The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-06-28

THE convention of June II in st.
Paul has accomplished it's main
purpose. 1t brought together into one
national political body most Of the
really progressive and militant ele-
ments in the American labor move
ment 1t created the machinery for
and assured the carrying out of a
national farmer-labor campaign in the
elections Of 1924 And last, but not
least, it drew the line clearly and I'M
mistakably, between independent class
action of workers and poor farmers
on the one hand and petty bourgeois,
LaFollette- "progressivism" on the
other hand.
Makeup Of Convention.
1t was predominately convention
of what we call class elements. Not
Communist, by any means, but repre-
sentatives of workers and poor farm
ers who strongly believe in the neces-
sity of farmer-labor party as against
following the leadership of petty bour-
geois liberals of the type of LaFollette.
Nearly 80 states were represented
at the convention. The state delega-
tons of the east and the middle west
were composed mainly of representa-
tives of labor Organizations, while
those of the northwest, west and
south were rather mixed in charac-
ter, part Of the delegates represent
ing labor and part of them represent
ing farmer ORGANIZATIONS
From the point of view of economic
makeup the state delegations could be
classified into three groups: First, pre-
dominantly labor; second, predomi-
nantly farmer; and third, mixed.
The first groups included the follow
ing states: Connecticut, Illinois, In
diana, Massachusetts,, Maryland, Mich
igan, Missouri, New Jersey, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and
Wisconsin.
Second group: Iowa, Nebraska,
North Dakota, South Dakota and
Texas.
Third group: California, Colorado,
Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, New
Mexico, Tennessee, Washington and
West Virginia.
It was quite representative gath
ering, geographically as well as eco
nomically, and its political physiog
nomy became manifest almost the
very first day of the convention. The
overwhelming majority of the dele
gates had come to st. Paul to form a
party on an independent class basis.
A comparatively small incident-the
election of permanent chairman of
the convention-gave the first real in
dication as to what direction the winds
blew.
There were three candidates in the
field. Senator Taylor, of Montana, a
staunch supporter of the immediate
formation of class party; William
Mahoney, Of Minneapolis, follower
of LaFolIette and author of the idea
of coalition" as against the forma-
ton Of a party; and Mr.. Putnam, of
South Dakota, favorite son PROPOSE
ton, who seemed to occupy the same
position as William Mahoney.
Twenty-one states voted solidly for
Senator Taylor, Of Montana. Only one
state, South Dakota, voted for Mr.
Putnam. The remaining states split
between Mahoney and Taylor For
instance: California, z delegates for
Taylor; 2 for Mahoney. Iowa, dele
gates for Taylor; for Mahoney.
Kansas split half and half. And Min
nesota (Mahoney's home state), 20
delegates for Taylor; SO for Mahoney
The election of Senator Taylor to
the permanent chairmanship of the
convention signified the first real vic
tory Of the farmer-laborites as against
the small group of LaFollettes
followers.
Issues and Problems.
1t was generally agreed, in accord
ance with the convention call that n