must have prosperity, which means prosperity for other
economic groups in the country, and, indeed, in the world.
What we need is indicated in the formula of three G's,
namely, good farming by good men on good land. We
must put land into its proper use; we must continue the
efforts already begun, for which our State departments of
agriculture, our agricultural colleges, and the splendid
United States Department of Agriculture deserve our
highest praise. We must do our best to lessen the number
of submarginal men, and here reference is made merely to
those measures which are agreed upon by substantially all
eugenists, to lessen the number of the absolutely unfit,
while at the same time we do our best to cultivate all hu-
man powers, ethical and spiritual, as well as economical.


The taxation of land is a large problem in itself and can
be treated now and here only in the very broadest terms.
At the meeting of the National Tax Association, held in
Bretton Woods, N. H., last September, it was the general
consensus of opinion that the burden of taxation resting
on land was becoming excessive-in fact, confiscatory. Al-
ready we find places like Michigan where the burden of
land is forcing it back into the hands of the State, and it
is said on reliable authority that in Ohio special assess-
ments on farm land are absorbing all the value of the land
and threatens to force many farmers into hopeless bank-
ruptcy. At the same time we find agitation for the appro-
priation through taxation of all land values. It is, there-
fore, a fundamental problem in land utilization whether or
not we shall retain private property in land. At least it is

iur opinion that private property is beneficial alike to so-
ciety and the individual. We take the position that meth-
ods of taxation should receive careful attention to the end
that the tax burden should become more and more widely
diffused, just as the benefits of government are more and
more widely diffused. Property, whether in the form
of improvements or of land, should be taxed; otherwise
this tax burden tends to become confiscatory.
Land settlement embraces a variety of problems in land
utilization. We have discussed several of .them already in
treating these problems-as to the proper proportion be-
tween agricultural production and the production of non-
agricultural goods and services; the right proportion be-
tween the various requisites of production; the credit
problem; and, in fact, all that has been presented has its
bearing on land settlement. Among other problems the
following are mentioned:
First. The political and social conditions which result
from the quality of the settlers, because we want in the fu-
ture landowning farmers who will resist new tyrannies as
actively as our forefathers resisted old tyrannies.
Second. The adaptation of policy to the various ele-
ments comprising the population, to their relations, actual
and prospective, with a clear understanding of the facts
that these relations must be based on similarities and dif-
ferences, past and present.
Third. Methods of attracting to agricultural land good
agricultural labor and training it as a source of supply for
land settlement.
A fourth very serious problem is that of wise selection
of land. It is in land selection that the settler most fre-
quently makes his failure, and as this is a case where the
purchaser (the settler) is unable, and necessarily unable,
to judge of quality of the purchase which is to afford him a
living and a home, he should be provided with adequate
help by various social agencies, private and public. Noth-
ing is more pitiful than cases of honest, hard-working set-
tlers cheated out of their little homes by unscrupulous
dealers. One case only-a man had a little home in Chi-
cago and was induced to exchange it for a so-called farm,
which consisted of worthless swamp land. He toiled in
vain, his wife died, he went insane, and his children scat-
tered. Would hanging be too good for this unscrupulous

agent In another case the settler went back to Chicago
and became a bolshevik.
The fifth problem is that of land classification and with-
drawal from settlement of unsuitable land.
The sixth problem is that presented by the high capitali-
zation of land values.
The seventh problem is that of wise land planning and
the closer settlement of the land.


The reclamation of land plays a large role in land utili-
zation. Others have discussed this problem. Here it is
necessary only to emphasize merely the fact that recla-
mation applies to many different kinds of potentially good
land, i. e., swamp lands, cut-over lands, irrigable lands,
worn-out soils, etc. The policy of reclamation must be
viewed as a national policy, and money must not be expend-
ed beyond prospective returns; otherwise capital is wasted.
In other words, we must have proper balance between cost
and return.


Given needed legislation, land utilization requires satis-
factory administrative agencies. Let us remember that this
problem, like all administrative problems, is only sec-
ondarily a legislative problem. It has already been sug-
gested that we need land commissions, State and Federal,
to help bring about good settlement. We need these agen-
cies for other aspects of land utilization. The policies grow
more complex as wealth and population increase. The ad-
ministrative agencies are to guide, to direct, to enforce, to
exercise various degrees of control. Laws establishing them
must be broad in scope and of a kind to attract this high
service talent equal to any that the country affords, men
who will regard their office as an opportunity to serve, put-
ting their souls into the work.


We do not know enough about tenancy to decide what is
a normal amount of tenancy in an old, settled country.
It may be 20 or it may be 30 per cent. Certainly it must

vary with the racial composition of the population. We
do know that there is much bad tenancy. We do know
poor tenants account for a part of this bad tenancy. We
do know that there is much good tenancy. We do know
that tenancy is very frequently a rung on the agricultural
ladder. We find in some places that tenancy is merely a
method of transferring property from generation to gen-
eration-the tenants being sons, sons-in-law, etc. We find
farms in which every tenant, becomes a farm owner, or 100'
per cent own producing farms. We need more light and
we need to help the more capable tenants to become farm
owners; in some cases additional credit may be needed, but
we have inadequate data. We need not want incapable men
to become farm owners, and we do not want to encourage
attempts to buy land with excessive grants of credit, lead-
ing only to ruin. To give a man 95 per cent of purchase
price of land through public grants of credit would be
as disastrous as to encourage men to gamble in futures.
Finally and lastly, we must emphasize the often-over-
looked fact that a modern farm is a large enterprise worthy
of our best brains. Our agriculture needs big men capable
of big things. A great many in writing on agriculture seem
to think of it as a small business for small men. They would
so restrict the possibilities of land ownership that it would
not attract the kind of farmers who helped to establish our
independence and who framed our marvelous Constitution.
In our early days our greatest statesmen lived on the land'
and were proud to be farmers. It was not necessary to,
legislate them into office. They were our natural, our
voluntarily selected leaders. We think of men like Madison,.
Monroe, and Jefferson, and, above all, Washington. Our
land policies, while giving every opportunity for capable
young men to rise, must at the same time be of such a char-
acter as to keep up the breed of big men among our farmers.


By DR. FRANK L. LOVELAND, Topeka, Kan.

At Kansas Agricultural Convention January 15, 1920.

The only plea which I can offer for appearing before you
tonight is the plea of sympathy with the work which you
represent. The first eighteen years of my life I spent on the
farm. That is where all great men come from, and I fully
appreciate what former Secretary of the Treasury, Mr.
Leslie M. Shaw, meant when he said, "No man ever came
to greatness who had not at some time or other gone out
on a cold, frosty morning, barefooted, on a farm, and driven
up a cow, and stood and warmed his feet in the place where
she had lain." I know just how it feels, but, gentlemen, it
is not necessary that I should offer any eulogy concerning
the farmers of Kansas, or, indeed, the farmers of America.
When the history of this great war shall be written, there
are going to be at least six pages of that history that will
be noted. Three of the pages will be white and three of
them will be black. Of those three white pages, ladies and
gentlemen, one page will be given to extoll the courage and
heroism of our boys who put on the uniform of Uncle Sam
and went to win this war. Another page will be devoted to
the women of America, who never faltered, though their
faces sometimes grew as white as if the ashes of at sepulchre
had been sifted upon them. They stood by, and the woman-
hood of America will have one of the whitest pages in the
history of this great war; and the third great white page,
any friends, will be the page that will be devoted to the
farmers of America, who never flinched, who never halted,
who bent their backs to the great task of feeding a famish-
ing world. And those three pages will be, I think, as a
seraph's wing.
I hardly dare to trust myself to mention the three black
pages that will be written. One of them will have to be
devoted to the seditious and accursed tribe in this country
and under our flag that were continually harping and halt-
ing the work of this government in the winning of this war,
while the rest of us were trying to keep our mouths shut and
be loyal and stand by. If the devil don't get that kind of 'a
gang there is not any use to keep a devil in this country
at all.

