, 1908-09-14
REPUBLICAN STATE TICKET.
MIR. TAFT AND B

Mr.. Bryan has had something to say
about the position of Mr.. Taft upon
theQ question of injunctions and his at
titude toward labor. In this he has
STOPPED TO the role of the ~demagogue.
II he had assumed the attitude of a
straightforward man, he would have
admitted that Judge Taft's duty as a
justice upon the bench was to pass
upon the law and the evidence as 1t
was presented to him, giving such
opinion as he honestly believed to be
right. There is no question as to the
honesty OF the opinions rendered by
Judge Taft. There IL no question but
that they were strictly In accord with
law. And the safety of the American
people. union men and all. lies in the
honesty of the men who preside yer
the courts OF this country. Mr.. Taft
had a sworn duty to perform and he
performed 1t regardless Of fear or
favor. At times his decisions hit the
large corporations. At times they
were against poor men and agains.
labor organizations, but they were al
ways In accord with the law and the
evidence.
In speaking of this question the
other day In Ohio. Mr.. Taft said:
Now. as the question of injunc.
lions. l understand, In the first place.
that my own personal attitude toward
labor has been represented as a man
who says and thinks that a dollar a
day Is enough for any man. Well,
there Is n short way of meeting that
statement, and that Is that 1t is a lie.
l never said 1t, and l don't think that
1t argues intelligence in any man who
believes the statement, for what I'M
der heaven would induce me or any.
one to say 80?
I'm the second place. they say that
l am the father of Injunction in la
bor.' l have issued injunctions in la.
DOR cases. there is no doubt. and /
have done it because the right of the
plaintiff entitled him to an injunction,
and when l am on the bench and en-.
forcing the law I enforce 1t, and |
don't make any apologies for it. 1t
has been my lot to sit in labor cases,
to sit in antitrust cases. When l am
a judge on the bench, insofar as | can.
l decided cases according to the law
and the facts, no matter whom 1t
hunrts. because | believe that to be my
worn duty.
'NnW II hnS hnnn nv, 10t tA Lao,
down the rules with respect to the
rights OF labor In two or three cases.
and l refer to those cases as a full
statement OF what l believe the rights
of labor to be with reference to its
employment. Labor has the right to
unite in organization for the purpose
of looking after the united interests
of labor in its controversy with cap
ital. because if it did not unite and
was no permitted to unite, then it
would lie helpless. Laborers have the
right not only to unite, but to contrib.
ute funds which in times when they
wish to leave the employ of their m
ployer, when they do not like his
terms, may support their fellow MEN,
bers. They have the right to appoint
officers who shall control their action.
If they choose. They have the right
to invite all other laborers to unite
with them and withdraw If they
choose from association with their
employer. But they have not the
right to injure their employers prop
erty; they have not the right by what
is called a secondary boycott to in
vite a third person into the contro-
versy VINO wishes to keep out by
threatening a boycott with him I'M
less he assists them in the fight. In
this fight between the employer and
the employee or the united employees
they must fight it out between them
selves and thy nus not involve the
rest of the community in it by a sys-
TEN of duress. This law, / believe. is
a fair law, and being a fair law when
l was on the bench / attempted to en-
force it.
1T is said I issued the injunction
first in labor cases That gives me
too much credit for ingenuity and too
great honor as an inventor of judicial
proceedings. II you will examine the
records you will find that there were
q number of cases before l issued an
injunction at all, and that l merely
followed precedent in doing so. l am
not apologizing for that; | am merely
telling you the fact. What | believe,
gentlemen. is that there ought to be
no favored class in litigation at all.
The theory that If you weaken the
courts by taking away the power Of
Injunction in certain cases you are
going to help the working man is ut
unfounded. The person who Is
soaag to, take advantage Of the weak
sneA power Of the courts Il the man