The Nezperce herald. (Nezperce, Idaho) 1900-1957, 1924-01-17

citation seem to be more interested ii
the part of salary of from four to -fif
teen thousand dollars a year than they
are in measure that win give i'm
mediate relief to the farmer. This ar
ticle stated that many of the farmer.
or their spokesman have expressed
themselves as against price-fixing and
attribute the farmers condition large
ly to the government price during the
war. To the latter as farmers we
agree. Such an unfair, discriminating
bill as the wartime government price
fixing bill, is looked on with contempt
and is largely to blame for the con-
dition of the farmer today.
One day we hauled our grain to the
warehouse and received $2.35 per
bushel and the next day under govern
ment price conrtol sold it for $1.95 per
bushel, or loss of 40 cents per bushel
to start with. The supposed minimum
price was made the maximum price
and we continued TO sell the govern
ment our wheat at a dollar and ninety
five cents at the warehouse. AT least
three fourths of the one dollar and
ninety-five cents received per bushel
represented the cost of production.
The cost of production Immediately
rose hundred to one hundred and
twenty per cent, whereby it actually
in many of the poorer farming sec
tions was costing in unavoidable ex-
pense two dollars and fifty cents to
to three dollars to produce a bushel of
wheat and 1 suppose if the war had
continued we would still have been
eking out bare living by trying to
raise wheat and sell it below cost.
There is no question but what the
farmer would have received from fifty
cents to one dollar more had the price
fixed been a minimum price, which
would have allowed him to hquidate
many of his present obligations, but
the farmer did not murmur. He work
ed faithfully and hard, produced to
the utmost, disregarding the cost or
return received, as the slogan was,
bread will win the war; His sons
were on the battle field of France
dying for humanity's Is cause, fully ex-
pecting that he would receive justice
at the hands of the government after
the war; that the great wheat indus
try the government had been the
means of forcing up to an unusual pro-
duction, that wheat would not be
thrown back on an open market at the
mercy of the wheat gamblers and spec
llators, forcing prices down to less
than one-half the cost of production.
Such system would mean financial
ruin to any business enterprise in this
country.
Why were not other businesses
singled out and regulateda Why not
The sugar trust when sugar rose to
famine prices, four hundred per cent
above normal pricel Why was the
'armer's IS wheat commandeered by the
government during the war and turneo
oose after the war without the slight
,st guarantee of even the cost of pro
luctiong The railroads were COM
and returned after the war
,ut with guaranteed earning on their
Investment, or in other worls, six per
ent above expenses; some officials
lrawing salaries as high as from fifty
O one hundred thousand dollars an
lually which was charged to operating |
expense. We were treated unjustly.
Ne were unorganized and could not
lelp ourselves, but the farmer has
earned lesson ard will not soon for
ret his treatment at the hands of the |
government. He labored to suppolv
nd gave his sons to defend. Thou
ands in broken health have lost their
omes, and are in financial ruin as
esult of the unequal, unbalanced
yheat price situation. 1t will always
emain shadow on this government |
or its treatment of the agriculturist
nd lack of interest in bringing relief
o the one who's community, bread,
Yon the war.
No, Senator Gooding is not alone on
rice -stabilization on wheat. Carried
ONE to the real farmer the very big
majority indorsed safe and sane
disqualification bill, or some similar
ieasure where the price may be set
nnuaIly, taking into consideration the
ost Of production. A bill setting a
minimum, not a maximum, price. Nine
y-five per cent of the farmers today
ave no hope of relief soon unless
ONE means of price-stabilization can
e enacted. The only arguments on
rice stabilization by those opposed to
!, is that it is putting wheat in
pecial class and that all other COM
lodities would or could ask similar
rice stabilization. This is not sound
easoning, wheat is in q special class.
he government first placed it in
pecial class, segregated it from other