And another page will have to be devoted to that tribe
of an accursed kidney that sought to profiteer upon the
people of this country, and feed themselves fat upon even
the very blood of the boys of our country, and were willing,
like Judas Iscariot, to sell the Christ of Democracy for dirty
pieces of silver. The profiteers in wealth.
And gentlemen, there will have to be another black page
to record the profiteering labor, that sought to halt pro-
duction and went on strike when the country's life was in
The tragedy of this war was so great words cannot
express it. Do you know, my friends, that there was taken
out of the productive elements of this world by this awful
war enough men and women, who sleep tonight in seaweed
sepulchre or blood-drenched grave, who went down to death
from starvation, disease, or who are tonight going through
the world blind, maimed, unfit for the work of the world,
because of their wounds, enough of them that if you were
to form them into a procession, form them eight abreast,
this great host of dead, and some almost worse than dead,
form them eight abreast, ten feet apart, one line behind the
other, start them out of Broadway, New York, and tell them
to march westward until the end of the procession came, do
you know that procession would have to march out from
New Yoork to Kansas City, to Los Angeles, then turn north-
ward from San Francisco, to Portland, to Seattle, then
swing back across the Canadas, through Winnipeg, Torontoa
to Montreal and then have to head southward, down
through New England, and pass the classic halls of old
Harvard and Yale, and when the head of this procession
reached the Hudson, there would still be nearly a thousand
miles of that procession yet waiting to get out of Broadway,
New York; and such an upheaval as this in the world has
touched every home, every fireside, every farm, every busi-
ness, every profession and gentlemen and ladies, of this
society, you and I today are facing the period that is fol-
lowing that dreadful holocaust, and we have got to look
some things squarely in the face.
In this period, when the world would gladly have re-
turned to peace and equality, we are obliged to face the fact
ignorance and anarchy are now reaching for the very pillars
of civilization, just as autocracy reached for the pillars of
democracy a little over five years ago.
Twenty-six years ago Herbert Spencer, that philosopher

of England, writing to a personal friend in the city of
Washington, who had made inquiry concerning his ideas of
the future of America, declared that America at that time
was beginning to foster certain conditions that inside of
fifty years will possibly mean either military dictatorship or
a commune. When Mr. Maccaulay, the great historian, was
asked about the future of America, he said he would have
to appeal to the twentieth century, "because," said Mr.
Maccaulay, "a motley combination, called cosmopolitan,"
was in danger of reaching a condition where if some Caesar
or some Napoleon did not rise to wield the arm of power
over it, some Hun or Vandal might destroy it as they had
destroyed old Rome. "With this difference," said Mac-
caulay, "the Hun and the Vandal that destroyed Rome
came from without, but the Hun and the Vandal that will
destroy America will come from within, engendered by
your own institutions."
De Tocqueville, the great French statesman, declared that
democracy in America was still an experiment, and that we
had not yet as a people demonstrated our ability to solve
the problems that our democracy would raise.
Now whether these men were prophets or not, whether
their predictions are worth the air that it took to voice
them, I cannot undertake to answer, except to say to you,
my friends, that there are things trembling upon the hori-
zon of our American life today that might make us feel that
these men after all were prophets, and that to their predic-
tion we should give earnest heed.
If you are to ask me what is the center of world disturb-
.ance today, of this great disturbance that has turned Eu-
rope into a madhouse, that has caused our senate and our
national Congress to confer closely and keenly concerning
certain laws that we never had supposed would be needed
in a democracy, that is now asking for nearly two millions
of dollars to be appropriated especially to deal with a cer-
tain storm center that has caused even the legislature of
Kansas to be convened in special session now-now don't
you pre-judge what I am to say-I say, if you were to ask
me what is the storm center of it all, I should reply un-
resitatingly that it is the labor problem of the world. Now,
don't get uneasy, I am not going-to make a labor speech,
either pro or con. That is not my business nor my pur-
pose. But I am here to say, ladies and gentlemen, that this
war has been a revelation, especially to what are known as

the laboring classes of the world, that have borne the heavy
burden of it in blood, if not in treasure. They have learned
some things; chief among these, they have learned their
own power, and what that power can accomplish when it
acts with a unity of purpose; and you know, ladies and
gentlemen, as well as I do, that back and beneath all that
which is going on lies something that is fundamental, that
must be considered by every intelligent man and woman.


Now, possibly it may help in the consideration of it if we
were to reflect upon this. There have been but three great
labor systems in all the history of mankind. We are now
living in the third system, which I believe is to pass. the
first great labor system known to history was that called
the slavery system of labor, when the slaves toiled for the
master for his food and clothes. Now, it is not easy for
you and me to adjust our mental machinery to take in the
fact that when Jesus of Nazareth walked the shores of
Galilee that 75 per cent of the whole human family was in
slavery, when Nero would fatten the cocks for the table by
feeding them the flesh of freshly killed slave children; you
know for centuries, stretching clear back to the great dawn
of history, the work of the world was done by slave labor.
The system stretched across the centuries. Finally it
came down into your lifetime and mine, and into this coun-
try. I was a baby in the cradle when our fathers, yours
and mine, left their tears upon our faces as they kissed us
good-bye and went into that awful conflagration called the
Civil War. The pathetic ashes of that conflagration lie
tonight in a million sepulchres that stretch from the pato-
mac to the far off Rio Grande. In that conflagration sla-
very as a labor system perished in this country, but it was
only about thirty-five years ago that slavery perished in
Russia, when over sixty millions were liberated. That was
the beginning of the end of it in the world.

The second great labor system was what we call the fea-
dalistic system of labor, when the lords owned the land and
the laborers worked for them in return for food, clothing
and protection. We are not so familiar with-this, and yet,
ladies and gentlemen, that was the root, or cause, of most
of the wars in Europe for more than 500 years. It lay by

the very root of this great war through which we have just
passed. The life of old Frederick the Great, who was con-
temporary with the time of our own national constitution,
took the feudalistic system of Europe, codified it, systema-
tized it, wrought it into one of the most deadly militaristic
systems of feudalistic philosophy known to mankind. Bis-
marck, in later years, put the Prussian uniform upon it,
and in 1866 drew his devilish sword and drove it to the
bloody hilt into the heart of the old German state. True,
there was an old Germany of the Rhine, the Germany of
Saxony, Wurtemburg, Baden, and those German states that
loved liberty, the old Germany of Heine, Lessing and
Beethoven, the old Germany of art and poetry, and re-
ligion, but when Bismarck finished that dastardly deed the
old Germany had lost her soul. It bowed its neck to the
Prussian yoke and handed its soul over to the house of
Hohenzollern, and from that time, as Goethe, the great Ger-
man poet, said on one occasion, "Then she put out the
light. "
You will remember there was only a very brief period
after this until the Franco-Prussian war was fought by
Bismarck to accenuate this accursed feudalistic system up-
on Europe, and when this kaiser of infamous memory, who
is now chopping wood in Holland, unfortunately at the
wrong end of the axe, when he came to the throne thirty-
one years ago, coming with a taint in his blood that had
been the curse of the Hohenzollerns for a century, a taint
that made him an epileptic as a child and a monomaniac
as a man, he became obsessed with the notion that that
whole feudalistic system that had been Prussian and not
German, could be made to obtain over the world.
On that wonderful June day of 1914, a pistol shot
started the whole human family on a mad race toward hell;
and let us thank God, ladies and gentlemen, that our Amer-
ican boys got into it just in time to save the kaiser from
accomplishing his hellish purpose. Let us not forget that.
But with the passing of the house of Hohenzollern in Prus-
sio, the house of Hapsburg in Austria, the house of Ro-
manoff in Russia, there has passed, thank God, the last
exponents of the feudalistic labor system on this planet.
You have seen that come to pass in your lifetime.
The third labor system, ladies and gentlemen, is the sys-
tem that is known as the wage system of labor. The wage
system of labor is largely the result of modern invention.

As you know, there have been more great inventions in the
last fifty years than in all the 5,000 years that preceded it.
What caused it? This, that seventy-five years ago the
gifted sons thrust their arms in under the ribs of the earth
far enough to touch the hidden secret of chemistry and
electricity, and chemistry and electricity are responsible
for most of the great modern invension, as you know it. For
instance, when you get into an automobile, remember that
automobile carries you not because there is an engine in it.
We have had them before. Not because it has wheels, or a
body, but simply because of a chemical and an electrical
action that you are able to cause to take place in a single
drop of gasoline, one drop after the other, but just as
chemistry and electricity have made the automobile and
the aeroplane a possibility, so they have made possible all
great modern tools and machines that today are doing the
work of the world, that yesterday was done by the muscle
of the old slave, or the old feudal serf.
Now, then, as soon as these great inventions were tossed
into the lap of mankind, people of genius, thrift, initiative,
and of capital, speedily got control of most of the ma-
chines and the tools, naturally so, and they began to em-
ploy the laboring men to use these tools and the machines
in the work of the world not for food and clothing, nor pro-
tection, but for a wage, thus giving rise to what is known as
the wage system of the labor world. Then what naturally
followed? The tool owner on the one hand and the tool
users on the other; the tool owners began to combine the
tools and the machines, and their money, and their capital,
in order that they might do bigger things in the industrial
and economic world, such as the building of great railroad
systems across the continent, and so on, and for the first
time, then you began to hear such words of monopolies,
combines, corporations, trusts. Listen to me, folks, those
are words of recent origin. The legal department had to
inaugurate a new department, known as corporation law,
to take care of the situation. Now we need not be sur-
prised at these combinations of capital. It was necessary
for the doing of big work. But on the other hand, you see
the laboring man, the wage earner, beginning to combine
with his fellows, and you see the beginning of the labor
union and kindred organizations, in order that labor might
more successfully compel the corporations and so on to pay
a bigger wage; and gentlemen, let us not forget that the

