The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-08-26
MONDAY. AUG. 2s. 1895.
WRITE YOUR OWN CHECK

THIS controversy over government cotton
and wheat loans. which so dramatically
blocked congressional adjournment involves
issues that might well prompt all Of US to ask
whittier are We trending
The cotton Senator'S espouse nothing new.
They merely ask that the policy Of government
lending at u cents a pound on cotton be con-
tinued. This policy over the last year has
proved very helpful to the South What does
it matter that one result has been to load
down the government with 100000 bales for
which consumers in the cotton trade will not
pay the l2-cent price and another result has
been an alarming loss Of foreign cotton mar
kets? The cotton South is getting its money,
and it doesn't bubble between taxpayers
money and purchasers money.
And what is more natural than that the
wheat Senator'S should ask, as they did, for
chunk of the same? Since the purchasers of
wheat might prove unwilling or unable to buy
up all the wheat grown at 80 cents bushel,
why not have the taxpayers take on few
granariesfm at that price?
Ours is a democratic government, and nee
essarily has to maintain some semblance of
consistency. 1t has at least to seem to treat
all alike We learn that all over again every
time we have a log-rolling tariff or a pork
barrel appropriation. We are relearning it in
the working of our farm program. We started
out to pay benefits to cotton. wheat. tobacco
and corn-hog farmers. and then had to en-
brace rice, sugar cane and sugar beets. pea
nuts and potatoes
e ,,-L,fo orff
loans on wheat and cotton could not with con-
sistency refuse. if asked, to do as much for
copper. oil, soybeans. butter and eggs hog
lard and A. G. & E. stock Senators who plug
for other things just happened not to be on
the job with amendments.
Why not use the taxpayers credit to guar
antee scent newspapers? And why can't wage
earners be guaranteed. whether our labor can
find market or not? incidentally, we seem
to remember that some of the most ardent
cotton price-fixers were very active, under
cover pushing the work-relief wage in the
rural South down to SO month"; on the
theory that higher scale would bankrupt
Southern farmers who en- 3loy labor. Now,
can these same Senators explain how family
with S19-a-month income is going to buy
very many sheets and pillowcases and shirts
and dresses made out of 12-cent cotton, in
tariff protected textile mills?
We seem to be begging into a "do-some-
thing for-silyer" philosophy of government
and adopting policies that lead from one cause
to several effects and on and on. TO many more
causes and multitude of other effects. It's
a case of one calls two. into a geometric pro-
erosion, all directed at the public till. The
ultimate is that those who aren't on the pre-
ferred "do-something- for" list will have to get
along as best they may by taking in each
others washing.
After first recalling that the Republicans,
with their tariff. started the two-wrongs-
make-a-right combat of politics versus eco
Monies, we feel free to remind the incumbent
Democrats that the concluding declaration in
their 1882 platform read:
Equal rights to all; special privileges to