The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1908-10-08
WITH INTENT TO DECEIVE.

In his address of acceptance. as in
his public speeches since, William II.
Taft has met in manly fashion every
issue which concerns working people
raised by the Democratic National
Not so Mr.. Bryan. In his accept
ance speech he deferred the discus
sion of these and other issues to a
later occasion The later occasion
chosen for the full exposition of his
view of the rights and exemptions OF
working people before the law was
the occasion of the delivery of his
Labor Day speech in Chicago.
In that speech Mr. Bryan does not
meet those issues manfully. He does
not meet them at all. And he has not
attempted to meet them since, as he
doubtless would II his position or the
position of his party was an honest
one.
On the single issue of the injunc-
TVS policy of scuttle- He does SO to
the accompaniment of much rhetoric,
but he does so none the less-indeed
all the more-effectively. He believes
with his party that working people
are readily deceived by effective ap-
peal to their prejudIces and emotions.
and in dealing with the injunction
question and with every phase of 1t
his intent is plainly to deceive.
The Democratic platform and Mr..
Bryan have promised that there shall
be jury trial in all cases of contempt
of court committed out of the pres
ence of the court. What both the
Democratic candidate and the Demo-
cratic platform wanted to promise
was that every union working man on
strike charged with violating an in
junction should have his guilt or in
nocence submitted to Jury.
That promise they dare not make
without committing themselves to the
doctrine that the striking workman
should be granted a standing before
the court not accorded to other mem
bers of society.
But the promise made IS incapable
of performance, as every enlightened
man now recognizes, without deprtv-
ing the courts of the land OF their
power to enforce their own mandates.
The Democratic platform and Mr..
Bryan have also promised that no IN
junction shall be allowed to issue in
any case where a labor dispute is In
volved IL 1t would not be issued II
What both wanted to promise was
that no injunction should issue in
any case where labor dispute was
involved.
That promise they dare not make
without committing themselves to the
doctrine that striking workman
should have especial favor before the
law not conceded to any other class of
citizen. That promise is, therefore,
like the other, incapable of perform
ance.
Neither promise would ever have
been made II the purpose did not ex-
list to deceive working people into the
belief that they are to get degree of
favorable consideration before the
law in the event of Mr.. Bryan's cleo
ton that cannot in the nature OF
things be extended to any other class
of people in the community.
If working people, especially those
belonging to the unions, have bene-
thing like the extent claimed by their
leaders, through the propaganda car
past few years, it will be impossible
10 impose this deception upon them.
The stiffness of Mr.. Bryan in dis
posing of these two false promises is
worthy of admiration. But the cam
paign is long and the orators art Is
neeting, and there may be another
story to tell before tho end has come.