same logic that supports any combination of capital for
any purpose must support a combination of labor for the
same purpose.
But now, then, you ask me why it is that there was fric-
tion between capital and labor ? Why listen. The old slave,
under the slavery system worked for his food and clothing
and that is all he got. He didn't need to worry about it.
The old selrf under the feudal system worked for food,
clothing and protection, and that is all he got. He need not
worry about it, but the wage earner under the wage system
gets neither food, clothing nor protection. He gets only his
wages, and the pay envelope becomes to him of prime im-
portance, because the pay envelope has in it his food and
his clothing, or otherwise. It has in it the piano for his
home, the rugs for his floor, the automobile for his family,
the college for his children, or otherwise. That is why it is
that you have always seen so much friction concerning the
matter of wages. It is the necessary result of a system.
I am not arguing this, I am simply stating it, in order'to
say something else. Now the friction between capital and
labor, you saw it before the war, that friction would even
break out into a flame, and sometimes quite a conflagration,
and anybody with half an eye could see that there was going
to be a fire some day, but when the war came Uncle Sam
called up both capital and labor to lay aside their differ-
ences that we might win this war. Not all of them did it, but
enough did, thank God, to win the war, and if we had not
done it we would have lost this war. But now the war is
over, the volcano of battle is no longer belching. Big busi-
ness is gathering itself for a mighty movement ahead, and
labor is rolling its sleeves to the shoulder and saying the
hour has come for them to get what they want. Why, ladies
and gentlemen, do you know that in the last twelve months
we have had more men out on strike in this country than
we had men who went into the World War ? You have seen
more labor disturbances in the last twelve months than you
have seen in the last twelve years. Talk about the high cost
of living. Put this down in your little book. This country,
in the last year, has produced only about 60 per cent of
what it produced in the year before America entered the
war, and we are consuming 30 per cent more than we con-
sumed when America entered the war. What is the result?
The old law of supply and demand, that is as exorable as
the law of gravitation-and you cannot monkey with it

much more successfully than you can with a buzz saw-is in
operation, and the only way to cure the trouble is to get
back, or, rather, if you please, let me say this, the way
to cure the high cost of living is to declare an absolute truce,
or armistice in the labor and industrial and economic busi-
ness world for just twelve months, and everybody roll up
their sleeves and go to work, and produce what America can
produce. Begorra, when I was on the farm we had the
eight-hour system in vogue on the farm. It was eight hours
in the forenoon and eight hours in the afternoon and, if we
could have that for twelve months in this country you would
solve your whole problem of the cost of living. But don't
forget that the granaries and cupboards and storehouses of
Europe are as naked as Mother Hubbard's cupboard. Mr.
Hoover tells you there are multiplied millions over there
that will starve to death before the robins meet again. More
European buyers are standing at the doors of the American
factories today than ever before in the history of American
trade. America needs to produce. Listen to me. Food sup-
supply depends upon soil and water, and do you know
that this hemisphere has a million square miles more till-
able soil than all Europe, Asia and Africa combined?
Seventy-five per cent of the fresh water of this globe is
upon our shore. European and Asiatic mountain ranges
are on their eastern borders, and you know the great trade
winds that carry the water move from the east toward the
west, and in those far off countries yonder across the sea
you see the vast number of acres untillable because the
water is precipitated upon their eastern seaboard and
leaves the great bulk of the lands unwatered, but i'l
America, both north and south, our great mountain ranges
are upon our western border, and the life-giving clouds
sweep across our nation almost from the Statue of Lib;ety
to the Golden Gate before they break are precipitated upon
the rocky ribs of the Sierras or the Andes. We can produce
it. I tell you, ladies and gentlemen, America, if she will can
feed the world, even if the Europeans and Asiatics don't do
very much. What we need in this country is to have our
ability transformed into availability to settle the cost of
This labor friction that is on, anybody with half an eye
can see that something is radically wrong. What are the
solution of it. We have had three great labor systems.
We are now having three great solutions offered for the

labor difficulties. May'I mention them to you? The first,
and I think the most sensible solution that is being offered
is, that the wage system, as a system, as we have had
it in the past, should pass, and give place to a system
of cooperation between capital and labor, and an appli-
ction of the principles of democracy to the indutsrial
world. We have a democracy in our politics, let us have it
in our industries, and I don't mean by that that our indus-
tries shall be ruled by an autocrat on one hand nor by an
I. W. W. on the other. The United States Chamber of
Commerce is advocating at this time the principle of cooper-
ation by which labor, as well as capital, shall sit in at the
council tables of the industries of this country and share the
responsibilities, as far as it is possible to do in the adjust-
ment of the business enterprises of the country, in the in-
dustrial world, and ladies and gentlemen, do you know that
just as people for the last forty years have had to come to
Kansas for great ideas, they are coming to Kansas now, to
see enacted into legislative form the first great, magnificent,
industrial program for adujstment of differences between
capital and labor that has been proposed in any state in
this union ?
What we want to understand is that capital has rights,
and labor has rights, and that there are wrongs in capital
and wrongs in labor. Ladies and gentlemen, some things
are eternally and everlastingly right, and there are things
that are eternally and everlastinly wrong. For all too long
capital has been saying to the public, "The public be
damned." That is not profane; I am quoting. Now we
have reached the place in many places where labor is saying,
"To hell with the public."
Now, there is another solution being offered, and that is
the socialistic method or settlement. Now don't get uneasy,
old fellow. Yes, I know you, but listen. There is a method
of settlement by which, through a change in our entire form
of government, from that of a republic to a socialistic
democracy, the government will own all the land, and all
natural resources, and all the methods of transportation,
distribution, communication, all public utilities, all organ-
ized industries, and that, it is claimed, will stop the friction.
But the sane, sensible socialist says this can be brought
about through the orderly method of governmental evolu-
tion. All right, I am not here to argue that either pro or
con, except to say to you, gentlemen, if you don't want

your land all owned by somebody else than yourself, and
all the rest of it, you want to study this thing pretty care-
fully. Gentlemen, never forget this, that America was
founded, has been maintained and reached its present great
place in the nations of the world with the basic principle,
the fundamental rights of the individual to own and control
his own property. I think it is time that that should be
But neighbors, passing this, there is another form, a form
that is today one of the greatest perils of democracy,
namely, that form of government which is coming to the
world under the guise of new liberty, a liberty that calls
itself Bolshevism. Now gentlemen, liberty, per se, is a
splendid thing, but liberty, before it can be understood and
applied to human affairs, must square itself with the ques-
tion, "How are you going to use your liberty ?"
In the shadow of every good lurks the demon of some
proportionate evil. Now let me say I believe in the rights
of ownership of private property. I believe in the labor
unions, as organizations seeking the betterment of the la-
boring people. But listen: Bolshevism comes seeking
neither the right nor the privileges of capital or labor. It
simply seeks to use both to foster its own nefarious pur-
poses. It was my privilege when I was in New York City
last spring to have a personal interview with a man whose
name has been much in public print in recent months. I
refer to that fellow that is called Ludwig Martine, the
self-styled ambassador of bolshevism in America, and
therefore when I succeeded in getting to him I asked him
the question, "What is Bolshevism?" May I give you his
reply? "Bolshevism," said he, "is simply the overturning
of the whole social structure of the world, when those who
have been at the bottom heretofore are coming to the top.
The poor, the empty handed, the naked toiler, even the
ignorant, the vicious and the criminal," said he, "for these
have all been made such by your infamous systems of la-
bor," and he said, "the proletariat, being largely in the
majority in the world, are going to take possession;" and,
ladies and gentlemen, that program is to take the majority
way-and by the way, the word "Bolshevist" is simply the
Russian word "majority," not meaning in point of num-
bers, but in point of program, and he says, "We are going
to take the short cut, and if we want land we will go and
take it. When we mant factories we will take possession

