American Agriculturist, April 12,1924 
We 
S71 
What Farmers Think About This Great Problem — and Tax Reduction 
I N accordance with our policy of asking our 
readers to give us their first-hand opinions 
on matters of public interest, we recently 
presented the bonus and The Mellon Tax 
plan as subjects for discussion. 
The bonus is evidently not entirely popular 
with farm voters, although some letters favor it 
strongly. On this page we reprint characteristic 
letters for and against. 
The Mellon Tax plan divides the votes with 
more in favor than opposed. 
* :f: $ 
A Civil War Veteran Speaks 
“In reply to your question, ‘Are you in favor 
of a bonus?’ No. I am a Veteran of the Civil 
War, 85 years old. I enlisted for three years 
and during the war I was in four hard-fought 
battles and a half-dozen skirmishes. I was 
wounded twice, the last time so severely that I 
lay in a field hospital three months before I 
could walk with crutches. It was several years 
before I fully recovered. Twenty years after the 
war I applied for a pension and received six 
dollars a month for a number of years. Now a 
'little over four years after the World War, strong 
young men are demanding a pension. I say give 
a liberal pension to all sick and disabled soldiers. 
Strong able-bodied young men ought to be 
ashamed to ask for a pension. I believe the great 
majority of farmers feel as I do if they express 
their honest opinions. 
“As to Mr. Mellon’s tax plan, I don’t feel 
competent to be a good judge, but 
I have faith in Mr. Mellon and believe 
he has studied his plan and knows 
what will be best for the future of a 
great majority of the people.”—D. 
W. W., Somerset County, Pa. 
By A. A. READERS 
and should receive patient, careful attention and 
treatment as long as they need it. Therefore, 
of first importance, it would seem, is free training 
in some line for every soldier physically handi¬ 
capped, to enable him to be self-supporting, if 
possible, instead of having th6 humiliating feeling 
that he is an object of charity. Of equal im¬ 
portance is the care of the boys who are mentally 
unable to cope with their problems or to learn 
new ways. 
“The return to each man of an amount equal to 
what he had to contribute for the support of his 
dependents while he was in the service should be 
another provision. It does not seem the right or 
sensible thing for a government to do, to distribute 
money ‘promiscuously’ to a body of citizens 
without regard for the particular needs of the 
individual. There are many to whom the sum 
they would receive would be more harm than 
benefit. If a system of life insurance, twenty-year 
endowment plan with sick benefit and disablement 
clauses, were arranged for the ex-soldiers, it would 
give them the money when it would be of more 
value to them than it would be now. It would 
protect their dependents in case of their death, 
and it would protect them in case of permanent 
disability, sickness or accident. (Editor’s Note.—It 
now looks as if Congress will pass an insurance plan 
of payment to soldiers instead of a cash bonus.) 
“Of course pensions should and will be arranged 
for those veterans and their widows in old age, but 
it seems that some arrangement, such as that 
outlined above, would be much better than to 
turn over to them a few hundred dollars and let it 
go at that! The latter would ease the conscience 
of the government and the taxpayers; it would be 
welcomed, no doubt, by every ex-soldier, but it 
would not be a benefit to every one. As the 
government cannot easily investigate the needs of 
every healthy ex-soldier and his dependents, the 
safe way is to do what would bring most good to 
the greatest number. A friend of fair dealing.”— 
Mrs. W. R., Franklin County, N. Y. 
* * * 
Forget Injustice—Go Ahead 
“Noting your editorial about the bonus in the 
American Agriculturist in the January 26th 
issue, I am inclined to express my opinion. I 
served eight months in the infantry branch of our 
war forces. There is no thinking man but realizes 
the injustice in the soldier’s wages as compared 
with civilian wages during the war. However, 
that is past; the time to pay up was upon dis¬ 
charge or soon after. Let us forget the past and 
press ahead to secure an efficient and progressive 
government administering its duties to the wel¬ 
fare of the American people, present and future.” 
—M. C. B., Onondago County, N. Y. 
“You 
to say I 
An Emphatic No! 
“In reply to your question, ‘Do 
You Want the Bonus?’ I emphati¬ 
cally say No! The principle is wrong. 
It cheapens and lowers the tone of the 
soldiers’ patriotism and tends to make 
them dependents. Lessens our ability 
to care for the diseased who need and 
deserve the cash we can give them. 
Diverts capital from its proper sources, 
thus making it more difficult for sol¬ 
diers to earn and pay themselves the 
bonus, for it’s they who must in a 
great measure pay it. 
“I am expressing the sentiments of 
a son who served more than two years 
in an infantry regiment that went 
through the Argonne drive, as well as 
my own. 
“I am rather inclined to favor the 
Garner bill for the reduction of taxes. 
I like it better than the Mellon bill, 
but either of them will do much good.” 
—A. P. R., Clearfield County, Pa. 
