The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1906-05-25
|PreSentedby VermOntBranch,
American Federation Labor
MADE PUBLIC TODAY
State House Incident" Growing Out Of
the Charges Of Bribery--Their
Friends Separated
Them. III

In response to interrogatories from
fthe Vermont State Branch, American
Federation Of Labor, sent TO the various
Republican candidates for Congressional
nolnination, John M. Gordon of Barre,
a candidate in tho second district, re-
ipIied with the following letter which
was male public this afternoon:
barre, Vermont, Ma, 10, 19o6
Mr.. Alexander Ironside, See. Vermont
Branch, A. II. Of ii. Barre, VT, Dear
ISir
Your esteemed favor Of May 9Th ult.
was dnly received. Following an Eng
ljsh rather than an American custom,
you ask me as candidate for the office
lof Representative in the Congress to
give specific answers to specific ques-
ltions. The custom may be good one,
but the American people have usually
deemed it sufficient if the candidate as
scented to the declaration OF the prinei-
pies of the party with which he was as
fsociated. But the fact that yon have
asked these questions indicates that YOU
would not be satisfied III ] stated that,
Iii elected, I would support the principles
lof the Republican party so far as prac-
lticable | SHALL therefore, answer your
Hquestions SO far as | can within the
limited time you have fixed
i O. l. IF elected, will you actively
assist in enacting legislation for the ter
lmination OF government by injunction,
1.-The details of the measure to be those
Iof our Anti-Injunction bill, at present
before Congress-
/ Yes, ii elected, will do all can for
I"thc termination Of government BY in
junction, if it exists, but there is no
more government by injunction than
there il BY assumpsit. The phrase ii
apt to mislead and was invented q few
years ago for that purpose as political
icatch word. a vast amount Of evil Of
Item lies IN the misuse OF words. This
rule applies peculiarly to this phase.
Iii man owe You debt aud refuse
to pay, usstnlpsit il the remedy by
which to make him pay. Would you
/ call that government by assunlpsity II
a man alone OF in combination with
Others il about to do You an irreparahle
linjury and there Is no adequate remedy
at law. an injunction restrains him from
doing It. Would YOU call that govern
\ ment BY iniunctionf should call it
the protection Of fundamental social
right. Would YOU object TO that protee-
4 ton ii you had no othcrg On the other
hand would You not insist upon that
protection as a birthright in a free and
Icivilized countryg
The second part of your question Is
y more to the point. BY tins ! understand
l you TO ask ii ! would advocate and vote
for the House OF Representatives Bill
Il No. 50 popularity known as the Anti
Injunction Bill. The question is large
one, too large for proper consideration
within the limits allowed me, unless |
should answer by stating that, il elect
ed, would do everything in my power
for the iaboring man consistent with my
oath OF Office. Such an answer would not
be without Il precedent. II YOU would
be satisfied with that. YOU may read no
further. but | assume that more ex-
Eplicit answer would command your re
spect il not your concurrence.
4 The Anti-lniunction bill appears to
be intended as n modification OF the
Sherman antitrust law as we'll as ces-
tain criminal laws. Ii IS probably his
torically true that the Sherman anti
trust law. as understood al the time of
its passage. was only intended 10 forbid
unreasonable. not reasonable restraint of
trade according TO the principles Of the
common law, aud That few, ii any, sup
posed that the act woufl apply to labor
organizations. Since the courts have
given it broader Interpretation than
was expected by its trainers aud applied
IL 10 labor organizations, those organi-
zations have right TO have it mpdi-
|. fed, if, as they claim, 1t has worked
lunjustIy against them. They claim
!. that. as interpretated by the courts, IL
has intcrfcred with the constitutional
freedom of speech, and Of the press, and
OF the right of public assemblage. aud of
!. trial BY jury. The evidence offered in
support OF this claim consists mainly
of preliminary injunctions Of certain
indpcs in the states of West Virginia,
/ Arkansas and Texas. ! believe that
, many of these iniunctions would have
been quickly modified and narrowed it
the cases had been taken to the appel
late courts. Perhaps, the very Judges
who issued them would have done so II
they had had the opportunity and bene-
iit OF argument and review. But the
law should not be condemned bcenusn u
Judge sometimes misapplies It, any more
than the statutes against murder should
be repealed, because jury may some
times convict an innocent man. lnfalli-
Ibility is not a claimed attribute Of Our
courts. No human agent works with the
certainty OF divinity Good citizenship
requires us to bear with human limita-
tions Ouf Judges, as a rule, are indus-
tTious and learned, honorable and com
scientious, seeking 10 enbody the very
truth in every judgment. But in view
Of the broad Interpretation of the law,
the purposes contemplated NJ its pass
age and present conditions, and the err
rors that may occnr in lis summary
. application by the process Of injunction,
II would favor les modification 40 that 10
would conform with The common law,
and that, as applied % trade disputes,
! the civil process of Injunction should
only 20 against acts that constitute an
unreasonable restraint Of trasle. With
this modification 1 am inclined to think
there would he few complaints. The law
would then be substantially what / un-
Continued ON Fourth Page.