The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1931-09-16
Organizing the Poor Farmers of
Tennessee

combatted. Many Of the farmers still had faith
in the local courts in spite of the fact that these
courts had, during the strikes and previous ac-
tions by farmers worked consistently for the
bosses. They still had faith in the remedy OF
legal action. By pointing out how consistently
the courts had stood by the mill bosses in former
suits brought by farmers, it was possible to win
many away from this idea.
Other farmers expressed serious doubts as to
the "constitutionalty' of asking that the back
taxes of the mills be turned over to an elected
committee of workers and poor farmers. This,
of course, was an idea carefully tostered by the
mill bosses and the opponents of the petition.
Many of the farmers, however have suffered
from the official administration of relief funds,
which, besides being used chiefly as a source
of graft, were operated in such way as to ex-
clude those who had participated in or sympa-
thized with the mill strikes. By pointing out
specific examples of such cases. it was possible
to make many farmers see that the talk of "con-
stitutionality" was merely trap set by the mill
owners, a catch-phrase against the efforts of
starving workers and farmers to obtain real
relief
The chief danger to the movement however,
was the tendency Of many of the farmers to drag
at the tail of the tax movement started by the
small shopkeepers and larger farmers of the
county. This group had also begun to circulate
petition demanding that the mills pay taxes.
With this however, they were content. Their
only aim was to remove the tax burden from
their own shoulders They had no interest IN
relieving the farmers; they opposed as "uncon-
Stitutional" the demand to turn over back taxes
relief funds to an elected committee; neither
did they propose to help the mill workers them
selves fight for better conditions. The more ad-
vanced members of the United Farmers League
pointed out also that additional funds coming
into the county, without lowering of the taxes
of the farmers, would mean chiefly higher sal
aries for the county officials-sheriffs deputies
etc, more graft, and the chance to hire more
deputies and gunner to act against the mill
workers in the event of another strike 1t was
possible to make clear to many of the farmers
the necessity of having a genuine workers and
farmers movement on this question, entirely
separate from the movement of the small capt.
talists
Two interesting features of the movement
were the facts that the signatures of women
farm workers and share-croppers were also COL
lected on the petition The traditions of this To-
calty are that women take no part in these
movements. AS for the share choppers, it was
pointed out that although they do not pay taxes
directly on the land, the tax burdens are to a
great extent shifted to their shoulders The ex-
trenely high proportion of the crop that is
turned over to the farm owner by the cropper in
Carter County-third to half of the crop as
against quarter to third in most farming COM
munities-was direct proof of this fact
Over 500 signatures were collected on the petit
ton of the United Farmers League The petition
circulated by the small capitalists received less
than half that number. On the day Of the hear
ing, almost 100 farmers damned the room in
which the tax board was celebrating The tax
petition of the United Farmers League was lost
by only vote.
The petition created panic in the ranks of
the mill owners. One of the immediate results
of its circulation was the arrest on a trumped-up
charge Of vagrancy of the organizer of the Ma
tional Textile Workers Union, who had been &C.
tive in the framing and circulating of the tax
petition.
Although the line Of the movement was cor
rect, and good beginning was made. the work