Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1916-1918, 1918-01-18
THEORY VS.. FACT.

THEORY VS.. FACT.
To understand the state OF nina
which permits Secretary Baker to ex'
press SO much satisfaction over the
deplorable conditions for which his de-
partment is responsible it is neces.
sary to realize that the secretary OF
war not only is pacifist but the
chosen Moses of that socialistic circle
of idealists which in this country
corresponds to the school OF Russian
socialists that produced Kerensky.
In view Of the utter collapse OF the
so-called government of which he1-
ensky was the nominal head, this IS
4 harsh charge to make against Mr..
Baker but evidence to support 1t
is found in his own assertions
and in The Public, organ OF the
high-brow socialism Of Louis F.
Post Joseph FEELS and their school.
This Magazine in recent issue, re-
fers to Secretary Baker in several
ecstatic editorials and congratulates
the nation that "a pacifist and humanl-
tartan head of the war department" is
on the job.
.Our supreme good fortune" The
Public says, next to having Woodrow
Wilson in the white house, Us to have
Newton D. Baker at the head OF our
war making establishment" A little
farther on in the same article we find
that as chairman of the council OF
national defense Mr.. Baker has
found the time aud the thought and
the courage to insist on the demo-
cratic spirit in our industrial mobiliza-
ton" and that he has insisted upon
fair standards of wages, hours and
conditions for employees engaged in
war industries and has fostered by
every legitimate means the principles
of Industrial democracy
During the senate committees ques-
tioning of Secretary Baker Saturday
senator Frelinghuysen asked if all
the clothing manufacturing facilities
Of the country were used. The Sec
rotary replied:
.The sweat shop system was pro-
hibited from the beginning"
It is reasonably safe now to predict
that in an early number Of The Public
It will be possible to find this reply
used as the text for another enthus-
iastic editorial lauding Secretary Bak-
er's idealism and humanitarianism,'
and possibly concluding with some
such statement as this one in the is.
sue of The Public from which we
have quoted already:
THAT is why Newton D. Baker is a
great secretary of war in sense Tar
transcending considerations of mere
military efficiency"
Writers of the type whose academic
illusions fill the columns of The Pub
lie have brought into some popularity
the superficial method Of thinking
which permits applause for Mr.. Baker
merely because he insisted that con-
tracts for army clothing should be
made only in the most modern work
shops, in which short working days
were the rule. 1t is fine to reflect that
the sweatshop system had no part in
equipping our army for its battle for
freedom and world democracy. But
there is a practical side, as well as an
idealist side to this question, for it is
q vital question in this war and war is
essentially practical. Wars emergen-
cies are very real and very serious.
When you are in battle you don't
stop when a whistle blows.
Mr.. Bakers restrictions resulted in
q delay in providing the army with
proper clothing to Withstand weather
conditions to which the new soldiers
had been unaccustomed. The result
vas an epidemic of pneumonia and
another epidemic Of meningitis. Near
ly every camp and cantonment has or
has had its siege of disease and the
list Of deaths already is long one.
Because the medical department of
the army was we'll organized under
Surgeon General Gorgas, who seems
to be one of the few bureau heads to
escape the cloying influence Of the
secretary, the percentage Of mortality
has been encouragingfy low. But tho
efficiency Of the army has been re-
duced greatly by sickness, and the
work of training has been delayed
through this cause as we'll as through
q lack OF guns and munitions.
II sweatshops had been stamped out
OF existence as result of Mr. Bakers
activities, or il any permanent good
had been brought to garment workers
there might be some compromising ad.
vantage to society to count against the
experienced as result of the clothing
delay. But the sweatshops merely
turned out civilian clothes while the
approved factories were making sol
diers' uniforms. The sweatshops'
owners enjoyed a share Of wartime
prosperity without acceding to Mr..
Bakers rules, and those rules did no
practical good. although they were a
complete success as measured by the
impractical reformer.
It is not our purpose to defend the
sweatshcp nor to condemn proper
steps for wiping it out Of existence.
But The test of any movement for bet
terment is practical test. Mr.. Baker
aimed at the sweatshop moral blow
which missed it's target: by the same
act he delayed Americas preparation
for war and opened the way for dis
ease and death to claim many hun
Areds Of young men in the army.