The Bismarck tribune., 1934-09-05
r. O N tt N u E n
from Iage one.
Uncle Sans Relief
Chiseled From Start

Allotments to counties are made
on the basis Of need Is indicated BY
requests from county committees and
independent surveys by the relief ad-
ministration. Some counties. again
adopting the grab-bag theory. have
consistently asked for more than ap-
peared to be necessary. Their re-
quests have been pared down. Sub
sequently, In some cases. political
capital has been made Of the fact
that the county officials wanted to
do the fright thing" but that the gov
ernment was too stingy." There are
q number Of counties where this stu.
alton has prevailed and, as a result,
numerous changes have been made
In county committees during the last
year.
Local folks, frequently public off,
GERS, wanted to be good fellows" with
the governments money. The gov
ernment was not disposed to be 50
easy.
Some chiseling has been done from
within the FEEsA organization itself,
again by people with axes to grind.
As the work spread It was neces-
sary to build up IN organization to
do II. Local people were recruited for
this work. Cases are on record at
the FERA office where county COM
mittee members have attempted to
favor persons In their own families
to the disadvantage Of other individ-
uals. This has been stopped wherever
It has been discovered. A number Of
designations" can Be traced to this
cause.
During the heavy distribution Of
stock feed last winter, every effort
was made to do the Job according to
the rules. But Interpretation of the
rules necessarily had to Be left to
local managers and some queer situa-
tions resulted.
Bismarck Man Tells Story
FOR example, this story Is told by
Bismarck man Of unimpeachable In.
tegrity.
He owns q farm In another county
and has q tenant on 1t. The man In
charge Of stock feed distribution was
= friend Of long standing, 50 he In.
formed the Bismarck resident that. II
he would send in his renter with the
farm truck, he could have q certain
amount Of government feed.
There was at that time on the farm
plenty Of hay and some 1900 bushels
Of wheat. No assistance was needed.
The offer was refused.
Was It chiseling or an effort to
curry favor with = man Of some
prominence? What, In effect, is the
difference between the two?
So much for local politics and the
inevitable abuses due to local condi.
tions.
The state political situation, as II
effects the FERA. is entirely differ
ent. Political uses Of the FERA here
have been more obvious and, para.
doxically. more subtle.
A glance at the election returns
shows that william Langer received
strong support In the precincts where
the relief load Is heaviest.
Relief officials will not talk about
4 since political discussion Is barred,
but nothing ever was done to refute
claims made by the deposed gover-
nor. In speeches everywhere, that he
VAS responsible for the assistance
given needy people.
Political Preference Manifest
Another factor Is the employment
system originally set up by the FERA.
This was done by the county COM
uaittees and political preference often
was manifest. Jobs were distributed,
at least In part, on q political basis.
When tho FERA Was recrganized from
time to time In various counties, poll
tics were not considered and, II the
enlploye originally appointed through
political influence had been satisfac-
tory. he was retained.
So far as can be learned there Is
no evidence Of suck or any other
FRA employees having played poll
tics, for political activity Is cause for
dismissal. but the possible effect o6
having persons With known allegiance
or the payroll Is admitted. However,
It works both ways, persons known ia
be connected with oil parties appear
ing on the FE2A payroll.
Most obvious among the efforts to
play politics with relief were two &C.
tionS By the deposed governor. One
uas the payment Of relief checks from
the "Wtlliam LANCER Relief fund.-
every cent Of which came from the
government. This eventually wal
stopped by federal order.
The other was his announcement