The Glasgow courier. [volume] (Glasgow, Mont.) 1913-current, 1918-11-01

. Senator Walsh in an interview in
the Billings Gazette, after trying to
explain to Montana farmers why they
didn't get $3.50 for their wheat, winds
up his interview by saying:
ut is considered in Washington as
q closed affair, a troublesome war
matter that has been disposed of and
most loyal citizens will, l believe, e
gard it as patriotic to treat as SUCH"
Like so many other matters affect
ing the people of Montana, Senator
Walsh lightly passes over this vital
question Of the price Of wheat. OF
course we realize that in the larger
affairs in Washington and those great
problems affecting the world at large
the price of a bushel of wheat is Of
small concern. But the wheat grower
of Montana is vitality interested in it.
And it comes with poor grace for
Senator Walsh to not only refuse to
be interested in the welfare of the
Montana farmers, but at the same
time to hold over the head Of the un-
fortunate tiller of the soil the DEM
ocratic threat of ~disloyalty when he
presumes to raise his voice in his
own behalf. The farmer Of Montana
should not be bludgeoned with the
federal threat that he is unpatriotic
when he refuses to vote the Demo-
cratic ticket and the best Judgment
is he is not going to stand for it.
No matter how cleverly Mr.. Walsh
may argue, the fact remains that. the
wheat grower Of Montana has been
sand1bagged by the present admins
tration. While the price of wheat has
been pared to the bone, in fact to a
point where there is scant profit even
under favorable conditions, Jul peo-
pie witness the riot of prosperity en-
joyed by the growers of cotton and
of corn. We are naturally pleased
that our southern brethren are pros
porous, but for Senator Walsh to rap
our farmers over the knuckles when
they object to being held up by the
Democratic administration while the
south is going through their pockets
is really too much.
It's all right for Senator Walsh to
say he voted for $3.50 wheat. But
the growers of wheat didn't get it.
And they didn't get it because Presi-
dent Wilson vetoed the bill. Now Mr..
Walsh wants to know what l would
do. In the first place I would have
voted against the veto when the bill
was returned with the presidential dis
pleasure. Again my election to the
senate insures the farmers of the
north a vote and a voice in the senate
which will be at all. times in favor
of the material welfare of Montana
farmers and against the continuance
of the strangle-hold which the south
err senator's have on the federal gov
eminent and which has been so con-
%spicuously abused by the present ad-
ministration in its uniform ~favoring
of the south at the expense of the
north. Mr.. Walsh knows that his re-
turn to the senate means a continu-
alton of the present intolerable con-
ditions. Being a Democrat he knows
he must abide by the caucus rule and
the very fact of his return means, as
said, a vote to further continue the
southern Democrats in power.
The grower of wheat is not a dis
loyalist because he asks for fair play.
Montana farmers and Montana citi-
Gems generally have given a full mea-
sure of devotion in the great crisis
which we are all going through in
man power, money and in all war &C
Invites and they have been doing this