of them; when we want money we will take your banks;
when we want pianos in our homes and rugs on our floors
we will strip a palace and invade a home, because," said
he, and he gave voice to that most damnable lie that ever
was born in the throat of fanaticism or demagoguery,
namely, that "all wealth and property are the result of
manual toil." I tell you, gentlemen, that kind of a theory
is being exploited all over the country. But let me say
that manual toil alone never produced anything. I do not
speak this in any disparaging sense at all, but I tell you a
printers' union may print a book, but it did not write the
book. A bricklayers' union, a hod carriers' union, a
plumbers' union, a carpenters' union may erect this build-
ing, but this building was swinging in the brain of a man
before even a human hand touched the material. It takes
more than manual labor to produce. You men have your
farms yonder in this great state of Kansas because either
you or somebody else had the brain of a dreamer, somebody
that had the heart to pay the price of the prairies, some-
body that pioneered the way before ever a plow touched
the soil of your state, and therefore, gentltemen, the basis
of this whole thing in the matter of the confiscation of
wealth and property, which is the short cut of the Bolshe-
vist to accumulation of what it wants, is based upon the
fundamental error that wealth and property are the result
alone of manual toil, and therefore, he says, "We will go
out and take it." And I asked him, of course, to give us
the program, and he learnedly discoursed on the necessity
of overthrowing all governments, because governments were
builded in the interests of the capitalists and employer
class. He told me without any equivocation that in ten
years Bolshevism would rule the world, and the necessity
then of having no more nationalities, but everybody being
internationals, and the pulling down of the flags of the na-
tions, and having but one flag, the red flag of the prole-
tariat, and he pointed at a little American flag I at that
time had in the lapel of my coat, and with a sneer upon
his lips said the day was speedily coming that that flag
would no longer be seen in the sky, and I felt the red blood
creeping up to the roots of my hair, and my Irish great-
grandfather turn over inside of me, but I kept my temper,
for I wanted to get through with it. But I have wished a
hundred times since I had laid aside all my religious scru-
ples and licked the devil out of him before' I left there.

Then he went on to declare that religion must go, no more
churches, no more altars of prayer, no more systems of
faith, and when we pinned him down to it, to declare that
the time would come when Bolshevism would come into its
own, we would not need any more families, for, said he,
"Bolshevism will ultimately return to the natural process
of human reproduction, when every man shall have
right of sexual accessibility to every woman, and every
woman have sexual accessibility to every man according to
their mutual desires." God Almighty! Well, now, gen-
tlemen, listen. I don't need to speak further about this,
except to say that it is time for the American public to
recognize the great necessity of dealing fairly, honestly, in-
telligently with the whole question at issue between capital
and labor. The public must become the third party in
every case. Let us recognize that labor has grievances
that ought to be removed. Let us remember that capital
has rights that must be protected as well as the rights of
the laboring man, but let us not forget that groping under-
neath this, and taking advantage of this situation, comes
the I. W. W. and the anarchist, and Bolshevist, and the
radicalsocialist, threatening the very foundations upon
which our whole republic rests. Don't blame the labor
union for wanting better living conditions; don't blame a
man because he is successful in business and won't have to
go over the hills to the poorhouse when he dies; don't
blame a farmer for having a competency in acreage, and in
cattle, and wheat and corn, but the thing to do is to realize
that the hour has come when we have got to squarely face
some of these things, and remember, fellows, not very
many are really red in this country, not very many. Alto-
gether too many, however, but here is the trouble. There
are so tormented many fellows that while they are not red,
they have a decidedly pink complexion. And if I were go-
ing to address our legislature I would say to them, "When
you are putting Henry Allen's industrial court bill into
your hopper, for God's sake have sense enough not to put
another one in alongside of it that will finally destroy
everything you are trying to do.
But say, men of Kansas, we love you. I used to think
that if I had to take my choice-this was years ago-be-
tween going to purgatory or to Kansas, I knew which I
would take, but while I was not born in Kansas, yet I love
her now, just as sure as you live, and say, you farmers out

here in this great, grassy quadrilateral, the government
has got to depend upon you as the great balance wheel in
this great crisis.
Oh, I know that in Kansas people will not come as tour-
ists just to see Kansas. No, we haven't in Kansas any Alps
or Appenines rearing their gilded peaks mile upon mile
into the heaven's mighty ball; we haven't any Vesuvius
belching its lurid, angry flames at the stars; we haven't
any mountain ranges rent by the thunderbolts of an angry
Jove; we haven't any gloomy gorges where devils dance
and witches howl; we haven't any Niagaras churning their
waters into rainbow-tinted foam, but I tell you what we
have got: We have valleys in Kansas more beautiful than
those of Cashmere, hills more splendid than those of the
Lotus Eaters' land, and pastoral beauties more delightful
than those of old Tempe's. We haven't any gold mines in
Kansas, but the gold of our ripening harvests or our even-
ing sunsets is rich enough to ransom a universe, and the
purple colors of our sunrises are more gorgeous than the
Crustacean dyes of ancient times. The sparkle of our
waters in Kansas are more brilliant than those of Gol-
conda's diamond mines, and the air we breathe is more
healthful and balmy than ever blew over the plains of
Araby the Blessed. Gentlemen, let us love every acre of
our sunny soil; let us love every hilltop that catches the
morning sunbeam, and every valley that cradles the even-
ing shadow, and let us see to it that the fetid breath of
anarchy shall not blister the cheeks of our children, and
that the foul harpies of radicalism shall not drive our citi-
zenship from the paths of peace and plenty that are spread
in this great grassy quadrangle that you call the state of


By H. C. Taylor, Chief, Office of Farm Management, U. S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.

The farmer's economic problem is that of winning a sat-
isfactory income. The size of the business settled for a
given year, the farmer's labor income depends upon costs
and prices. The farmer's economic problem resolves itself,
therefore, into the question of reducing costs per unit of

product and securing an adequate price for the products
of his toil. The starting point in solving this problem is
the getting of the facts. He must study his costs.
No time need be wasted on this audience impressing the
importance of cost of production figures. Necessity has
aroused the American farmer to the importance of know-
ing his costs and seeking a fair price for his products.
In our complex economic life with its high degree of
specialization and division of labor both as between indi-
viduals and between regions, the view that competitive
forces adjust prices in a manner fair and just has not
been accepted for all conditions. On the other hand, the
view has gained ground that where a group of men have
made permanent investment in the agencies essential to
producing an article, let us say milk for example, and
where custom tends to bind the price of that article to an
old level when all the elements of cost are rising, it is in
the interests of sound public policy to adjust these price
levels in such a manner as will preserve this production. It
is believed that there are conditions where a public loss will
be sustained if competitive forces are left to work in their
slow and crude way to readjust the price level by destroy-
ing a part of an essential industry in order to force prices
up only to find that the whole industry was needed and
that a period of great scarcity and unnecessarily high
prices result from a shortage in supply.
Wherever the competitive regime breaks down the prob-
lem of fair price arises, and wherever the question turns on
fair price attention is turned to the study of costs. Thus
it is that the cost of production is in the foreground in
this day of unsettled price conditions. In the minds of
some, accounting has failed to play a satisfactory role in
this regard. This difficulty arises out of the fact that but
little farm accounting has been done and that has been di-
rected to the problem of farm organization rather than the
problems of price regulation. With adequate funds the
accounting method will render invaluable service in the
study of the cost of production in its relation to the prob-
lem of fair price. The basic unit factors of production
which will be ascertained for this purpose will serve not
only for the emergencies when price regulation is neces-
sary, but also as an aid in constructive extension work in
farm organization.


(By Governor H. C. Stuart, Elk Garden, Virginia, Chair-
man of the Agricultural Advisory Committee of the
United States Food Administration, and Member
of the Price-Fixing Committee of the War
Industries Board, at Farmers' Week,
Columbia, Mo., January 21, 1919.)

We have been passing through a wonderful period. I am
not going to make a war speech. We have fought through
the great war and won a great victory. We have tested
that age-long question as to whether or not a Government
free enough to guarantee the liberties of its citizens and at
the same time be strong enough to defend those liberties
from attack could rally exist-and we have settled that
question it may be for all time.
We have had experiences which are fresh to you all, and
out of those experiences it seems we might well take stock
of the lessons which they carry, hence I want to talk to you
on the lessons of the war as applied to agriculture.
In the first place, we learned that we were in fact a
nation. We have had here for a long time forty-eight great
commonwealths stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific,
reresenpting as many sovereignties. We have had here a
population, descended from many of the European coun-
tries, with the blood comingled of many nationalities, much
of which has never fused into pure Americanism, but we
see that each of those forty-eight states willingly laid down
every vestige of its sovereignty and laid it at the feet of
the National Government, it state machinery of all de-
scriptions, and merged itself, each and all, into the great
nation that thrilled the heart and nerved the arm of a
great executive tocsin, the liberties of a great people.
We then may say we are now, and I know I speak from
high authority when I say we are now for the first time one
race and one nation, a nation of Americans, pure, undivided
and unalloyed Americans-Americans and nothing but
We have seen, too, the strength of a democracy and how
one hundred million people responded voluntarily to the
call of their country. There was no iron rule of autocracy.
The service, whether at home, in the field or on the firing
line was ready and cheerfully delivered to the country

