Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-10-22

ihedtC Soiie OCEeT emplOSeT Dy CedSlUS oil
business relations with him? The black
list and the secondary boycott are two Of
the most cruel forms of oppression ever
devised by the wit Of man for the in
Fiction of suffering on his weaker fell
lows.
Brutal, Unfeeling, Despotic Power.
No court could possibly exercise any
more brutal. unfeeling OF despotic power
than Mr.. Gompers claims for himself and
his followers in this legislation, which
would permit them without let or him
drance Of any kind to carry on every form
and degree Of the secondary boycott.
The anthracite strike commission. as
falr minded and distinguished body of
men as ever passed judgment on an in
dustrial question. thus refers to the sec
ondary form of boycott: that is. the boy
colt of innocent third persons for refusing
to take an aggressive part in a contro-
versy with which they have no concern:
ITO say this Is not to deny the legal
rlsnt or any man or set OF men volun-
tarily to refrain from social intercourse
or business relations with any persons
whom he or they. with or without good
reason. dislike. This may sometimes be
unchristian. but it is not illegal. But
when it is concerted purpose Of a num-
Der OF persons not only to abstain them
selves from such intercourse but to rem
der the life of their victim miserable by
persuading and intimdating others so
TO refrain such purpose is a malicious one
and the concerted attempt to accomplish
1t Is conspiracy at common law, and
merits and should receive the punishment
due to such crime
The commission further states that this
boycott can be carried to an extent
which was condemned by Mr.. Mitchell.
president OF the United Mine Workers of
America. in his testimony before the
commission. and which certainly deserves
the Reproduction of all thoughtful and
law-abiding citizens"
Does Mr. Bryan agree with Mr.. Com
pers that all existing legal restraint on
the enforcement Of every degree of the
boycott should be Withdrawn; that the
industrial accommodation of the inno-
cent merchant who refuses to render
unquestioned obedience to the orders of
Mr. Gompers should be legalized and en-
ccouraged. or does he believe, with us and
with Mr.. Mitchell and other labor leaders
who differ with Mr.. Gompers in this mat
ter. that this form Of the boycott is NOR
ally wrong: that labor at war should fight
with it's enemies and respect the rights
of neutra!s; that innocent third parties
should not be coerced into taking sides
in industrial disputes to which they are
in no sense parties, under penalty of hay
ing their business attacked and destroyed?
Mr. Taft is perfectly definite on this
proposition
Where does Mr.. Bryan stand?
Mr.. Taft's Position Plain.
The citizen who votes for or against
Mr.. Taft on this proposition does so with
his eyes open and will, a clear UNDER
standing from Mr.. Taft himself Of his
position. He has frankly discussed this
subject time and again with workingmen
themselves. both in this campaign and
prior to his nomination. He has been
willing to express his position clearly
and to assure workingmen that to pro-
tect them in their rights he is willing to
go to the limits of what lie considers JUS
tice. but that he will not go further. His
definition of justice to labor does not,
as we understand it. include either Of the
program as set forth officially in this
bill.
Does Mr. Bryan disagree with Mr..
Taft on these propositions?
Will he state publicly, definitely cate
gorically whether he accepts the pro-
gram outlined in this bill. as Mr.. Com
pers in his letters has assured the public
that he does?
Mr.. Bryan's party platform paid high
tribute to our courts of justice. 1t stated:
I'VE resent the attempt of the repub-
lican party to raise false issue respect
Ing the judiciary. 1t is an unjust refiec-
ton upon great body Of our citizens to
assume that they lack respect for the
courts
The great body of our citizens to
whom this platform refers is admittedly
Mr.. Gompers and his followers
Mr.. Gompers, now Mr.. Bryan's open
and avoWed ally, has. in the letter here
quoted. attacked the federal courts in I'M
a long line of decisions. the equity courts
have refused to make an outlaw of the
business man. because his right to carry
on a lawful business under the peace Of
the law has been protected by the process
of injunction. because in a word, one Of
the most vital and most fundamental
rights OF the business world, the right Of
a business man to carry on his business,
has been sustained and not denied by the
processes of the courts Of equity This
the judiciary has been made In frank
and open effort to secure votes for Mr..
Bryan.
Are these attacks made with Mr.. Bry-
ans consent?
Do they meet with his approval?
Does he indorse them or does he re-
pudiate them?
Mr. Bryan has frankly questioned Mr..
Taft during the progress of this cam
paign. and very properly so. and has
asked him to make clear his personal
stand on public matters upon which the
public were entitled to be enlightened.
Bryan's Turn to Speak Now.
In turn. with equal frankness and with
equal prOpriety, Mr.. Bryan should be
asked to break a long continued silence
and make definite and certain his own
position in regard to a matter which con-
Germs not only business men and every
decent. law-abiding citizen, whether a
wageWorker or not. just as much as 1t
concerns Mr.. Gompers and that part Of
organized labor that stands with him.
There is no need of generalities, OF
vague expressions of sympathy for labor.
Let Mr.. Bryan simply confine himself to
the anti-injunction plank of his own plat
form and tell us publicly. definitely and
clearly whether he accepts or rejects the
the statement of Mr.. Gompers that this
plank pledges him to the principles of the
bill for which Mr.. Gompers stands. and
whether If elected he will endeavOr to
have this proposal enacted into law. This
is asked honestly. i'm the interest Of that
large voting public which believes sim
cerely in the promotion of every legiti-
mate right and interest of labor: but
which believes also that from the stand
point of the best interest of labor II
neither requires nor is entitled to more
than justice. and that the right to destroy
business should not be formally recog-
nized in the law OF the land.
Denounced as wicked"
feel that I have the right to speak