* * * 
Care for Disabled and Dependents 
“Your paper is getting better with 
each issue, it seems. I read it from 
cover to cover, ‘ads’ and all, and so 
does the ‘head of the house.’ 
“We are much interested in the Sol¬ 
diers’ Bonus question and as you invited 
your readers to air their views, here 
are ours. We feel that the govern¬ 
ment should do all necessary and pos¬ 
sible things for soldiers mentally or 
physically wounded in the country’s 
service. Those boys have first claim, 
for so many were rendered physically 
unfit for their former employment, and 
perhaps do not know how to do any 
work they would now have ability for. 
Others, mind-sick and soul-weary, need 
If you believe in tax reduction sign the petition below, get your neighbor 
to sign it, and send it IMMEDIATELY to American Agriculturist, 
401 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
, * 
TO THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE, AND TO EVERY 
OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIAL IN STATE, COUNTY AND TOWN 
GOVERNMENT IN NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW 
JERSEY. 
WHEREAS, first, taxation has increased in this nation more than four times 
since 1913, and in our State and local governments more than three and a half 
times, and 
WHEREAS, second, this burden of taxation, particularly for State and local 
governments, falls heaviest and directly on farmers and farm property, amounting 
to, 16.6% of the farmer’s income in 1922, stopping agricultural prosperity and 
fast becoming absolutely insupportable, and 
WHEREAS, third, the general basis of taxation is INCOME and not PROPERTY, 
and 
WHEREAS, fourth, our national. State and local governments have made little 
real progress in cutting out unnecessary officers, government departments and 
appropriation bills since the end of the World War, therefore be it hereby 
RESOLVED,: First, that we, the undersigned, are unalterably OPPOSED TO - 
THE EXTENSION AT PRESENT OF ALL NATIONAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOV¬ 
ERNMENT ACTIVITIES. 
Second, that all of our national and local officers should give immediate at¬ 
tention to THE GRAVE NECESSITY OF LARGE REDUCTIONS IN ALL GOV¬ 
ERNMENT EXPENDITURES, to the reduction of government personnel, to com¬ 
bining and simplifying government departments and activities, to the need of 
short legislative sessions, to smaller expense accounts for public officials, to 
passing fewer laws, and in short, to the necessity for practicing the same economy 
in public affairs that farmers are constantly obliged to practice in the production 
of the necessities of life. 
Third, that we as farmers are not interested in credit or any other unsound 
farm relief legislation, BUT IN TAX REDUCTION. 
Fourth, that taxation, both State and national, be maintained on all luxuries, 
as for example, chewing gum, tobacco, motion pictures, etc. 
Fifth, that tax reduction be made TO ABOLISH DIRECT PROPERTY TAX. 
A REDUCTION OF INCOME TAXES IS NOT SATISFACTORY. The farmer’s 
income is from his property holdings and therefore his assessed valuation, par¬ 
ticularly on paper, is high. The reduction of income taxes, while government 
expenditures are still so high, will inevitably result in greater taxes on property, 
chiefly FARM REAL ESTATE. Signed eventually by 100,000 farmers. 
Name (write plainly) . 
Address. 
(Paste blank paper to this petition for additional names.) 
For Bonus—Against Tax Plan 
ask, ‘Do you want the bonus?’ I want 
do most assuredly. You ask for views 
on Mellon Plan of Tax Reduction. I 
will say that I am not in favor of the 
Mellon plan to reduce income taxes. 
I am a farmer and have four boys, but 
none of them were old enough to be 
in service in the World War, so would 
not be benefited by bonus. But I was 
benfited by staying at home and hav¬ 
ing my three square meals per day and 
a good bed to sleep in while the boys, 
„ the best of our land, went and gave 
their lives for my family. 
“I read an article the other day and 
it said that if the Mellon plan went 
through that it would be impossible to 
pay soldiers’ bonus, and I want to say 
it made by blood just boil. Think of 
the money that was made during the 
war. Think of the sacrifice the boys 
made during the war. Then to think 
of the bonus being wiped from the slate 
and cut the tax on income; it is ridic¬ 
ulous in my judgment. You asked to 
state briefly my view’s and I think I 
have.”—G. W. S., Tioga County Pa. 
* * * 
Too Much Chance for Fraud 
“I am opposed to the bonus propo¬ 
sition as in it there is already evidence 
of the possibilities of a repetition of 
gigantic fraud similar to the pension 
frauds that followed the Civil War. A 
pension bureau and lobby w’as es¬ 
tablished in Washington that was 
known to be making raids upon the 
U. S. Treasury to the extent of 
millions of dollars. An investigation 
committee discovered that this lobby 
was procuring pensions for descendents 
of the old Mexican War, besides the 
other pension frauds of large extent 
which were knowui by Congressmen 
wffio were notified at every election 
that they must not interfere with the 
pension work in Congress. 
“Already the charge has been made 
public of fraud against some of the 
active members of the Legion, and a 
bonus lobby is quite certain to be 
established in Washington along the 
(Continued on page 385) 
