Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1906-10-04
I'm HIS TRUE LIGHT.
SPEAKER CANNON REVEALS HIM.
SELF TO THE PEOPLE.
Practically Announces That He Favors
Government by Injunction and
Resort to Star Chamber
Methods of Procedure.

aAo ANVIL 0bo Va ooL vi SlhdS 0
Speaker Cannon made a speech on the
18th of August which is likely to cost
his party as dearly as anything that
happened in Connection with the
Homestead affair in 1892. Mr.. Cannon
not only upheld the tariff law of 1897
under which the trusts of the present
day have grown up, but he made a vi
cious assault upon the American in
stitution of trial by jury and eulogized
the system of trial without juries in
criminal cases which prevailed in the
English court of star chamber. He
did not mention trial by jury or the
star chamber, but he denounced the
opponents of government by injunc-
ton; and government by injunction
mean the elimination of jury trials
and a resort to the star chamber
metkod of procedure. By indirection,
by fraud, and by tricks, the speaker
assaulted the constitution, the Demo
cratic party, and organized labor all
at once. He also misstated facts. He
says:
"Mr. Gompers, with Mr.. Stillings.
his attorney, advocated a bill intro
duced by request by Representative
Pearre."
This statement is untrue. Mr..
Gompers did not advocate any bill
but H. R. 4445, introduced by Mr.. Lit
tie of Arkansas. At page 40 of the
hearings before the judiciary commit
tee Of the house of representatives,
ffty-ninth congress, first session, in
relation to anti-injunction and re.
straining orders, Mr.. Gompers is re-
ported as saying:
"The judiciary committee of the
house of representatives has recon-
mended the passage of the bill which
| advocate-H. R. 4445. The house
passed it once" Again in the same
volume, at page rs, Mr.. Andrew Furu.
seth, speaking for the Federation of
Labor, is reported as saying: I'VE
want H. R. 4445. We don't want H. R.
$685."
Now H. R. 4445 is a literal copy OF
the Hoar-Grosvenor bill which passed
the house May 2, 1902. with Mr.. Can
mons approval. Immediately after il
had been read in the house, the fol
lowing proceedings took place.
"Mr. Ray, of New York: Mr.
Speaker, if there is no comment de-
sired nov the previous question.
"The Speaker: The gentleman from
New York moves the previous ques'
ton.
"The previous question was ordered
and under the operation thereof the
bill was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, and being engrossed. ii
was accordingly read the third time
and passed. "-Congressional Record
Vol. 35, p. 1895.
Mr.. Cannon was in the speakers
chair and approved the whole proceed
ing.
The bill did not pass the senate, but
it would be unjust to assume that the
Republican majority of the house Of
| representatives knew in advance thai
it would fail, and voted for it perfid
iously, in order to deceive the labor
ing men of the country. MI. Cannon
is now doing his best, however, tc
force that view upon the public. Ii
his speech at Danville, ILL.,, August 16
1906, he said:
"Mr. Gompers claims that in con
tests growing out of strikes or lock
outs he is opposed to violence on the
part of any one connected with the
controversy. l will not question the
good faith of the claim, but I do say
that if the legislation he demands
were enacted, destruction of property
by irresponsible persons in such con
troversies would increase. Again, il
such legislation were enacted, under
it's cover vicious and irresponsible per
sons belonging to the criminal class
not engaged in labor or seeking tt
labor, would avail themselves of the
| opportunity, as they have in many in
SldlCeS, III Tic uduic VI SohlColiht
labor, of destroying property, and the
owner thereof would be without rem
edy. The legislation that Mr.. Com
pers demands would turn loose il
times of trouble the criminally dis
posed"
If this is true to-day, why wasn't |
true on the second day of May, 1902
when the identical bill which Mr.
| Gompers advocated before the com
mittee on March 4, 1906, was passed
by the body over which Mr.. Cannon
presides, and which he practically con
trolls; he and every other Republican
and every Democrat in that body as
senting to it? Why did he and the
Republican majority agree to give
such an opportunity to vicious ant
irresponsible persons belonging to thu
criminal class" at that time? VIII!
did he and his party then agree tt
turn loose in times of trouble thu
criminally disposed?" Are the labor
ing people any worse now than the,
were then? Or is he simply SANDER
ing those people now, besides impugn
ing the honor Of every Republican
member of the fifty-seventh congress
Hurrah for the Democrats.
Have you heard from Maine? Tha
| rock-ribbed Republican state la
| given the smallest majority agains
the Democrats since 1~S72--barel.
5000. Nor was this great loss t.
the Republicans confined to the vot
for governor, for every Republican