The Western news. [volume] (Libby, Mont.) 1933-current, 1938-02-17

! the SHIPS BACK IN time OF war. Mr..
Kennedy became chairman of the
maritime commission to administer
the law. Newspapers extolled his
walk-away with the job. They say
his survey of the United States
shabby old merchant marine, as
compared with the nifty fleets OF
England, Japan, Italy, France is
one of the few businesslike doeu-
ments ever to come out Of Washing
ton. His settlement of claims
against the United States by ship
ping companies, whose ocean mail
contracts were cancelled by the new
marine law, was model of business
sagacity.
But others said that Mr. Kennedy
used abrupt language to some ship
ping companies who didn't fall in
line with his plans. That when he
leaves for England in February he
will have contracted definitely with
operators to build only about 43 new
ships. The navy says it needs 500.
Maybe the chairman laid the founda-
ton on which an adequate merchant
marine will be built.
Those troubles are all behind the
new ambassador now, but he may
run into more ahead. Plain blunt
talk may not be SO good for treaty
making and War-dodging. Or again
it might. If the United States wants
a man to talk turkey, it's got him.
Crop Regulation
Congress viii soon enact farm
crop regulation law. Since near
ly all the nations food is produced
on farms, the new law will really
regulate food. Under the law the
secretary of agriculture will tell
farmers they can sell only enough
corn, wheat, cotton, tobacco and
rice to make a normal national sup
ply. With third of the population
ill-clothed and ill-fed, as President
Roosevelt said, his New Deal con-
gress is passing scarcity law
Must hunger go on in the midst
of plenty2 Why?
For years farmers have been get
ting less and less goods in exchange
| for their labor on farms. In pioneer
days they produced and consumed
their own food, and supplied near
by towns. Then came fast trans
portation and factory methods,
shaking foods always cheaper. And
the lower the prices the more the
farmers had to grow to make a
living The same things happened,
as result of machine production,
to clothing, monographs, furniture,
automobiles. But the manufacture
ers simply stopped making SO many
things, and prices stayed up. In the
case Of farm produce, however,
there were so many "manufac-
turers" scattered over such vast
areas that they never could be or
ganized, or reach an understanding
to limit production.
The government took a hand in
the problem back in postwar days.
Remember all the talk about the
McNary-Haugen bill? But it didn't
pass. Ever since, and before that,
politicians have been getting farm
ers' votes by promising to do some
thing to Increase their purchasing
power. Great national farm unions
tried, but without success.
Nothing Of Importance was c-
complished until congress passed
the Agricultural Adjustment act
during the last administration. I'm
der AAA the government paid farm
ers not to grow crops, not to raise
pigs. But the Supreme court de-
clared it unconstitutional. Then the
President got an appropriation for
soil conservation" and arrived at
the same result in a different way.
Prevented Disaster
But a lot Of farmers preferred to
raise all they could and sell it
than to plant less and collect the
conservation benefits from the gov
eminent. Crops still were SO big
some years that they could be sold
only at starvation prices. Last
year the South raised nearly fifty
per cent too much cotton-more
than 100000 bales-and the gov
eminent prevented disaster only
with loan and subsidy TO keep prices
from tailspinning.
So most economists, and indus
try, and labor, agree that some kind
of compulsory crop control is nee
essary They hate to see farmers
in poverty. But more important.
from business poist of view, is that
the farm population buys a big por-
ton OF manufactured goods-if it
has the money. If it doesn't have
the money, factory production is
cut down, and labor is unemployed.
Thus, though millions of people
lack enough to eat and wear, it
is not because of scarcity; it is be-
cause they don't have enough in
come to buy it. New Deal econ
omists say that helping the farm
ers will help everybody to a better
income. And few good authorities
dispute them on that issue. 7They
may be right. Time will tell.
q Bell cate.--WNU Service,