l86 AGRICULTURAL DISCONTENT 



chological ties likewise expedited the spread of the League into Wisconsin, 

 Iowa, South Dakota, Montana, and other neighboring states. 



The political campaign of 1918 got under way in Minnesota, as in North 

 Dakota, with the staging of local meetings on February 22 Washington's 

 birthday. Delegates named at these conventions were to meet in district 

 conventions for the purpose of nominating delegates to the state con- 

 vention. Simultaneously, plans were made to get out as much of the vote 

 as possible by staging whirlwind membership drives. No pains were 

 spared in organizing Minnesota. Two hundred and sixty Ford cars were 

 purchased at a cost of $130,000; the most capable organizers were sum- 

 moned from Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Okla- 

 homa, Kansas, Texas, Montana, and Idaho, adding some 150 organizers 

 to those already in the state. At one time Minnesota farmers were said to 

 be joining the League at the rate of a thousand a day. 2 



In the Minnesota primaries, for governor the League supported Charles 

 A. Lindbergh, the "original lone eagle" and former congressman who 

 had represented the district around Little Falls. He was described as one 

 who "never wore the corporation collar." In Congress he had voted against 

 declaring war on Germany an unfortunate act in view of the fact that 

 the League had been accused of disloyalty. Lindbergh also was opposed 

 by many Catholics, against whom he had shown hostility. While a mem- 

 ber of Congress, he had introduced a resolution asking for congressional 

 investigation of the political activities of the Catholic Church in America. 

 He charged that Roman prelates "in all lands and at all times have been 

 the ally of oppression," implying that "Big Biz" and the Catholics were 

 closely allied. 3 



The League set out to gain control of the dominant party in Minnesota 

 as it had done in North Dakota. Since Minnesota elected the members of 

 its legislature by a nonpartisan system, the League was not confronted 



2. Non-partisan Leader (Fargo, N. Dak.), March 4, 1918, pp. IT, 17; S. R. Max- 

 well, The Nonpartisan League from the Inside (St. Paul, 1918), p. 13; James W. 

 Witham, Fifty Years on the Firing Line (Chicago, 1924), p. 101. 



3. Robert Kingsley, "Recent Variation from the Two-Party System as Evidenced 

 by the Nonpartisan League and the Agricultural Bloc" (unpublished master's thesis, 

 University of Minnesota, 1923), p. 29; Catholic Bulletin (St. Paul), June 15, 1918 

 [leaflet in Minnesota Historical Society]; Lynn and Dora B. Haines, The Lind- 

 berghs (New York, 1931), pp. 221-23. 