,showing that there is that inherent strength in a Govern-
ment like ours which, under patriotic appeal and by
patriotic appeal and by patriotic impulse, has more power,
more convertible power than ever resided in the hordes of a
people who have been trained in the school of militarism.
There are some lessons that are quite obivous and that
we have learned, and I know we will all profit thereby.
What are they?
Of course, we have learned a great many lessons in
economy. "Necessity is the mother of invention." We
have learned how to rely more upon the man power, aye,
even the woman power under our own roof, when stripped,
as the country was, of the surplus labor and the family had
to do its own work.
There have been learned lessons all over this land which
will be well appropriated in years to come. I know we have

learned to utilize a great many things that used to be over-
looked and that were not thought of, either forgotten or
lay dormant or never discovered. Those things have been
marshalled to the support of this great country in the
great wor which we have just fought. They are lessons
which we may well continue to remember.
The elimination of waste! Who will say that this lesson
has not been taught in this country? Waste of all kinds
reduced to a minimum, all sorts of inventions by way of
substitutes for the things that were vitally necessary to
the prosecution of the war. Sending the things which the
country and our allies needed, and finding substitutes for
them as best we could.
I know we have found a degree of earnestness and zeal,
and spirit and enthusiasm in creating the sinews of war, in
providing the food for our own army, for our civilian popu-
lation and the armies and the civilian population of our
allies, which if continued and carried into the work that is
still before us may be of great benefit to us.
"What else?" Cheerful submission to the limitations
which the Government had imposed upon the prices of our
product. I want to tell you that the question of bread and
meat is primarily necessary, because it is the one thing that
is discussed around the tables three times a day of every
citizen in all this broad land. That was the thing which
most of all was limited in the price by the Government.

Whoever heard that the farmers of this country tried to
hold up the Government, undertook to defy the Govern-
ment, or even to argue sternly with the Government over
the prices the Government chose to fix on agricultural pro-
ducts? They asked a rightful hearing. They presented
their case, always saying that whatever might come, their
services, their land, their live stock, their all was sub-
ject to the order of this Government.
"What else?" Control of production! The Agricultural
Department, you will remember, sent out all over the
United States literature and put on food campaigns, urg-
ing the farmers to increase the acreage of this and reduce
the acreage of the other, and under the stimulus of those
campaigns we find that the states in some cases doubled
certain crops, in some cases they cut out certain crops, and
when the Government asked for a certain acreage estimated
by the Department of Agriculture, the farmers of this
country arose gladly to the occasion and never failed us.
The fact is, as Governor of my own state for little more
than a year, or about a year of the war period, and con-
nected as I have been with some of the departments in
Washington since, even though I be a farmer myself, I
feel that it is due that great class of patriotic citizens to say
without disparagement that no single class has played a
more conspicuous patriotic part in accomplishing the great
results of which we are so proud than the American
It was the fact that those farmers had started out to
feed the world, if necessary, that put into the mind of the
Germans the submarine to thwart us in our efforts to cross
the seas in pursuance of our international rights. The great
crops of this country which were to feed the contending
nations of Europe brought about the birth of the sub-
marine as the only means of overthrowing what were after-
wards our own allies, and the only thing which they thought
could possibly save the German cause. "Why?" Because
break the pathway once that lay between the granaries of
this country and the people of Europe, and certain starva-
tion was the portion of the Allies!
But, there are some other lessons. Now then what are
some of the more obvious lessons immediately at home?
There are some broader questions, questions that take on a
national and an international significance as to how we are
to appropriate the lessons we have learned. We have found.

as I say, that this Government has practically controlled
production. If a farmer was told to stop the raising of
this, didn't he do it? If he was told to raise more or less
of this, didn't he do it ? All he wanted to know was what
the Government wanted done.
What else did the Government do? The Government not
only controlled production but it also controlled distribu-
tion. Suppose somebody had told you a few years ago that
the time would come when every man, woman and child
in this country should be put upon an allowance, where
substitutes should be asked to be used and should be
promptly used.
Suppose, in a much larger sphere, you would be told that
machinery would be set up, governmental machinery, by
which it would be said we can keep so many bushels of
wheat for our own people; we must have so many bushels
for France, so many bushels for Great Britain, so many
for Italy, and so many for starving, down-trodden,
appressed Belgiums and other unfortunate countries de-
pendent upon them? It would have been considered
But here we find a program under which the farmer was
asked to raise a crop with a fixed number of acres to be
sown or planted with a view to raising a certain number of
bushels, with prices fixed before the grain was sown.
We find that they were asked to produce so many hogs at
prices fixed upon the hogs yet unborn. And it was done.
And you see, too, that out of an abundant caution this
was done from time to time, well in advance of sowing time,
well in advance of the time when the farmer must make
his preparation. But what of it? Why was it so novel?
Wasn't this same Government awarding contracts day
after day to the munition makers at fixed pieces, making
monthly settlements ?
Was not this Government at the same time awarding con-
tracts to the great steel companies who were producing the
sinews of war as well as the farmers?
The railroads carried the steel that entered into our ships,
the munition workers shipped the ammunition which were
to be used in conducting the war, but in that case the con-
tract was from month to month. The ordinary war contract
was made each month for the deliveries the next.
It so happened, my friends, that that could not be
done with the farmer. You must contract with the farmer

a year ahead if you expect him to fill an order for the
Government or anybody else.
And the only difference that there is or ever ought to
have been in your mind or mine between the farmer who is
invited to sow wheat, which was to be gathered a year ) ter
on the one hand, and the munition maker or the steel maker
on the other hand, who settled once a month, is of time
and time only.
Who will say that it is wrong for the Government of the
United States to fulfill its contracts with the United States
Steel Companies who had contracts for the month of Na-
vember and even for he month of December at fixed prices ?
It was unheard of that the Government would think for
one minute of saying to them: "The war is over; we don't
need your steel!"
It was unheard of to think the Government would say to
the munition makers: 'We don't need those shells; the war
is over!"
But there are those in the country who are now saying
that because the wheat that is in the ground has not been
harvested, or because the hogs which were born during the
summer of 1918 are just now being marketed, that there is
a moral difference between the obligations of the Govern-
ment in the one case and in the other. Not at all.
Let us remember, uy friends, that the farmer didn't ask
the Government to fix the prices. Not at all. His wheat was
worth $3.00 to $3.50 per bushel when the Government fixed
the price at $2.20. It was not at his request. It was not
fixation of the price of wheat; it was a limitation on the
price of wheat, and that is all it ever was.
The law of Congress under which that price was fixed
expressly stipulated and provided that it had to be fixed
before the wheat was sown. Now the wheat crop that was
sown in 1917 was contracted for at $2.20 per bushel, and
there was some wheat had- already been made that was
bought at $2.20 which could have been sold at $3.00 to $3.50.
The wheat was then grown and conceiving the law as it
then stood, the price was $2.20.
Again, after the crop of 1918 was harvested and the Gov-
ernment fearing a long war and fearing not to provide
stimulus, not only the patriotic stimulus but the reasonable
stimulus of compensatory prices for the production, called
the producers of this country together, through our Repre-
sentatives, in the month of August, and after hearing from







business, it is claimed, which amounts a a million dollars
a day.
The numberof acres of land in actual cultivation in the
United States is only one million for every day in the year.
Although we have 1,140,000,000 acres of tillable land.
Local associations handling perishables have proven
that co-operative methods are applicable. A notable ex-
ample of this is the East Shore of Virginia Association
which handles vegetables, potatoes, berries, tomatoes, and
has been the means of transforming that part of Virginia.


There are two general methods of pooling:
One is to pool all of a commodity pledged to the Asso-
ciation, even when the commodity is grown in several
states. Each member of the Association receives the same
price for a given grade of the product handled. This
plan is followed by grain, cotton and tobacco associations.
The other method is that of the local pool; each member
of a local association receives the same for a given grade
of the commodity handled. This plan is followed by the
California Citrus Exchange and by the Florida Citrus


Technically speaking, the local exchanges have the right
to accept or reject all bids in both the California and the
Florida Citrus Exchanges. This prerogative is seldom
asserted. The central office receives all bids and trans-
mits to all locals. In effect the central office really does
the selling.


Neither the Florida nor the California Citrus Ex-
changes have stockholders-though they are regular cor-
porations. The California Fruit Growers' Exchange re-
tired all its stockholders some three years ago.
The corporation that has no stock dividends to pay is at
an advantage over one that has this load to carry; many
in addition carry a heavy bonded indebtedness.

