The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-09-13
Indianapolis Man Explains What is the Real
 Labor Question
CAPITAL IS ESSENTIAL
 ID WELFARE OF PEOPLE
Parry Declares That Both Bryan and Beveridge Dodge the Real Question
 In Debate-Private Owner
 ship Must Be Protected.

Washington, September 12.-(Special)- D. M. Parry of Indianapolis has taken a cudgel to both William J. Bryan and Sen ator Albert J. Beveridge for their views on the labor question as exRessed in their debate in the Reader magazine, and has prepared a keen and peppery article, In which he scores both for evasion falla- clous reasoning and trucking to the labor vote
 MT Parry handles both the Reader dis putants without gloves. He says:
 The real labor question is whether men in an organized capacity shall Q) be permitted a special license to violate law and @ whether they shall be granted special favors by the government at the expense of the whole people. The unions assume the power to deny. by forclble means If necessary, the right of a non member to work here, when and for what he pleases and the right of the employer to hire whom he pleases and to manage his own capital as he sees fit under the law. Also the unions are particularly clamorous for special favor from govern ment The labor question is thus one imposed on the country by the efforts of organized labor to use it's power in an hlegitimate way. and it is this attempted abuse of power which occasions allAindus- trial troubles and constitute the entire cpaltal-labor controversy. The real labor question has nothing to do with the right of labor to organize for legitimate ends, and when confnng their efforts within the sphere of the lawful, the unions best ends of society
 Dodging the Question.
 Do MT. Bryan and MT. Beveridge ad- dress themselves to the labor question as have bere statea Il. No. IneV n1gl1 nof dare to do it. The union labor man Is a voter-a very hard voter to please and still harder to keep pleased But horror of horrors. if he isn't pleased there is the fatal roll of the political enemies of labor edited from day to day by Mr. Gompers! And if MT. Bryan or our own dear senator should get his name on that roll 1t would be catacylsmic, Could they tell the unions that when they strike, when they abandon their employment. their members should leave the placa where they had worked and not molest in any way their former employer or tiie ildH ne ulFeS m lnelr stead? Could they tell them that their proposed class legislation could not be granted without virtually annulling the constitution of the United States and substituting in it's place code on the socialistic order? Of course not-that is they could not do it from the standpoint of public men. Hence we have a labor debate which in point of fact is mainly a rvalistie performance to see which can smear the political salve the deepest.
 Beveridge on Defensive.
 But while MT. Bryan and MT. Bever- idge evade the main issue they have much to say which requires an answer 1t is only justice to MT. Beveridge to say tha. his views are very much different from those of MT. Bryan. Being senatorial member of MT. Roosevet's cabinet, Mir Beverdge is somewhat on the defensive 1t IS largely his object to prove that the national administration is for labor. but in doing this he Is careful to admit that labor is not exactly the whole thing III the universe, and that as matter of fact capital is also entitled to some con sideration. This admission is well-nigh fatal from labor point of view as was demonstrated in a resent interview in the public press, wherein the most conser- vative' labor leader In the country adrcit- ly takes the senator to task by declaring with pointed emphasis that the labor question is the only great question. and that all other questions, such as tariff finances, trusts. etc, mentioned by the senator, pale into nsignficance beside it. Clearly from the labor point of view, Mr. Bryan has utterly routed MT. Beveridge In this debate.
 Bryan's Diplomacy
 But Mr Bryan. being of the 'opposi- ton. and exceedingly anxious that some body else should become the opposition has no annoying responsibilities to con tend with and apparently no scruples in further advertising himself as an enemy of capital. Organizer labor says: If we just had the right kind of laws, nobody would be poor or have to work either, and Mir Bryan pats it on the back and says: You are on the right track. boys, I'm with you Organized labor further ayers: The present laws are capitalistic laws and until they are changed we must nave the privilege of violating them whenever we fight capital and it's hirelngs' Mir Bryan Automatically replies: You are entitled to all the special privileges that government grant you.'
 MT. Bryan favors the amendment of the law as to injunctions so as to ex rept labor unions, but still leaving the law apply to trusts and capital in gen eial. Such an amendment can possibly mean but one thing, and that is the granting of special privilege to the unions to commit crime. Mir. Beveridge he it sad makes some sound remarks as to the injunction. but in the windup seems to favor some sort of a 'compro- misc with labor on the the subject
 Bryan Wants Law Amended.
 .AIr. bryan and the labor leaders assert J ,uously that labor is the all-important t in the universe and that capital [ inert and soulless, is of small con-
 ce. Destroy tine present capital in
 1try and four-fifths of the people
 ertainly die of starvation. The
 uld still be in existence when the
 IS destroyed, but work hard
 [, it would not be able tG keep
 for the majority at bay
 5hat Causes Poverty.
 ensues from the absence of
 from the absence of labor.
 was further illustrated when