The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-10-03
SHAMEFUL ENCROACHMENT.
Men Denied the Rights of Ameri.
can Citizens AS the Price OF
Employment.
Whittier Are We Drifting The
AggressiOns OF the Courts.

John NJ. Thurston, the Union Pacific
railroad corporation attorney and
member of the Republican national
committee, has issued the following Or
der on behalf of Nebraska corporation
politicians of the Republican stripe
who seek to coerce their employees.
Read it.
son account of personal strife en-
gendered by partisanship it has been
decided to ask all employees of the
Union Pacific company to refrain from
active participation in politics.
Should any employe desire to accept
the nomination for any office he will
be requested to resign from the SER
vice of the company"
Shame. Shame! Shame.!!
Where. oh. where, are corporation
judges acting for Uncle Sam?
Are they parties to the outrage,
too?
Talk about government ownership
of ailroads.-Denver Road.
This is one of the most striking
signs of the times. There are great
many of them, and they all point in
the same direction,-toward change
IN our FORM OF government.
If any railroad employe is nomin-
ated for an Office, and accepts, he must
give up his bread and butter, SO far
as the road is concerned, for which he
is at work. And, as the corporations
have general "backlist," and the
man discharged by one company is re-
fused work by all others, the unhappy
wretch has nothing before him but
the poor house. And this in a free
country, standing on the platform of
the Declaration of Independence,
which proclaims that all men are free
and equal.
And what is IAN active participa-
tion in politics." Does that include
voting? Why not? If it is an unpar-
donable sin for railroad employe to
run for an office, is it not an equally un-
pardonable sin for another railroad
employe to vote for him? Where is
the difference? Are the millions of
railroad men to be disfranchised, and
free institutions made a nullity, so far
as they are concerned? Can the ma
.tion afford to see millions of it's sons
wronged in that way?
And in connection with this order
of the Union Pacific we note a COM
munication in the Chicago Times, as
follows:
To THE EDITOR: Your vigorous
editorial in the Times on the action
of the Union Pacific company in warn
ing its employees against taking any
part in political matters has been
read with feelings of keen delight.
You have characterized it's action
justly as inSolent, and l hope this
may be the only instance which may
call for such criticism. But l am fear
full the full significance of this action
by the Union Pacific company is not
fully realized by any considerable
number of people. Perhaps not the
next, but the final move certain to fol-
low if matters now in court are decid
ed as it is fully expected they will be
by the railroad companies, will be an
injunction by the courts just before
election in November directed against
all Populists warning them to take no
part in the voting. This on the
ground that if they do vote, as Popu
lists, it will be construed as cOnSpir-
acy against the money and other laws
of the country.
If the present case against Debs
and others is successfully maintained
such result as l have indicated
above is just as sure to follow as day
follows night. II the principle sought
to be established in the Debs case is
upheld it will become precedent to
be followed by all the smallfry courts,
and when this occurs the end of the re-
public is not far distant. B.. J.
Our readers may think these sugges-
tions unreasonable and extravagant.
but the march of aggression is rapid
and unhesitating.
When our national constitution was
formed the states were without mas
ter, and were regarded as sovereign
ties. Our country is called '"Thc
United States of America" That is
to say,-the States united and confer
red certain clearly defined powers on
general government: and all powers
not so conferred were reserved"
says the constitution, "to the states
respectively or the people" Hence it
was conceded that all questions Of
roads, bridges, transporta tion and in
ternal commerce belonged to the
states: and local self-governmentw was
considered so sacred that the presi-
dent of the United States could not
send company of soldiers into a
state, unless the Legislature of the
state asked him SO to do; even the
governor of state could not invite
the president to send in single SOL
dier unless there was domestic vio-
lence, and the Legislature could not be
gotten together. But while each state
was to be thus master within it's own
limits commerce necessarily passed
from one to the other; and at this
point of junction neither state was re-
garded as in full possession of it; and
hence the Constitution gave the pow
er to Congress to regulate commerce
between the states" But who would
ever have imagined that, in this year
of grace 1894, a court of the United
States would have held, as Judge Woods
did the other day, in the Dcb's trial,
that the power to regulate commerce
between the states," gave the nation
al. government power to send it's
troops into Chicago, to protect and
regulate street cars q because, for
sOoth, said Judge Woods, traveller
about to cross the boundary Of Illinois