The morning journal-courier., 1908-07-17
THE LABOR VOTE.

THE LABOR VOTE.
 The presence of Samuel Gompers, the president of the national federa- tion of labor at Chicago with other associates and later at Denver has caused people to wonder what their authority was to speak in the name of organized labor. They were manifest ly at Chicago to get what they could and to then move on to Denver to get more, in each instance plainly intimat- ing to the party leaders in control that organized labor throughout the coun- try would support the party address, ed, If the demands of their representa- tives on the spot were complied with.
 In yesterdays issue of The Journal Courier was printed an interview with labor leaders, who denied that MT. Gompers and his associates acted or could possibly act with tho assent of the members of the organization. They were distinct and definite in their statements that the man does not live who can deliver the labor vote of the country to any one. Said one of them: "The fact Is that union people think about the same way as other people do. Because a man Is a mem Der of the union for trade benefits, he does not hand over his right to judge political questions to any one who happens to be at the head. especially when as in this case it is so mani fest that the federation chiefs are seeking political power" Said an other: While I believe that Gompers Is trying to do his best for the inter- erests of organized labor don't pro- pose to let any man take. away my freedom at the ballot box. No ono can speak for all labor men. Our vote is independent and the consensus of labor opinion is the same
 These assertions someh ow ring true. and impress an unpreiudiced person as representing accurately the views of the average member If organized labor Men are enlisted Tn the army of unionzed labor for self protection
 
 In their trades and occupations. No religious or political or scientific ben- eflts are promised Their interest is more practical and has to do with the scale of wages to be paid, the length of days labor more liberal con- ditions of employment and with legis- lation effecting factory organization. No one of these things is political in origin or in achievement. So far IS wages are concerned it Is matter of negotiation between employer and employed. It does not touch the re- sponsibility of political party. The same is true of other conditions of employment. The enactmel 1t of laws for the better protection Of factory employees and mine workers is not a political responsibility and IS not the concern of any single party; 1t Is q proposition in morals and the public health. Even the question of iniunc- tons Is improperly included among the assets of political party; 1t is a question for sober-minded and impar- tial students of social and economic conditions to determine
 It is because these things are so that we have regarded the threatened entrance of organized labor into poli- tics, through the activity of the chiefs as of exceedingly doubtful wisdom. It Is now generally recognized that there is a definite work cut out for organ ized labor to perform, and large cor porations in particular have in many instances come to recognize 'ts mutual usefulness, but at the same time or ganized labor can contn le to get out of its work all that is desirable only upon the exercise of the greatest care in not crossing that thin line, which separates it's necessities from its hu- manities. It's necessities have to dc with conditions of employment. 1tS humanities have to do with the right of each man to act as he choses with in the law in matters concerning his religion and his politics. The req reason why neither Mir. Gompers noi any other labor leader will ever deiv. CT the labor vote to the political part, of his choice is because such an under. taking interferes arbitrarily with thc humanities of organized labor, Tht political history of Connecticut within the past twelve years definitely proves this.
 - -
 vvh,+ ohout the plan for fushinf