The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-10-22

to Senator P c. Knox of Pennsylvania, 1 in which MT. Roosevelt pays his re- spects to Samuel Gompers president of l the American Federation of Labor
 Speaking at Philadelphia on Tues- day Senator Knox took issue with MT. Gompers on the question of the atti- tude of organized labor in the present campaign, and the Presidents letter is in support of MT. Knoxs views.
 MT. Roosevelt says:
 White House,
 Washington, october 21, 19OS' My Dear Senator Knox:
 Tn your admirable speech of yester- l cay you speak of the action of MT. Bryan and certain gentlemen claiming to be the special representatives of organized labor, ! foremost among them Mr. Gompers, to secure the support of laboring men for Mir. Bryan CD consideration of his agree rnent to perform certain acts nomnally ln the interest of organized labor, which would be really either wholly ineffective or else of widespread injury, not only to | organized lahor but to all decent citizens throughcui the country. You have pe- l culiar right to speak on labor questions, for, 1t was you, who, as attorney general, first actively invoked the great power of the federal government on behalf of the
  in the history of the government, you, speaking fer the department of justice, in- tery ened in d private lawsuit which had gone against locomotive fireman who had lost his arm in coupling cars and by your intervention secured from the su- preme court a construction of the safety appliance act. which made it vital remedial statute, and, therefore, has se- cured to hundreds of crippled employees Of rrnp1ad onnnlOVpS pensation they would not otherwise have obtained.
 "The daily papers of October IS contain an open letter from MT. Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor appealing to working men to vote for MT. Bryan.
 Statements of Gompers.
 Tn that letter are certain definite state nerts which appeal to the wider Amer ican public quite much as those to whom MT Gompers makes his appeal. These statements warrant all you have said in your speech, and they would war rant you in asking MT Bryan to say pub licly whether MT. Gompers states cor rectly the attitude of his party and him. self cn a subject that is of vital concern 90 every citizen, including every business man as well as every farmer and every ,aboring man who looks to the courts for the protection of his rights.
 "Mr. Gompers, in his letter, asserts that the judiciary of this country is destroying oemocratic government and substituting therefor an Irresponsible and corrupt des- potism in the interest of corporate power, and he further makes clear that the T means by which he believes this alleged despotism has been set up In the place 1 of democracy is by the process Of inJunc- tion in the courts of equity.
 MT. Gompers, in his letter, states that his appeal to the republican convention at Chicago for remedy against the injunction was denied. and he then goes on to state not only that the democratic party prom sed a remedy but promised him the par ticular remedy that he already asked of Congress.
 Pledges of Democrats.
 His words are; 'Labors representative then went to the derflocratic party. That party made labors contentious its own. 1 It pledged it's candidates for every office to those remedies which labor had al- ready submitted to Congress-
 "The last sentence in this quotation in- oicates very definitely the specific reme- dies to which MT. Gompers understands Mr Bryan's party has pledged itself.
 His statement now makes perfectly clear an important plank in the Bryanlte platform which has heretofore seemed l. puzzljps to vast number of earnest rninded thinking people who are sincerely interested in the steady advance and the legitimate aspirations of labor, and who carefully read both platforms to Know i precisely what hopes each hold out for the improvement of the conditions or , l wage-earners.
 That plank reads as follows Questions of judicial practice have | arisen especially in connection with in- dustrial disputes. We deem that the parties to all judicial proceedings should be treated with rigid impartiality and that injunctions should not be issued in any cases in which injunctions would not issue if no industrial dispute were in- volved.'
 This is the plank which promises the remedy against injunctions which MT. Gompers asked of MT. Bryan's party. In | actual fact it means absolutely nothing; no change of the law could be based on ! it. no man without inside knowledge could foretell what it's meaning would turn out to be. for no man could foretell how any judge would decide in any given case, | as the plank apparently leaves each judge free to say when he issues an injunction in a labor case, whether or not 1t is a case in which an injunction would issue if labor were not involved. Yet this plank is apparently perfectly clear to MT. Gompers, and in his letter to his follow CTS he indicates beyond question just what he understands 1t to mean. He asserts that he has the requisite inside knowledge. , His statement that MT. Bryans party (for | it was MT Bryan who dictated the plat 1 form), pledged to those remedies which | labor has already submitted to Congress- , | is a perfectly clear and definite statement. , Remedies Submitted.
 "The remedies which MT. Gompers has already submitted to Congress are mat ] ters of record, and the Identification of his remedy against injunctions in labor disputes Is easy and certain This remedy is embodied in House bill No. "A of the l first session of the sixteth Congress, the complete text of which is hereto append ed The gist of the bill, as can be seen by referring to the complete text, is this: l. First, after forbidding any federal judge to issue restraining order for an injunction in any labor dispute, except to prevent irreparable injury to property or a property right, 1t specifically provides that, no right < : to carry on business of any particular kind, or at any particular place, or at all, shall be construed, held. considered or treated as property or as constituting a property right
 Second, it provides that nothing agreed upon or done by two or more parties in connection with labor dispute shall con- stitute Q conspiracy or other criminal of- fense or be prosecuted as such unless the thing agreed upon would be unlawful if l v gircla individual