St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1908-08-29

ter question, the "full-dinner pail ar
gument. Can you blame men for Civ
ing in to this cry? l don't! Suppose
the head of factory or plant says
he will have to shut down" if a Ger.
tain man isn't elected. The employe
may reason to himself: 1T doesn't
make any difference to me who's
elected, but if this plant shuts down
| lose my job If lose my job I'm
on the street." To expect him to "as-
sert the God-given right of the fran
chise," as some orators put it, is to
expect him to ignore the rule that
tself-preservation is the first law of
nature" You can't hand that poppy
cock to man with a wife and fam
lily depending on him for their exist
ence. I don't mean for their comfort,
l mean literally for their existence.
A certain judge in our city was up
for reelection. He had hit 1abor's
head every time it appeared before
him. He had earned the title of the
Injunction Judge" He was a re-
spected and reputable citizen, a man
of blameless private life. But he did
not decide in favor of labor unions |
am not impugning his motives nor his
integrity. And the supreme court af-
firnfed his decisions.
Our party made extraordinary ef-
forts to beat this man. Circulars call
ing attention to his decisions were cir
culated among the laboring element.
The labor unions had representatives
among every class and race calling
attention to these decisions, and his
attitude toward the labor unions. Good
speakers, without in any way STOPPING
to abuse or unfairneSs showed the Ia
Dor element that this particular jur-
list, if reelected, could reasonably be
expected to drive nail into labor's
coffin every time he had an opportu-
nifty. There was no difficulty in the
way of labor pumping" its solid vote
against this particular candidate, for
all that was necessary was to put a
cross in the ring in front of the oppo'
sition candidate.
Day in and day out, week in and
week out the campaign was steadily
waged against this man. 1t was not
simply because of his party; nor be-
cause his decisions had sent men to
cells for what they believed was exer-
cising the right to privileges guaran.
teed them by the state constitution
and the constitution Of the United
States. These men may have ex-
ceeded their rights. The supreme court
of the state said they did. Let it go
at that! But he was candidate we
wanted to beat, and his adversary was
an entirely reputable lawyer, standing
as high in the estimation of the COM
munity as our antagonist.
The day of election came and the
Judge we were trying to defeat, with
the aid of the labor vote in addition
to our own strength, was triumphant
w elected. The labor" vote did not |
materialize. 1t was voted, all right, |
for the registration did not disclose |
any great array of "stay-at-homes."
But the labor vote did not throw its
strength against the man who had so
1ften decided against it in his court
room. If labor had gone solidly
against him, no possible detection
rom our strict party ranks would
nave saved him, for the labor vote, SO
ar as numbers was concerned, would
nave overwhelmed him.
There are two sides to this granting
II injunctions, you know. Both great
parties are now getting out state plat
orms protesting against the abuse of
his power. But suppose we say, for
he sake of argument purely, that this
Judge was absolutely right in every de.
,ision that he made. Even if this
we're admitted (which l deny) he was
Judge whom labor had every reason
n the world to wish to retire to pri-
rate life
Take it from me, with my sympathy
.lways with the labor element as an
ntirety (because it has the hardest
ow to hoe), that the Tabor vote"
nd all this piff1e about the labor
ote'' is the merest "monkey-moon.
hine."
ERNEST MGAFFEY.
Copyright, 1903. by Joseph 3. Bowles.l