Evening star., 1938-09-25

~ ALIAS, Textile Southwest, CEN
tering in the eleventh Federal Re-
serve district, has been one of the
brightest spots on the Nations
business map during the last few
years, at times being the only white spot
on an otherwise dark-colored map. The
year 1888 is proving no exception The
largest white spots on the map this year
are in the Southwest.
Real prosperity" as known prior to
1929, does not exist here But conditions
are more prosperous, unemployment is
less, business, both wholesale and retail,
is better, and there is less unrest and
greater contentment than in many parts
Of the country.
Texas-the greater part of the eleventh
Federal Reserve district and the major part
OF the Southwest-may be considered typ
ical Of the entire Southwest Texas is par
ticularly rich in natural resources; it has
wide variety of soil and climate; its
people are hardy. thrifty, energetic and
resourceful. The Lone Star State is for
titled by nature to withstand business de-
preston, and therein lies an explanation
for conditions as they are today.
New Deal Loses Popularity.
Texas is part of the Solid South, and
while the State is traditionally Democratic,
its Democracy is not of the dyed-in-the
wool variety to be found in the Safes of
the old South. Texans are independent,
and this independence extends to their
politics. The State has gone Republican
only once in recent years-when it gave
Its vote to Herbert Hoover and against
AL Smith. There is little danger that it
will go Republican any time soon.
Texans were strong for Franklin D.
Roosevelt in 1882. They were among the
original Roosevelt men. Texas also was
for Roosevelt in 1896, and a vote today
would give Roosevelt big majority But
Roosevelt and the New Deal have lost
popularity in Texas during the past two
years. Many things have contributed to
loss OF prestige Of the President, chief
among them being disagreement on the
part OF Texans with certain phases of the
New Deal. -.--.
one OF the most significant developments
IN recent months was the defeat of three
Representatives who had stood four-souare
with the President on all New Deal policies
Morgan Sanders of Van Zandt County
ranking member of the House Ways and
Means Committee; Maury Maverick of San
Antonio and w. D. McFarlane of Graham.
All three were defeated by young and mex
perlenced men on well-defined issues con-
trary to those advocated by the national
administration.
Snubbed Ones Win.
Also significant is the fact that the Presi-
dent had given each of these men his
Official nod of approval, and more signifi-
cant still Is the fact that several members
OF Congress seeking reelection, who did
not receive the official nod from the Presi-
dent, were renominated in the recent Demo-
cratic primaries by large majorities. Two
Of these Representatives Hatton w. Sum.
ners of Dallas and Fritz w. Ianham of
Fort Worth, were actually snubbed by the
President during his recent trip to Texas.
Representative McFarlane was defeated
by young attorney, Ed Gossett, self
made man who had worked as a house-to-
house salesman of kitchen utensils to earn
money to get his law education. Repre-
sentative McFarlane made his campaign
on the issue that he had supported the
President in all his New Deal policies. Mr.
Gossett, on the other hand, openly told the
voters he was opposed to many OF the New
Deal proposals and would oppose them if
elected to Congress
Morgan Sanders was eliminated in the
first primary, being beaten by two of his
opponents young attorney and the
other veteran jurist, now county Judge
Of Smith County. Young Lindley Beck
worth, who received the nomination by
sizeable majority, campaigned almost on
one issue-opposition to the Federal Gov
ernment's cotton control program. He was
outspoken in his opposition to any effort
on the part of the Federal Government to
dictate to Texas cotton farmers what they
should plant or how they should market
their cotton.
U. S. Speaker Booed Down.
Showing more strongly the sentiment of
cotton farmers in the district to be repre-
sented by Mr.. Beckworth is an incident of
q few weeks ago. when representative
from the Department of Agriculture at
Washington called meeting of farmers
and attempted to explain the workings of
the cotton control program He was booed
and hooted down. A large map which he
had hung on the wall to illustrate his
talk was pulled down by the irate farmers
and torn to bits.
This instance in Henderson County in
East Texas is not an isolated case. It may
be taken as indicative of the sentiment
among Texas cotton farmers generally.
They are thoroughly disguised with the
cotton control program.
When Texas cotton growers voted last
spring on the cotton acreage control fea-
ture OF the new A. A. A., this feature was
approved by an overwhelming vote. Many
communities voted almost unanimously for
1t. But grumblings were heard almost i'm
mediately Long delay in making acreage
allotmen.s greatly displeased cotton grow
ers, and when they finally were told how
much cotton they would be allowed to
plant, these grumblings multiplied and
grew into roar heard all over the State,
Many farmers already had planted their
cotton before their allotments were known.
In practically every case they had over
planted. The acreage reduction was far
$1,000 dro ef{r than thev had avpacf>d 11,a