FARMERS TO THE FRONT 41 



terest of the farmer or the consumer of his products, 

 even though it might injure the manufacturer, or 

 middleman, that demand would be complied with. 

 Were the farmers orp-anized, some plan would be 

 found for checking the aggressions and extortions 

 of the railroad and food trusts. All this is perfectly 

 well understood by the minority that now controls 

 the government. Should the farmers think it worth 

 while to make any demands for legislation it will 

 be more in the interest of the consumers than from 

 any necessity on their part. When the farmers co- 

 operate and name prices on their own products they 

 will be so strong in their fundamental right to price 

 our food and clothing products which the balance 

 of the world must have that they can meet all ag- 

 gressions by others. What matters it if the rail- 

 road charges fifty cents a bushel for transporting 

 grain to market ? The farmers' price of this bushel 

 of grain — when the farmers represent the Third 

 Power — was made out on the farm before the trans- 

 portation company touched it. Therefore, I say. if 

 the Third Power concerns itself about legislation, 

 taxes, transportations, etc., it will be in the interest 

 of the consumers, and to promote the maximum con- 

 sumption by preventing the railroads and middle- 

 men from imposing unfair rates. On the whole it 

 is surprising that any person should oppose the or- 

 ganization of the farmers, and sneer at every scheme 

 looking toward that end. 



But there is even more in it than this. If there 



