The Washington times., 1908-09-07
ocontinued ION - Page.)

with the industrial combinations known
as trusts. TIE proneness of trust de-
tenders TO use the labor organization as
an excuse for combinations IN restraint
of trade has aroused the suspicion that
they have been classed together for the
purpose of shielding the combinations
of capital AS the rasult Of eighteen
years of antitrust legislation. only one
man has De5l given penal sentence
for violating the Federal law on this
subject, and that man was "A member Of
a labor organization rather thar trust
magnate. The labOring man is justified
in his demand that a distinction shall
be drawn between the labor organiza-
ton and the industrial monopoly.
Are Not Similar.
The trust and the labor organiza-
ton cannot be described in the same
language. The trust magnates have used
their power to amass swollen fortunes
while no one will say that the labor or
ganizatiOn has as yet secured for its
members more than their share OF the
profits arising from their work. But
there are fundamental differences. Tie
trust is a combination or dOllarSi Ine
labor organization is an association OF
human beings In a trust few men at
tempt to control the product OF others;
I'm a labor organization, the members
unite for the protection or that WnlcA
IS their own, namely, their own labor,
which, being necessary TO their exist
with dead matter; the labor Organizatto
deals with life and with intellectual ana
moral forces. No impartial student OF
the subject VIII deny the right OF lhe
labOring man to exemption rom IhS
ODeTaIfOn of the existing antitrust law
''If labor organization needs 10 be
regulated by law, let il be regulated by
a law which deals with man as man.
and not by a law that was aimed to
preVenT the COrnering OF commonly
or the fOrestalling of the market.
There are two questions intimately
connected with the labor problem upon
which the Democratic and Republican
parties do not agree, and I not only reel
al liberty 10 discuss these, but. under
the circumstances, I have no right 10
ignore them.
One Relates to InjunctiOns.
zone relates to the issue of injunctions,
and the other to contempt cases arising
under tniunctions. The Republican con-
yention did not deal candidly with the
laboring man on the subject of the writ
OF Injunction. Secretary Taft has en-
deavored to amend his platform N thls
respect and to make some promises,
which are not supported by his plat
form but his promises offer nothing
substantial in the way OF reform, ana
arc not binding on Republican Senators
and members. The Republican Con
eres, has already made a record on
Iaho. questions and the Republican
party cannot escape from that record
The Democratic platform on this
subject copies the language Whlch lhe
labor organizations submitted 10 ILle
Republican and Democratic conceptions.
Mr. TAFT in his notification speech, OBJ
lects to The language He charges that
the anti-inj njunCTlOn plank was loOseiy
drawn, and framed TOr the especldl
inc eFfG
one Interpretation by one set OF men.
and a Numerically opposite lnterpTeta-
ton by another AS Mr.. Taft has had
long experience on the bench, and Is
therefore skilled IN the interpretatiooih OF
language, / ask him 10 give US, II ne
can, two opposite Interpretations or the
language That plank demands that
all parties 10 all judicial proceedings
shall be treated with rigid imp artiailty.
Surely he cannot find two interpreta-
tions TO the phrase rigid Partially
Taft Takes Issue.
Upon the jury question Mr.. Taft
clearly takes issue with us. He is
thoroughly aroused by what he regards
as a menace to the courts. Here is his
lament:
. Never IN the history OF the country
ras there been such an insidiOus at
tack upon the judicial system as the
proposal to interject a jury trial be-
3
full hearing and the enforcement OF
such orders.
This would come under the head OF
/ important, If true But the fact is,
our platform specifically declares that
we favor a measure which passed the
United states Senate IN 1870 and which
] a Republican Congress has ever since
refused TO enact etc, providing for
trial oy jury In casea of indirect con
tempt Are not the proceedings of the
United States Senate d part OF the his
/ tory of the country This measure
/ passed the United States Senate more
i than twelve years ago, and the vote
upon il was so nearly unanimous that
no roll cali was demanded.
M Taft is no. an unbiased judge
/ where the Jury sSstem is under con-
sideration He Is not only known as
! ne father of government by injunction.
/ out he is preiudiced against the jury
: system Every man IS Inconsciously IN
1 iuenced by his environment and Mr..
Taft's long service uRon the bench has