The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1931-04-17

Editor Times-My solution for
solving the problem of eievating and
stabilizing wheat prices so farmers
throughout the nation may put their
farms on a paying basis and thus
benefit the entire nation, as well as
each farmer, himself, is as follows:
Have the government retain what
wheat it already has bought until it
has bought, enough more to create
a supply equal to a fair one years
crop. Then offer to sell it back to
the farmers to be paid for imnedi-
ately after the wheat marketing
time in 1882 has passed.
Sell it to the farmers at prevail
ing market prices under agreement
with farmers that they will not
plant for 1882 crop, and to uSe the
wheat for the 1882 crop that is in
storage for them, which the govern
ment had sold to them. Thus in this
manner one whole years crop will
be absorbed and without the over
production which so long has been
in process of accumulation.
1t seems to me that it Is a folly
for farmers to go on and plant for a
1882 crop when there is sufficient
quantity already in existence and
should be used for the 1882 crop. 1t
seems that the main problem is to
utilize without waste the huge stores
Of wheat now on hand and at same
time create greater stability and
general prosperity.
The lands which under present
overproduction system could be
utilized in growing other than wheat
crops for 1882. Transforming what
is now a wasteful and haphazard
system into a sound economic one
would be the result if the above so
luton was placed in force.
How many agree with me? In
event the reader agrees, why not
clip this article and pin it to your
letter to your congressman urging
the consideration of this solution?
T. T. OVERSHINER.
Is South State avenue.
Editor Times-In your editorial
THE Raskob Program" you say,
I'VE believe in home rule for the
states, that dry states shall have
the right to be dry and wet states
to be wet"
Why not be honest for once, and
say, I'VE believe that wet states
should have the right to be wet
and to make all the other states
wet" That you gladly would give
over all the good that has come
with prohibition and surrender ev-
cry decent principal involved has
been evident for years.
You were a wet years ago, when
admittedly the prohibition law was
"a noble experiment, when all that
the law needed was public senti-
ment behind it; you dared to open
ly encourage it's violation and to
advocate its overthrow.
Under the guise Of public bene-
factor, you consistently have given
comfort and aid to law violators,
always siding with the accused and
by insidious propaganda building an
abb for the criminal, seemingly be-
fore the thing might have occurred
to him.
You should take great pride in
your ability to develop the worst
side of human nature; to undo good
faster than any one else can de-
velop it. To you and to other editors
in our land more than TO anything
else can be attributed the failure of
the prohibition law.
The wet press, by its never-ending
propaganda against the law, has
made it practically impossible to
enforce the law. If these editors
had been honorable men of noble
purpose and determined to use their
influence for good. the things they