The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1926-08-09
Editorial Comment

(St. Paul Dispatch)


1t is to be doubted whether rose after all would
smell sweet by any other name. People certain
~ ought not to allow their thinking to be tyrannzed
by words and phrases, but the fact is that
names are very important and Vice President Dawes
probably had this fact in mind when he took the
trouble at Denver to reject the label of radcalisn,
which has been applied to the present agricultural
movement.
What thing is called does not change the char
acter merits of the thing itself; it does affect
the opinion which great many persons form about
those merits. The farmers Of the west are not rad
ical, but it would not matter particle if they were
the merits of equality under the tariff would re-
main the same. As Mr.. Dawes said, the farmers
are not radicals, in the sense in which the word is
correctly used. They are conservative men who
feel that their property is being taken away from
them. They only asking that they shall be per-
mitted to enjoy those rights of property which
are among the fundamentals of the most orthodox
conservatism.
This is idle talk on the part of the farmers
The appropriation against which they are complain
ing is hard material fact capable of expression in
dollars and cents. The department of agriculture
estimated the total Indebtedness of all farmers and
operators in the crop year 1920 at OOO
and the total value Of the capital invested at $780,
6O7,OOOOOO. In l92425J the value of the capital in
vested in agriculture had fallen to $50 OOO
while the Indebtedness unchanged. The total
indebtedness thus from 1874 per cent of the to-
tai value in 1920 to 207 per cent in 1925. The in
terest charge the operators debt consequently
required 1.2 per cent more of the gross income his
equity declined from SAT 900 900 to 900
600, and he lost about $4,000, 100000 or nearly
third Of his investment in five years. In the same
time, moreover, the owners of rented farms lost
about s., 100000 of the equity in their property
These figures are reflected in the alarming up-
trend in farm insolvency The $4,000 900 900 year
which was cut from the farmers equity was what
permitted the industry to continue to pay overhead
charges, taxes and operating costs in spite of the
inadequacy of income Bankruptcy, however, i'm
creased from 15.5 per 100000 farms in 1920 to
1913 per 100000 in 1924-25.
Two further considerations must be kept in mind.
Bad this showing u.s. it does not tell the true story
There are vastly failures Of farm enterprises
than there farm bankruptcies, for the figures
for bankruptcy do not show enterprises abandoned,
foreclosed, sold for delinquent taxes Nor do
figures for the industry whole give an accurate
account of what has happened in those sections
which have Jared worse than others. The great
staple producing has carried the weight Of the
burden. 1t is from this area that the protest has
arisen, and those who call it radical hoping thereby
to discredt it in the minds Of persons who mistake
words for IDEAS simply ignore the fact that this is
not protest against the rights Of property, but
protest against the invasion of the rights Of prop
erty.