At Hickory, North Carolina, the Catawba Creamery
Company has transformed that section by starting in
quite a modest way and developing a loca industry. It
handles dairy and poultry products on the co-operative
In the absence of any system of co-operative financing
for short-time loans the only way a crop can be held over
from harvest time till the market will absorb it at a rea-
sonable price is to have an association that can negotiate
loans on reasonable terms. As the spokesman of the
Farmers' Union I went before the Committee on Banking
and Currency of the House in 1914 asking for aid of this
character from the Federal government for the cotton
growers. Nothing was done and the farmers lost $40,000,-
000 on that crop. I wish to call your attention to the fact
that exactly what I was asking for and that was refused
is being done right now by the War Finance Corporation.
The War Finance Corporation was revived after the war
and made to function as a loaning agency, and the Farm-
ers' Exchanges all over the country are using it this sea-
One billion dollars were set aside for this purpose and
when the Federal Government offers to furnish the banks
money for this purpose they frequently say that they can
furnish their customers without help from the government,
or perhaps furnishing a part of it, so that the billion set
aside for this purpose really turned loose twice that much
which is available.
The government charges 51/2 and 6% for this money.
The banks add 2% for their trouble and expense. The
pity is that the borrower can't get it for the 51/2 first hand.
Have Farmers' Cooperative Exchanges been making any
use of this fund?
Yes, cooperative associations borrowed for the purpose
of "orderly marketing agricultural products during the
last season" to the amount of $104,000,000 up to August
10th, 1922.
The size of that experience is worth further observation.
The amount of money loaned by the War Fiance Corpor-
ation to exporters-from January of 1921 to September 15,
1922, inclusive-was approximately $9,000,000.
In that same period the amount of loans authorized by

the War Fiance Corporation to banking and financing
institutions for agricultural purposes was approximately
The amount of loans authorized to cooperative market-
ing associations of farmers was approximately $175,000,-
These moneys had been loaned in thirty-seven states.
The total loans on live stock had been some $89,000,000.
On cotton it had been some $117,000,000. On grain it had
been some $34,000,000. On tobacco $40,000,000. On
sugar beets $10,000,000. On rice $2,500,000. On dried
fruits $1,250,000. On canned fruits $700,000. For Gen-
eral agricultural purposes" $157,000,000.
There had been loans even on peanuts. The financial
succor extended to the peanut industry by the United
States Government through the War Finance Corporation
had been $1,132,103.
At this point the business man who is a manufacturer,
or who is a merchant, inquires:
"Why this favoritism to farmers? Why this lending of
public money to them ? Or, if to them, why not to me ?"
At this point also the left wing of the "Farm Bloc"
movement rises contrariwise to inquire:
"Why all this lending of money by the War Fiance
Corporation to 'banking and financing institutions'?
Why only $175,000,000 to associations of farmers? Why
$295,000,000 to bankers? Why not all of it to farmers

Our Federal Farm Loan banking system furnishes the
only method of cooperative financing of any magnitude in
the United States.*
*We have no general system of short time credits pro-
vided for by law. The Germans have had for years three
types of cooperative banking: The Landschaften, the
Schulze-Delitzsch and the Raiffeisen. The first is an in-
stitution of land owners who mortgage their lands to the
Landschaft and float bonds thereon, securing money at
low rates and for long terms. It has no shares and pays
no dividends.

*A short time credit law was passed the third day of
March, 1923.

The Schulze-Delitzsch is an urban short-time cooperative
credit bank.
The Raiffeisen is strictly a farmers short-time coopera-
tive bank.
The French have the Credit Agricole which is an Agri-
cultural Cooperative Credit Society which lends on both
personal property and real estate. I cannot take the time
here to explain these systems. Suffice it is to say that
they were a sheltering rock in the time of storm, during the
great war, for the countries that had them in operation.
We need a short-time cooperative banking system in this
country. The temporary functioning of the War Finance
Board is the nearest approach to a plan for short-time
credits that we have-it is not cooperative. The use the
people are making of it demonstrated the necessity of a
permanent system of short-time credits that will meet the
demands of agriculture.
For years agriculture in this country has not been hold-
ing its own with other vocations. Thirty per cent of the
men and twelve per cent of the women are engaged in
agriculture-not including the housekeeping wives on the
These fourteen million people cultivate the 367 million
acres that are actually planted to crops. Producing $13,000;-
000,000 worth in value. The mortgages on the farms
amount to over $8,000,000,000. No doubt other debts equal
the real estate debt.
Manufacturers have $15,000,000,000 invested, employ
9,000,000 people, and turn out finished products valued at
$63,000,000,000 annually.
The farmers have $78,000,000,000 invested, operate with
14,000,000 laborers and turned out products valued at $13,-
375,000,000 in 1922.
It is that great middle class that made America what it
is. When it is eliminated our doom is sealed. A significant
statement was recently reported as being made by Secre-
tary of Agriculture Henry C. Wallace. The statement was
to the effect that the problem confronting agriculture in
this country is, "whether the farmers are to continue to be
the independent class which they have been in the past or
are to drift into the peasant class, such as they have in
Europe." I agree with that statement.

David Lubin, the father of the International Institute of
Agriculture, used to say that he was often asked why he
was so much interested in working for farmers as he was
not a farmer, and his reply was that he was not working
for farmers but for civilization.
I did not fully appreciate the significance of Edwin
Markham's great poem "The Man With the Hoe" until I
saw the real peasant at home. Then the thought that the
Man with the Hoe was imaginary, a creature of fiction,
vanished. He is a reality. May 4, 1922 there was an edi-
torial in the Manufacturers Record which said:
"The army found that 45 per cent of foreign-born re-
cruits were morons. They had the mental capacity of nor-
mal children of less than eleven years and could never be
expected to have any more. What made these
people morons? Centuries of serfdom on the farms of
Europe. A few more years of farm impoverish-
ment in America and there will be plenty of morons here
who are not foreign-born."
After traveling under ten flags in Europe, I can readily
believe that indiscriminate immigration would eventually
submerge us. The fact is too few of the really competent
study the science of government.


Remember that the responsibility of saving this country
from the condition under which your ancestors and mine
lived rests with YOU.
If you want to know what awaits us in the future if we
neglect our citizenship duties, look at devastated Europe.
There the affairs of government were given over to royal
families and a privileged class, with the result that for
two thousand years a great per cent of the able-bodied
men has been sacrificed on the altar of Mars-to say noth-
ing of the suffering of those left behind. The last strug-
gle they had involved us on this side the ocean and we
made a heavy contribution to the rotten statesmanship of
the Old World.
"Poor old history, tale of sorrow,
States undone twixt Dis and Mars,
But for greed the world we groan in
Might be fairest of the stars."

What regard have you for this country and its institu-
There are but two ways by which you can function:
As an individual and as an organized body.
Which do you think is the more effective?
There is in Washington City a "Labor Temple" which
is the headquarters of the Federation of Labor. Does any
one dare say that no influence has been exerted from that
office since it was established?
The trunk line and the short line railroads have na-
tional offices in Washington. Does any one dare say they
have no influence?
The United States Chamber of Commerce has appropri-
ated $2,800,000 for their headquarters in Washington.
This represents the great industrial and commercial inter-
ests of the country. Do these interests exert any influence
in national life? And why all these organization offices
in Washington?
Finally the Federated Farm Organizations established
offices there.
American agriculture cannot hope to get the recognition
it deserves in national legislation if it is too indolent to
put forth the same degree of energy and exercise the same
diligence that is shown by other great interests.
Yes, we need men particularly fitted for this important
work in Washington. Committees of Congress are open
forums for the public to come and present their views on
pending legislation, and they ought to be. There is where
laws are made. Now it is up to the farmer to be equal to
the occasion and be able to measure arms with the strong-
est before those committees.


