The Washington times., 1924-10-02
WISCONSIN
! HOLDS
THEORY
Senator's Own State Has
Gained Much in Riches While
He Has Been il Power
By WILLIAM HARD.

Will Wage-earnerS, because, ae
q class, they now have less EN-
plcyment and less income than
they had last year. be angry with
Mr.. Coolidge and proceed to vote
in larger numbers than would
otherwise be the case for either
Mi. Davis or Mr.. La Toilette?
Will farmers. because, as q
class, they are considerably better
off than they were last year. beam
upon Mr.. Coolidge and turn away
from Mr.. Davis and Mr.. LIE Fol-
lette?
All political commentators, in
GLIDING the present writer, are in
clined to assume that prosperity
means political content and is an
advantage to the party in power,
while adversely, it is assumed,
means political discomfort and is
an advantage to the party out Of
office and seeking power.
Gaps In the Theory.
A little mingling Of observation
with this theory shows, however,
that this theory has at any rate a
few gaps in it.
There are few trade unions richer
than those Of the railroads and in
the clothing industry.
Yet they are the very ones that
were foremost in the Cleveland con.
FIRST labor candidate for President.
In the labor world 1t Is far from
being necessarily true that the less
prosperous parts Of It are more
radical and the more prosperous
parts OF 1t less radical.
On the contrary, it seems often
to happen that an advance in pros
perfty brings an advance in political
ambition.
"A noteworthy instance Of this pos.
aibility is to be seen in Britain.
The British laboring population,
~ spite OF unemployment, is proba-
bly, better off physically now than
az any time since the middle ages.
This Is indicated decisively and
teiitngly by the amazing Iowness OF
the present death rate In Britain.
Yet now is the moment when
British labor steps forward with
the greatest determination to organ
Ire and to operate it's own political
party; now, when it physically is
better OFF than eyer before, 1t politi-
cal!y Is more discOntended and more
ambitious than ever before.
Clearly, accordingly, there are
complications in the problem Of the
relations between prosperity or ad.
Versity on the one hand and politics
on the other.
Condition of Farmers.
Let us consider the farmers. Last
year their four principal grain crops
were worth some $500 900 900. This
year their grain crops will be worth
somewhere near $5,000,00 900.
It is an enormous advance. II
means an enormous increased III.
Iiancial comfortablcness among
farmers
Does 1t mean more political com
fOrtableness and conservatism?
The answer is far from certain: il
depends not merely on the farmers
Increase of wealth, but also on
whether or not that increase brings
him to where he thinks he ought
20 be.
Political discomfort is not caused
by what people absolutely have or
absolutely have not.
1t is caused by the margin be.
tween what they have and what
they have come to think they ought
to have.
A Vermont farmer may be- ION.
tented and conservative on $500 q
year because it has not entered his
mind that he deserves q larger
motor car, while a Wisconsin farm.
or may be radical on $500 a year
or $4,000 year because he does
demand q larger motor car and
also a concrete road on which to
run it.
Growth Of Incomes,
Agricultural income has gone IN
n Wisconsin for many years at 4
rate far faster than in the country
A. q whole. Yet Wisconsin has re.
manned the threatening fortress 81
La FollettiSm.
La Toilette never at any time In
the course of his career in wis.
consin has built radicalism on 4
foundation Of poverty.
The poverty has not been there,
Wisconsin has developed q highly
diversified agriculture and highly
prosperous agriculture, yet La Fol.
lettism in Wisconsin persists and
thrives and grows.
These considerations may well
give pause to the Republican man.
ayers who think that d rise in the
prices Of farm products will wean
the northwestern farmers away
from La Toilette
These considerations may also at