Newspaper Page Text
THE MONTHLY MAGAZINE The interest taken in the movement, the country over, to make the Fourth of July "Americanization Day," has been encourag ing. Events of the past few months have caused speculation as to the real attitude of the foreign-born American citizen toward the country of his adoption, in the contin gency of controversy with the country of his nativity. The conduct of these citizens, whose citizenship has been due to their own choosing rather than to the fortune of birth, has been reassuring to those of us who have believed that United States assimilates the immigrant and that he becomes, not a "hyphenated" American, but an American. The movement to observe Independence Day as "Americanization Day" this year was in harmony with the spirit of the citi zens who have made plain to the world their loyalty to the land of their adoption, with out disguising their affection for "the land where their cradles stood." It would be fit ting that Fourth of July be observed, as "Americanization Day" each year, at least in all communities where there are large bodies of foreign-born residents. It could . be made a patriotic call to all citizens, American-born and foreign-born alike, adults and children, to rally to American ideals, purposes, and common interests of many peoples united into one Nation. Such an observance of Independence Day should serve to emphasize that every foreign speaking person in America should learn English by attending the public schools, be cause the English language is the master key to American opportunities and life, and the first step to real citizenship ; that every illiterate immigrant should learn to read and write, so that he can read American newspapers and attend personally to his business matters; and that adults and chil dren, native and foreign born, be given civic training so that every one in our country will understand the functions of our Govern ment, the principles of democracy and for what America stands. In this way the Fourth of July may be made not only a celebration of our independence, but a day for strengthening the American spirit of nationality and uniting all classes, creeds, and races into one intelligent democracy. An Eastern advertising agency has made a suggestion to Kansas that is worthy of very serious consideration. Citizens of sis ter states sometimes have been snippy enough to suggest that Kansas blows too much about how much she produces. The advertising agency suggests that Kansas does not blow her own horn enough as to what she produces, not so much with refer ence to the quantity of our production as to the quality. In other words, it is the idea of these specialists in advertising that Kan sas producers would profit from a concen trated effort to popularize and establish Kansas products in Eastern markets. Con cerning the quality of Kansas products there is no question, but the point is that the world gets too much merchandise from Kansas without knowing where it comes from. No state produces more of the food supply of the world than does Kansas; no other state contributes as much to the world's flour supply as does Kansas. Still Northwestern flour, even though Kansas wheat is used to mill it, has more reputa tion than Kansas flour. All the markets know of Wisconsin and New York cheese, California fruits, Colorado canteloupes. They are established in the markets as to quality. Is it not practical for our produc ers to take concentrated action that will es tablish our products in much the same way? Some of the shrewdest advertising men in the world are convinced that it is. is balance over farm expenditures, labor in come is balance over expenditures and in terest, and farm profit is balance over ex penditures and interest and the farmer's own time. Of these three the labor income has been found to give the best index as to the net result of the year's work. It stands for what the farmer has produced by farm ing or putting capital to work in agriculture. Capital alone can earn interest, and all that the farmer can claim to have produced by his efforts is what he has made over and above what his capital would have earned if safely invested. It therefore seems plain that the most accurate point of view from which to study and interpret the farm rec ords is their contribution to the labor income." The State Labor Commissioner who one time set out to prove that farming in Kan sas does not pay was probably not the first of his line. Certainly he was not the last. Every now and then public attention is at tracted by some "figurer" who proves that agriculture is unprofitable despite the steady increases in deposits in country banks, and the constant elevation in the standards of rural life. For a long time this writer in clined to the notion that the "figurers" who seek always to prove that farming is a los ing business were just foolish. However, our attention has been attracted to an agri cultural bulletin entitled "Farm Records," that has convinced us that our former con clusion was uncharitable. It is their system of bookkeeping that is at fault; it is their interpretation of farm records that leads them so far from the facts. This bulletin points out that farm records must be prop erly interpreted to be of value, and that they may prove a positive detriment to the farmer who interprets them wrongly and acts on his interpretation. One danger of misinterpretation arises from the fact that often accounts with individual farm enter prises and with the farm as a whole are not studied from the same point of view, or are studied from a point of view that does not measure their true relation as agents of gain. The bulletin spoken of, discusses a proper method of intepretation in the fol lowing way : "There are three modes of measuring the relative profitableness of farm businesses, involving, respectively, the find ing of (1) the farm income, (2) the farmer's labor income, and (3) the farm profit. The farm income is the amount left from the farm receipts after paying all the farm ex penses; the labor income, what is left after interest on the farm capital is deducted from the farm income ; and the farm profit the balance remaining after a fair allowance for the labor of the farmer is deducted from the labor income. In other words, farm income Tom Botkin, Secretary of State, has been given a tip by the United States Depart ment of Agriculture, that he should not be slow to follow, even though it is but a varia tion of the philosophy of "Uncle Cy" Leland "if you can't lick 'em, jine 'em." Through four years of service as Secretary of State Charlie Sessions battled with the dandelions on the state house lawn at Topeka, unsuc cessfully. So far as apparent results are concerned, Sessions might as well have di rected his attention to encouraging the dan delions. They licked him to a standstill. Undeterred by the experiences of his prede cessor in office, Botkin started out last spring in a fresh campaign against the dan delions, loud in promises of his purpose to eradicate the plants from the capitol square. Most Topeka people agree that Botkin, like Sessions, has been licked. A recent bulletin of the Department of Agriculture suggests the cultivation of the dandelion as a drug plant. The bulletin declares: "Under fav orable conditions, yields at the rate of 1,000 to 1,500 pounds of dry roots to the acre have been obtained from second-year plants. The price usually varies from four to ten cents a pound." The suggestion affords a great opportunity for the Secretary of State in these days of business administration of the state government, when state officials are earnestly searching for new sources of public revenue. Botkin can't lick the dan delions; he might help to reduce taxes if he would "jine 'em." The State House lawn comprises some twenty acres. If dandelions, under conditions that are only favorable, produce 1,500 pounds of dry roots to the acre, the State House dandelion field should produce at least 5,000 pounds to the acre, or a total of 100,000 pounds. At prevailing prices, this crop would produce a tidy reve nue. The Secretary of State should try to market, rather than murder, the dandelions. What constitutes military preparedness? England's experience during recent months indicates that it does not lie entirely in the development of armed forces trained for field service. Troops in the field without ord nance are in the way as England has learned in Flanders. Germany contends, with much reason, that American industrial plants, just now engaged in the manufacture of ordnance, contribute materially to the strength of English military operations. If it be true that American industries are so equipped and organized that they may turn out tremendous quantities of ordnance, is it true that United States is so entirely lack ing in preparedness, from a military stand point, after all?