There is a general impression that co-operative unions
have little strength or power of endurance in the day of
adversity. How does the record stand with regard to
those in operation in Europe before the World War ?
Co-operative banking in Germany has stood the test and
is still operating. The same is true of France. The Co-
operative Wholesale Society of Manchester-the largest
and oldest concern of its kind in the world-has grown at
an accelerated pace since the declaration of war.
All right, how about a country like Russia? I was in

Russia in 1913 and was amazed at the progress co-opera-
tion was making in that backward country. They sent a
delegation to England and studied co-operative selling
and they studied co-operative banking in Germany, and
from their findings they began organizing in Russia. They
were enthusiastic and making splendid progress when the
war broke out. Russia lost more men than any nation
ever lost in a war in all the history of the world. Before
the conflict was over the government broke down and red-
handed civil revolution finished tearing the country to
shreds. On top of all this the worst drouth she ever had
covered the best portion of the empire, and millions
starved for lack of food.
Add to all this the fact that even to this day the nations
of the earth have absolutely refused to recognize the gov-
ernment that her people set up and has functioned for
years. Whether it is the choice of the masses of the peo-
ple or not it is the only semblance of government they
have. Now is not all this calculated to uproot and destroy
all the co-operative unions of that destracted country?
Has it? No.
The first international trade agreement made with Rus-
sia after the armistice, after final peace, was made be-
tween England and the Co-operative Union of Russia l
Stronger than the Government!
The first loans of money that Russia was able to secure
from abroad was negotiated with banks in Sweden by the
Co-operative Union; not the government of Russia, but
the Co-operative Union, has the respect of the nations and
financial institutions of the world!
It was bad statesmanship that caused the rulers of
Egypt to erect her ponderous pyramids with whip-lashed
slaves-squandering the energies of the people to satiate
the vanity of kings like Tutankamen-instead of expend-
ing that labor toward the comfort and improvement of the
masses of the people. When ancient Egypt went down three
per cent of her people owned ninety-seven per cent of the
It was bad statesmanship aggravated by bigotry that
caused the Medes and Persians to have all their laws and
edicts irrevocable. When rulers will not admit that they
ever make a mistake their case is hopeless. Babylon and

Nineveh paid the penalty in full measure for the poor
statesmanship of their rulers. Two per cent of her people
owned all the land.
It was bad statesmanship that wrecked Greece after be-
ing the center of the wealth and culture of the ancient
world. Slavery was tolerated at home and conquests were
made with wanton cupidity. The obsorption of slaves from
conquered and exploited provinces in Asia and Africa de-
stroyed forever the genius of the Greek people. Greece
perished from the infiltration of inferior races, brought
about by poor statesmanship. Autocracy and plutocracy
dominated the Greek world when she toppled to her doom.
Corruption in government wrecked Rome before the in-
vaders came with vandal hands to finish the tragedy.
Roman statesmanship gained nothing from the example of
Greece. Slavery was practiced and Rome's conquering
armies brought home slaves who did the work formerly
done by a hardy yomenry. This worked havoc with the
Roman stock. It undermined the economic constitution of
Roman industry. The large estates were tilled by slaves
and the real farmers were driven to the cities. When city
building was finished the laborers clamored for more work.
Wealthy exploiters fed the hungry mobs to get their votes.
Abominations piled up. Wickedness ruled. Statesmanship
was abandoned for intrigue and exploitation. Rome died
of rotten statesmanship. Three thousand men virtually
owned the Roman world.
The French Revolution was the legitimate fruit of the
foppish French statesmanship of the Middle Ages. The
government was conducted by royal debauchees. The
masses of the people paid the taxes and had no rights.
Fanaticism ruled in the guise of religion. The church was
patronized by the government for its support and all lands
were owned either by the church or the nobility. The mis-
ery of the French people was paid for in the fire and blood
of the Reign of Terror.
While I think it was fortunate in the long run that Eng-
land's American colonies revolted and set up an independ-
ent republic the fact that England lost the colonies was due
to the bad statesmanship of her rulers. Had Parliament
passed no laws discriminating against the colonies there
would have been no Declaration of Independence and no
revolutionary war. Great Britain "threw away a pearl

richer than all her tribe" for a mess of pottage of tem-
porary gain-the work of short-sighted statesmen.
When the Constitution of the United States was being
drafted Thomas Jefferson tried to get a section incor-
porated in it forbidding the foreign slave trade. But short-
sighted statesmanship prevailed, and that document ex-
pressly forbade the prohibition of the slave trade prior to
1818. By this time the institution of slavery had such a
hold that no legislative act could destroy it. Every slave
ship that was wafted by the breezes across the Atlantic
ocean was a prophesy of Sherman's march to the sea.
The earth was billowed with the graves of heroes from
the incarnadined hills of Gettysburg to the san-girt planes
of the Rio Grande; the soil was watered by the tears of
sorrowing kindred shed o'er the fallen brave. The penalty
was paid in fire and blood nor has the bitter cup as yet
ceased to be quafed-aftermath problems are still with us.
What brought on the World War, 1914-18 ?
Just one thing-
The rotten statesmanship of Europe.
That worst of all wars was the price paid by humanity
for believing in thrones and royalty.
Russian statesmanship sowed to the winds and reaped
the whirlwinds. Her autocracy and tyranny sowed
dragon's teeth that were to wrend the empire. Her exiles
were messengers of revolution. Protesting mobs that
paraded the streets of her capital were shot down to terror-
ize, but it only embittered those who sympathized. Each
stroke of oppression and repression added fuel to the
smouldering fires that only waited for a breath of free air
to burst into flames of revolution. This opportunity was
offered by the World War. In this international conflict
Russia lost more than any other nation. Her people saw
no solution of their troubles by this conflict. Sick and
tired of a fruitless struggle Russia withdrew from the inter-
national conflict to settle her troubles at home.
As is always the case the pendulum swung from one ex-
treme to the other. "Revenge is sweet" and the revolu-
tion offered these who had suffered ignomy at the hands
of the privileged few the opportunity to "get even" and
they proceeded to the task. Bolshevism had in its pro-
gramme the abolition of monarchy, confiscation of crown
lands and the big estates, and the enfranchisement of tLe
masses. This programme appealed to all who had felt that

the old regime had been unfair to them. Nobility was de-
based. Men and women of rank were made to sweep the
streets, clean the gutters and mop the floors.
The fact that ignorance undertook the impossible and
had to back up and start over is taken for granted in all
such transitions. The sufferings of Russia can never be
Why all this ?
The incompetency of the Romanoffs, venality of offi-
cials, and rotten statesmanship.
Nemesis claimed her own.
The law of bad statesmanship is inexorable. It brings
its own reward without fear of favor. Ignore its teach-
ing all you please but it will exempt none from its rule.
The so-called divine right of kings and the divine right
of big nations to lord it over small ones brought on the
Balkin trouble which lit the fires of a continent and threw
more soldiers in battle line than any other five wars in his-
tory. Secret diplomacy, rotten statesmanship, royal pre-
rogatives, and military obsession brought on the tragedy.
Every drop of blood shed, every pang of pain and all the
misery felt was extorted by bad statesmanship.
Don't tell me that it is not worth while to pay attention
to efficient statesmanship. Governments are not the seat
of all wrongs nor the panacea for all evils and misfortunes.
But they are the prolific source of much good and much
evil. Unless the people care enough for this government
to take part in its activities bad statesmanship will take
charge of it. To take no interest in it and place no esti-
mate upon one's own responsibility as a citizen of a repre-
sentative government is to belittle one's self. If one flag
means no more to you than another then you have no part
in modern civilization. The flag has no significance what-
ever except as it represents worthy ideals and aspirations.
It will represent you only to the extent that you function
as a citizen.
There are problems to be solved by the statesmanship of
the United States in the sphere of economics that have
never been solved by any nation, ancient, mediaeval or
modern. Upon the solution of these problems depend the
future of our civilization. The proper adjustment be-
tween capital and labor has never been made. Through
fire and blood the spirit of progress established religious
and political liberty and freedom of thought. Economic

freedom called loudly along with the others but has never
been answered. Competent statesmanship will save civi-
lization, bad statesmanship will end it and another lapse
into darkness will envelope the world as it did after the
fall of Rome.
Nor is the statesmanship of today meeting the require-
ments of the hour. Blinded by the cravings of human
selfishness mankind moves from one catastrophe to an-
other. Short-sighted statesmanship adopted no definite
land policy when most of the great domain was public
lands. The mineral resources, the heritage of all the people,
was allowed to drift into private hands at the price of
serface acres. All sales, homesteads, leases and grants
should have retained the mineral finds for the government.
The evil results of monopolization cannot be undone. The
issues involved in the struggle between capital and labor
have received no fundamental legislation. Campaigns are
waged on surface issues while great fundamentals are left
untouched. Too much of political life is built on the plan
of "give me my day while I live, let the future take care
of itself." This policy is just as manifest in one party as
another and amongst capitalists, wage earners and agra-
rians. Patriotism needs a babtism of loyalty to the next
Wealth is becoming more and more centralized. Less
than 3% of the people of this country own 60% of the
wealth, and 60% of the people own only 5% of the wealth.
The middle class is in between these extremes and consti-
tutes the hope of free government. Any industrial or so-
cial agency that tends to eliminate this class is subject to
correction by good statesmanship.
Civilization is not built on numbers but on quality of
citizenship. Every moron imported or born into society
lowers the general average of citizenship capacity. Eco-
nomic conditions that produce morons is the result of bad
statesmanship. There may be causes not economic, but
the economic cause is of prime importance. Wise states-
manship looks to the improvement of the race economic-
ally, socially, morally and intellectually.
When we look upon Old Glory we want to know that it
symbolizes human progress and enlightenment.


