Woodruff County news. [volume] (McCrory, Ark.) 1901-1910, 1908-09-10
BRYAN TO WORKMEN
DELIVERS NOTABLE ADDRESS AT
CHICAGO CELEBRATION.
Defines the Difference Between Planks
in Democratic and Republican
PIatforms-Justice for
the ToiIers.

here Hon. w. j. Bryan was the principal
speaker, and had for an audience many
thousands of workmen. Mr.. Bryan said
in part:
Labor day is legal holiday and it was
made so because the legislators thought
the wage-earnerS worthy to have day
specially set apart for the consideration
of themes that concern those who toll.
! appreciate the compliment paid me by
the program committee of this city in in
Nlting me TO participate in the ceremonies
of this day, and it was gladly accepted,
because Chicago is the second city in the
union, and as d labor center 1t is scarce
lY second to any city in the world.
If 1t We're proper to speak from text,
would select a passage from Proverbs,
furnished by the words of Solomon when
he declared that as man 'thinketh in
his heart, so is he" This is Bible doc
trlne; 1t is common sense, and 1t is hu-
man experience. We think In our hearts
as we'll as in our heads-out of the heart
are the issues of life" 1t is poor head
that cannot ind plausible reason for
doing what the heart wants to do ] be-
gin my speech with this proposition be-
cause l want to impress it upon the
minds of those who listen to me, and up
ON those who read what l say to you.
The labor question is more a moral than
an intellectual one.
A long step toward the elevation OF
labor to its proper position in the ma
tons deliberations is to be found in the
establishment of department of labor,
with cabinet officer at its head. The
wage earnerS deserve this recognition,
and the executive is entitled to the as
sistance which such an official could
render him. L regard the Inauguration
of this reform as the opening of new
era i'll which those who toll will have
voice in the deliberations of the presi-
dents council chamber.
The labor organization has been seri-
ously Handicapped by the fact that it
has been-and l am not sure that it has
not been done unwittingly-yoked up with
the industrial combinations known as
q
tenders to use the labor organi-
cation as an excuse for combinations
in restraint of trade has aroused the sus-
picion that they have been classed to-
gether for the purpose of shielding the
combinations of capital. As the result
one man has been given "a penal SEN
tence for violating the federal law on
this subject and that man was mem-
trust magnate. The laboring man is JUS
titled in his demand that a distinction
shall be drawn between the labor
sanization and the industrial monopoly.
The trust and the labor organization
cannot be described in the same language.
The trust magnates have used their pow
ct to amass swollen fortunes, While no
one will say that the labor organization
has as yet secured for its members more
than their share of the profits arising
from their work. But there are funda-
mental differences. The trust is a COM
hinatiOn of dollars; the labor organize
ton is an association of human beings
In trust q few men attempt to con-
troll the product of others; in a labor
organization, the members unite for the
protection of that which is their own
namely, their own Labor, which. being
necessary to their existence, is q part of
them The trust deals with dead matter;
the labor organization deals With life and
with intellectual and moral forces. No
impartial student of the subject will de-
ny the right of the laborin@ man to eX-
eluption from the operation of the eX-
listing antitrust laws.
If the labor organization needs to he
regulated by law. let it be regulated by
q law which deals with man as man, and
not by law that VAS aimed to pre-
the forestaling of the market.
I shall not speak of the eight-hour
day. OF of the employers liability act
because both of the leading parties have
indorsed these reforms: the only cues
ton to be considered: which party
can best be trusted to secure these re-
forms? l need hardly to assure You
that l am heartily in favor OF both
There are two questions, however, in
timately connected with the labor prob
lem upon which the Democratic and Re
publican parties do not agree. and | not
only feel ut liberty to discuss these but,
under the circumstances, ! have no
issue of iniunctions, and the other to con-
tempt cases arising under injunctons:
The Republican convention did not deal
candidly with the laboring man on the
subject OF the writ of injunction. Sec
rotary Taft has endeavored to amend his
platform in this respect and to make
some promises. which are not supported
by his platform, but his promises offer
nothing substantial in the way of reform,
and are not binding ON Republican sena-
tors and members. The Republican con-
gress has already made a record on la
Dor questions and the Republican party
cannot escape from that record.
MIR. Taft's speech may be considered
as binding upon him. but the convention
which selected the Republican candidates
ndorsed the Republican platform-not
Mr.. Taft's personal views. The Republt-
can platform, while pretending To pledge
some modification of the law, contains
an exception clause which reiterates the
very language of the law. Whether this
exception clause was inserted by accident
or design, the effect is the same II
merely provides. in substance, that re
straining orders shall not issue without
issue without notice The platform was
a triumph for those who have been OPP
posing the laboring man, and they have
been boa sting OF their victory.
The Democratic platform on this sub
iect copies the language which the labor
organizations submitted to the Repubh-
can and Democratic conventions Mr..
Taft. in his notification speech, objects 10
the language. lie charges that the anti
injunction plank was loosely drawn
and framed for "the especial purpose of
rendering it susceptible to one interpre-
tation by one set of men. and Il diamet-
REALLY opposite Interpretation by an
other. As Alf. ldtt mas ldt lotiS tA-
perence on the bench. ana is therefore
skilled in the Interpretation of language,
| ask him to give us, if he can, two "p-
posite interpretations of the language.
That plank demands that AL parties 20
all judicial proceedings shall be treated
with rigid importantly" Surely he can
not find two interpretations to the phrase
rigid impartaNty.
Speaking of industrial disputes. the
platform declares that 'injtnctions shall
not be issued in any cases in which in
iInctions would not issue il no industrial
dispute were involved How can that
language be misconstrued or misinter-
preted? If words mean anything. that
blank means that an industrial dispute
shall not. in itself. be regarded as SUI
ficieut cause for an Injunction IF an IN
junction issues in an industrial dispute,
il must be based upon acts which would
Justify an injunction II there were no
Industrial dispute involved. There IS
nothing ambiguous about it; there is
nothing that can be misconstrued or mis-
interpreted even by one desiring to find
a double meaning. Why do the Repuh-
licau leaders attempt to read ambiguity
into those words? Simply because they
cannot meet the proposition presented.
One of the great problems to-day is
to secure an equitable distribution of the
nroceeds of toll. The material wealth of
This country is largely joint product:
in factories few people work alone and