The Monroe journal., 1911-04-25
Some Things Not to be Endorsed.

III niiC u lis IAAtlA AaaS AA tAAS taoA
issue of The Carolina Union Farmer,
Mr. j. Il. Green says:
ave give scientific agricultural
writers credit for all the results in
their favor, but il is a well-known
fact that many scientific agricultu-
raj writers and teachers know prec-
ious little about practical agricul'
ture and they would 90 into bank
ruptcy if they had to 20 on the farm
and produce a living by their own
labor. They have never passed be
yond the degree Of theoretical farm
ing and every farmer who is trained
in the school Of experience knows
how to make due allowance for the
beautiful theories advanced BY poll
ticians. who get jobs with the State
and National Department Of Agrlcul-
ture, and whose salaries ar, paid,
either directly or indirectly, BY the
farmers Of the country. These paid
apostles OF scientific farming are
either consciously or unconsciously
working in the interest OF the non
producers when they stress always
the producing side, and say nothing
Of the marketing side, and even big
trust magnates and the special in
terests seem to be perfectly willing
to contribute to a fund to teach the
poverty stricken and debt ridden
farmers how to produce more stuff
to sell in an organized market at
lower prices
The Journal is friendly to the Far
mers' Union. 1t is friendly to all
labor organizations in the sense that
it believes that they are necessary
for the maintenance Of the rights
and the opportunities Of the men
who work with their hands. We be-
lieve that the best thought Of the
country today holds this view,
though the extreme capitalistic view
is that no unions Of any kind should
exist. However, the Farmers Union
is not a labor organization in the
strict sense Of the word. II is a com.
bined organization of labor and cap
ital. A real labor union composed
Of farmers would consist only Of
wage hands who work on the farms
and tenants who own neither land
nor stock nor tools. If there were
an organization of this kind, men
like Mr.. Green would be bowling
against them when they were in
position to raise the wages paid on
the farms. However, this is aside
from the purpose of this article.
We desire to call attention only to
the utter fallacy that is contained in
such extracts as the above. Not
only Is the doctrine unsound but such
articles DO grieyous wrong to men
who have done more real good for
the farmers Of this country than can
ever be done by the school Of thought
which Mr.. Green represents. Dir.
Green is correct neither in bis facts
nor his conclusions. Let US see.
1t is an undeniable fact that far
mers are better of now than they
have ever been. This is due to two
causes. One is the better prices that
have been ruling for several years.
The other is that farmers are pro-
ducing better crops at less cost than
ever before. Why are they doing
better farming? Did they ever do it
before the advent Of the men who
stud and experiment and find out
the great underlying facts and teach
them to the practical farmers? Why
have they got more things to sell to-
day for the good prices than they
ever had? Because they have learn
ed how. What farmer will say that
he has learned how to farm better
from Mr.. Green's ideas than from
the scientific experimenter? What
farmer is there, even though he has
not learned directly from the book
farmers" who will not admit that he
has learned indirectly from them by
way Of other farmers who had learn.
ed from them? To deny this will be
equivalent to deny igg the fundamen.
tai basis upon which all progress has