The Flag stands for whatever the Nation stands for;
the Nation stands for whatever its citizens stand for; the
citizens stand for their ideals. You are a part of the citi-
zenship of the country, and, so far as you are concerned,
the Nation's Flag stands for what you stand for.
This is not the case where thrones rule, royalty pre-
empts authority, privilege and seated power usurp func-
tions of State and the subordinate masses bow to the dic-
tates of the favored few.
The fact that sovereignty in this country derives its
power from the consent of the governed is due to the sacri-
fice of the lives and fortunes of thousands of your ances-
tors and mine.
When first unfurled to the air our flag stood for resist-
ance to tyranny and discrimination. It stood for the abo-
lition of royalty, freedom of press and speech, justice, lib-
erty, equality of the rights of man without regard to rank
or station and for representative government. All these
years it has stood for these.
It stood for these during the seven years of the revo-
lution when every sacrifice was made in its behalf.

It stood for freedom of the seas and against the dicta-
torial policy of England in the war of 1812-14.
It stood against piracy on the high seas in its war with
the Barbary States and forever put an end to the custom
of paying tribute to these corsaries of commerce.
When a sister Republic voluntarily surrendered her in-
dividual sovereignty and joined out Nation of States,
bringing with her the unsettled issue as to the boundary
between her and the government from which she had
severed connection, our government stood with the new
State of Texas against Mexico. In the war that followed a
vast domain of practically uninhabited country was added
to our dominion, bringing it within the folds of civiliza-
tion. The way that this part of our domain has pro-
gressed as compared with that just beyond the border
attests the quality of our institutions.
It stood for union against dis-union during four years
of civil strife when citizen met citizen in arms and hun-
dreds of thousands paid the forfeit with their lives and
the continent was drenched with fraternal blood.

Power is never more glorious than when it stands for the
protection of the weak, when in the right, against the
strong, when in the wrong. The only Good Samaritan war
waged in all the annals of history was the instance of the
Spanish-American when the United States stretched its
strong arm across the waters and struck the shackles of
tyranny from the struggling Cubans, hurled back across
the ocean monarchal autocracy to crouch at the 'feet of
throne-ruled Europe and bade the Cubans be free without
asking one dollar of pay or recompense of reward. This act
pressed the throbbing heart of liberty to the bosom of the
millions of the Old World who have long looked to America
as the "Promised Land."
"Each Cuban hero fought bravely for his land
and his line,
But thou hast fought for a stranger in hate of a
wrong not thine."
Again power looms in beautific grandeur when it views
with dignified patience the misdoings of a weaker neigh-
bor, struggling in the throes of civil revolution. This was
exemplified in our recent dealings with Mexico. When all
Europe was destrought with international struggle, no one
to say us nay we bore with long-suffering the depradations
of irresponsible bandits whom the unstable government was
unable to control. Our government refused to enter into a
war of retribution or conquest.
Our flag has stood for America in the application of
the Monroe Doctrine which has been of much importance
in our international relations. It stood against the dismem-
berment of China by the predatory nations of the eastern


Our nation was the only one that entered the great world
war with the declaration that it wanted neither indemni-
ties nor advantage. The only flag that waved along the
battle line stretching across the continent of Europe that
stood for a nation that wanted neither indemnities nor
land was the Stars and Stripes.
Germany wanted the world; Austria wanted the Balk-
ins; Bulgaria wanted a part of Roumania; Servia wanted
a part of Austria; Turkey wanted anything she could
get; Belgium wanted indemnities; England wanted the

German Colonies; France wanted Alsace-Loraine and a
slice of German possessions;. Italy wanted a part of Aus-
tria and other concessions. Other things were a part of the
contentions of each, but these were included in the over-
tures of peace. Russie was mainly jealous of the encroach-
ments of the German hegemoney.
What did the United States want? What did she ask
She asked for nothing in the way of rewards or spoils.
She wanted nothing but to free the world from auto-
cratic tyrannies.
No thought of extorting tribute from a defeated foe.
This is something different in the history of nations.
This government was alone in fighting only for a prin-
As a result of the war five republics rose from the ashes
of three great monarchies, burned to cinders by the flames
of Mars.
It is not the nation or individual that makes the most
history in the shortest time that the world loves, honors
and reveres.
Greatness for the day does not mean building for etern-
ity. Growing by conquest and ruling.by arms does not
mean permanancy. We do not love greatness without hu-
Not nations like Babylon, with her magnificent city with-
in her wonderful walls, with her hanging gardens and
tower, her extensive commerce and her military power.
Her code was the code of force.
Not Greece with her generalship, patriotism, art, philos-
ophy and oratory. She took in no conquered state as an in-
tegral part of her commonwealth. She tolerated slavery
and halted not at taking tribute from the vanquished.
Not Rome, the imperial impersonation of force and con-
quest, who struck not once for the liberation of nations
at home or abroad but made all roads lead to Rome and
collected tribute for Rome's glory. She tolerated slavery
without distinction of race or color, and brought them
from conquered nations.
Not Austria under the Hapsburgs nor Germany under
the Hohenzollerns nor Russia under the Romanoffs nor
Franoce under the Louises or Napoleon. Not England in
her methods of the conquest of India or of the Boer Free
States, nor Japan in her aggressions in the Far East.

If we as a nation set the example of honor measured by
the highest concept of individual action it will be the first
to exalt national ethics to so worthy a standard. If we
stand by that principle we shall build for all time.
We do not love and revere those spectacular characters
of the past who by sheer military force planted their
names full in the face of history.
Not Genghis Kahn, the Mongol scourge of Asia, in
whose wars five millions perished;
Not Tamerlane, the Tarter flame, who erected a pyra-
mid of 80,000 skulls in Bagdad as a warning to those who
would revolt against his authority;
Not Alexander the Great who conquered the world in his
day and died of debaucheries in Babylon;
Not Caesar whose sword dripped with the blood of a
Not Hengist invading Britain with Germanic hosts, nor
Attila, the Hun, marching westward from beyond the
Danube and butchering kingdoms in savage wantonness,
nor Ivan the Terrible of Russia;
Not Barbarossa, the red Teuton king, who marched
with his soldiers from Baltic shores to sofe Italian skies,
nor Alva of Spain, the despoiler of the Netherlands;
Not William the Conqueror, the ruthless Norman in-
vader and adventurer;
Not Napoleon, the imperial impersonation of force and
murder, who overran nations young and old, tying laurels
to his brow with heartstrings of the dying, and for whose
exploits France has not ceased to pay in enmity and blood;
Not the Kaiser of Germany, who, in our generation, un-
capped hell and plunged 25,000,000 soldiers into the most
horrible war of all the sorrowful ages.
Theirs were but passing triumphs. Those claimed by
the grim reaper left without grateful votaries among suc-
ceeding generations, and the one yet to answer the sum-
mons will go "unwept, unhonored and unsung" by the
good and great.
But there are those whom the succeeding generations
will honor for their service to mankind till time shall be
no more. Our attitude is that of grateful reverence
Men like Moses who led from slavery to liberty and left
with us the Decalogue carved mid the thunders of Sinai;

Men like the Christian martyrs who met their God on
the flames of persecution;
Men like Copernicus who mapped the stars for forty
years in seclusion, hidden from bigots and fanatics, that
he might give to the world the science of the heavens. He
will live when crowns are in the junk heap and thrones
are forgotten;
Men like Newton who dropped the plummet of science
by the ocean of truth and whose record will stand when
monuments are dust;
Women like Florence Nightengale who carried to battle-
fields the art and science of nursing;
Men like John Howard, who changed the attitude of the
world toward convicts;
Men like Phillip Pinel, who dispelled the dark clouds
of superstition concerning the insane;
Men like Jean Henri Dunant, the Swiss, who saw the
sufferings of dying soldiers on battlefields and conceived
the work of the Red Cross-making fields of carnage nur-
series of love-raise a church spire or a crucifix on a bat-
tlefield and it is shot down, but wherever the emblem of
the Red Cross waves all guns are silenced manned by
men who lay claim to civilization;
Men like Columbus who led the Old World to the New
and introduced the two hemispheres.
Men like Washington who stood on Mount Vernon, the
stern patriot without gewgaw, a supreme sovereign among
men, exemplifying the superioroty of kingdoms of char-
acter ruling in human hearts in contradistinction to tin-
seled royalty based on fear and braced by bayonets.
The age of martyrs is not past. So long as sacrifices
must be made, hardships and suffering endured, so long
will there be martyrs to answer the call and march in
the front line of armies, stand the opprobium of the public
pillory or walk to the funeral pyre.
So it shall be in the end of time, when history shall have
finished the chronicles of men, each nation's pyramid of
honor will stand in height proportional to the service ren-
dered mankind. If we but prove true to our ideals to the
end the pyramid of glory of this Union of States will
tower above all others and the lightning write about its
crest "Immortality.'

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs