The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1926-06-25
Editorial C Comment,
Secretary Mellon on Farm Aid
Chicago Tribunc)


than any other single factor to strengthen the
administrations opposition to the demand of the
corn belt for measure which would raise American
prices for agricultural products above the foreign
price level. The opinion of the secretary OF the
treasury stffens the congressional anti-farm faction
and seems likely to bring about the final defeat OF
the lIaugen bill.
Mr.. Melons sagacity stands dcservcdly high IN
popular favor. His opinions carry with them the
weight of notable record in the treasury depart
mcnt majority of citizens will accept MIR. Mel
Ions arguments against the Haugcn bill and rest
satisfied that the defeat Of the belts measure
is for the best. But the midwcstcrn farmer will not
be among them
AS political trends shape themselves and in
vitc the temerity Of prediction, Secretary Mellon
and his treasurership give promise OF being the
staunchest argument for Coolidge boom in 1923.
For two years he has sent campaign appeal to
every citizen with an income. Mellon magic has
turned Coolidge economy into reality that tckled
every taxpayer most pleasantly in his pocket nerve
The only drawback to the Mellon argument is that
it is not uniform throughout the country 1t has
class appeal and it omits pleasing the very class
alienated by the administrators policies-thc mid
western farmer The corn belt farmer is not paying
much income tax. Contrast, by way of example, the
1926 income tax receipts from Iowa of $10,716799,
or from Nebraska of $5,681 1856 with those from New
York Of $496 zoe, 1921 from Pennsylvania of $780,,
l642O3. A tax cut pleases many voters in New
York and in Mr.. MELONS home state; it means very
little to the mdwestern farmer compared to direct
| agricultural relief.
1t is this same tendency to think along the lines
OF benefit to the eastern trader, financer and in
dustralist and to dispose Of the troubles Of the
farmer with gesture Of 'better cooperation which
characterizes Mr.. Melons letter the Haugen bill
which counteracts his unquestioned sincerity, and
which will antagonze midwestern sentiment NOR.
strongly than
| Mr.. Mellon declares the Haugen bill unsound Geo.
nomically, but economic unsoundncss is generic
| cloak for any multitude of diverse opinion He
finds himself in accord with President Coolidge and
Secretary of Agriculture Jardnc this point.
They too, assert the bill violates fundamental laws
of economics. But the other side CT the counse
table are such men as Vice President Dawes and
former Governor Frank o. Lowden, declaring the
measure sound. And agreeing with them, Sir Josiah
Stamp, as noted an economist, as any in England
and whom no one can accuse of wanting to run for
! the presidency in 1928
The midwestern farmer put direct question to the
administration. He called for a remedy aimed d.
rcctly at an,eliorating the ills he complains of. He
wants bill whose effect farm prices will be inn
mediate; he is not looking for the solution Of his
problem through the ultimate working out of any
abstruse text book law He wanted direct an
swer Mr.. Mellon gave him roundabout
Mr.. Mellon embraced the world in his reply. He
totted up the effects of the Haugen bill on the for
; cgn countries Of Europe. The farmer would have
been content had Mr.. Mellon considered the effect
ON one Iowa farm. Mr.. Melon-and it is UNDER
standable because he is eastern banker and bust
ness man-looked at the Haugen bill from the point
: of view of industry. He felt that industry might
suffer; therefore he disapproved of the BILL
The farmer feels that it is only right that other
classes of Americans should be called to share
in his annual losses. It is quite certain, Mr..
Mellon disapprovingly pointed out, that the cost of
meeting the equalization fee provided for in the
Haugen bill will be carried up to the consumer. That
is of the things the farmer is aiming at d.
vision of the burden of production As for sub
sidizing foreign competition by selling American
farm products at lower price abroad than at home
if that is the case, says the farmer, then trimming
the debts and allowing foreign taxpayers low
err interest rate than American taxpayers is also
subsidy.
The farmer inquired for the reaction Of the Hau-
gen bill agriculture. Mr.. Mellon described its re-
action eastern industry 1t is true that industry
and agriculture must both be prosperous if the
country whole is to prosper but the prosperity
must be simultaneous and parallel If industry mus,
suffer slightly that the farmer may benefit little
that-as agriculture sees its no more than fair
: Though finding cheer in his letter, even the
: farmer must give Mr.. Mellon credit for two serv.
ices-for pointing out what is undoubtedly defect
" in the Haugen bill and for utterng an excellently
simple definition of the fundamental difference be-
: tween agriculture and industry. AS Mr.. Mellon ex
planned, of the chief faults OF the Haugen bill j.
the unwieldiness Of the administrative machine il
contemplates. It would empower a board, the com
position of which is almost completely in the contro
" Of farm organizations, with the extraordinary au
= thority of placing what amounts to tax on food
! stuffs.
As for the difference between agriculture and in
= dustry, Mr.. Mellon said this:
: Farming differs from most industries in that TIL
output largely fixes the price, whereas in manufac
). turing the price largely controls the output
The farmer will seize that pithy sentence ms al
excellent statement of his case The manufacture
has it within his power to control considerably tn
prices received for his products, whereas the powe
that controls the prices received for farm product
:" is the power Of nature. Yet the manufacturer ha
every artificial aid he has sought for TO help hin