The intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1887-1891, 1888-09-22
Wesklg gatelligeuter
official County Paper.
IContinued from first paae.l

lCOUCtHueu JTOHV JtTSC puget
States senate, organized labor from all
parts of Indiana met in their respective
assemblies and forwarded resolutions
TO Indianapolis demo uncing him and
his candidacy. On the 7th day of
August, of this year, at the fourth
annual meeting of the State Federation
OF Trades Unions, that body, the larg-
est aud most representative in Indiana,
passed resolutions calling upon all
workingmen' to vote against him.
Later, the district assembly of the
kuights of Labor for the indianapolis
district (Mr. Harrison's home) met and
did the same thing. This is all signifi-
cant and cannot be q heartless pursuit
after all innocent man. Where Is the
cause if not in his record toward labor2
But what of Mr.. Harrison's conduct
and utterances at the conference meet
ing referred to? l shall draw my con
c~iusions from the influences surround
Ing him, from the nature of the sub
j;ct under consideration, from the
events of the preceding days and his
relations to them, from ample and in
ddbitable court and newspaper evil
dence as to his attitude to ard the
strikers, and last, from the overwhelm-
ing testimony of brave and true men
who were present and who felt the
burning rebuke of his unjust aspersions.
He was there, then, as h richly paid
attorney of the .. & M. railroad,
though by a bold disregard of common
decencies he had slipped on the jury Of
arbitrators. He was there as the paid
soldier of the state. Hi heart was in
his employments. The cause of the
strike was low wages. This was the
subject under discussion. This was the
topic under debate. None other was
before the meeting. Three grades OF
men, as | have shown, were getting 81
per day and the roads were refusing to
concede more. Mr.. Harrison vas their
paid attorney. He was there to repre-
sent and defend their position, not
withstanding he had slipped on the
Jury. Could he have done this without
taking the position, tacitly if not in
words, that '.$1 a day was enough for
a laboring manr WasnOt his conduct
stronger even than any lam
guage he could have employed?
He offered no relief; suggested no CON-
promise; would accept nothing but
absolute surrender. Dc not the Cir
cumstances make it probable that he
should have discussed wages, and in a
agreeable TO his clients9 Could
he have said anything on such all occa-
sion and have been silent on tho matter
of wages? 1t was not q picnic o a
prayer meeting. 1t was a wage meet
ing. 1t was a wage meeting at which
his clients were ~contending that a dol
lar a day was enough. He was Tor his
clients, although he had slipped on the
jury. His clients acted a dollar a day.
He acted a dollar a day. Is il impro-
bable that he used language expressive
of his feelings and employments? H.
deed is it not absurd to contend that
he did not use such language. He was
out of politics and in the law business
Exclusively"
Now, again, did he use expressions
to the effect that he would ''shoot,"I
''resort I the militia" fuse the bayo-
net" or words of like import? He had
already, as we have seen, put himself
on the side of the "Pinkerton policy."l
He W~asscaptain of a company of men
whom he had organized. lie armed
them with. athe new breech-losding
Springfield rife, q most formidable and
efficient weapon." BY his course what
did he say? What are ''new breach
loading Springfield rifles, most formid-
able and efficient weapons" for? Did
Capt. Harrison intend feeding the
strikers biscuit out of the muzzle of IA
musket2 He is called "cold" and "dis-
tant,'' but he would hardly undertake
an act of charity at so long a range as
that. Was he intending to ''storm' the
meu with golden coins? No such am
munition was seen at the arsenal. II
was moi furnished by the state.
WHAT DID HE lean.
The cartridge boxes contained bull
let's. In drilling his company he taught
his men TO fire at the word of command.
Did he prepare to .'shoot?" Did he
think '.shoot?n Did he act ''shoOt?"
Did he talk '.shoot?" And even if ir
said nothing upon that subject, does il
weaken the case against him? 1t is said
the ''barking dog never bites," but
when the mastiff OF the household
sneaks s~tealthily around it is time to
get over the fence. His men carried
bayonets. Were they TO cut bread
with? Are they Implements of the bake
shop or the battery? Were they carried
by Mr.. Harrison as o sort OF soiace or a
treat 10 the strikers? Do these facts,
conceded, uncontradicted, prove any
thing? But in support OF The claim that
Mr.. Harrison delivered himself of cruel
aud inhuman u~tterances on that occa-
sion; that his speech was that OF a hired,
heartless attorney; that he disregarded
the crying appeals OF labor, crushed
and sconrged by The iashes oil Incorporate
power2.I will submit next the evidence
Of a few OF the participants of thai
strike. These Witnesses speak from
personaI contact. Their stafef0fx5s