The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1908-10-29
NIX. TAFT HAS SPOKEN. Mr.. COM.
PER HAS SPOKEN. BUT Mr..
BRYAN. THE PEERLESS
ONE. WILL NOT
ANSWER.

| RNOW WEN.
Up to the present time Mr. Bryan has
made no reply to the Presidents ques-
ton as to his Interpretation of the in
junction plank in the Denver platform.
Mr.. Taft in his notification speech de-
ciared that this plank was loosely drawn
and framed for the especial purpose OF
| rendering it susceptible to one interpre-
tation by one set of men and to
Numerically opposite Interpretation by
another set. Mr.. Bryan, before the
| question came UP as a direct issue. said
that the language is so clear that only
one meaning could be attached to it.
and he gave his Interpretation of its
meaning. Mr.. Gompers, the author
OF the plank, gives an entirely different
Interpretation. MIR. Gompers did not
say that the plank of the Democratic
platform, which he wrote, means this or
that in direct terms. But he explained
to a committee of Congress and in an
article in McCIure's Magazine what
labor-meaning himself-want, and on
several occasions he has declared that
the Denver convention gave labor what
it wanted.
This statement of Mr.. Gompers veri-
ties what Judge Taft said Of the plank.
and as the voters are left in doubt as to
the real meaning Of the plank from
Democratic standpoint furtherdeclara-
ton from Mr.. Bryan is demanded. Mr..
Gompers has said that the Democratic
convention at Denver made labor's con-
tention its own. Then Mr.. Gompers
told the committee Of Congress what is
''iabor's contention, as he understands
it. He demands the enactment of
House bill No. "a in the Sixtieth Con-
gress. The III which Mr.. Gompers
says embcdies labor's contentious TO
bids the courts to afford any protection
to the man whose right to do business is
attacked during a strike Mr.. Gompers
further says that the Democratic party
| pledged its candidates for every office to
! these remedies which labor had sub
mltted to Congress, and it appears from
the record that bill No 81 ad been sub
mitted to Congress by Mr.. Pearre "by
request, and that Mr.. Gompers went
before the committee to indorse it as
the onl y measure proposing satisfactory
remedies.
Mr.. Bryan should explain whether he
agrees with Mr.. Gompers that the Dem
ocratic platform pledges the candidates
OF the party to support this measure,
which will paralyze the courts and legal
lie the destruction of man S business.
This question cannot be evaded 1t is
in the platform upon which Mr.. BRYAN
Is standing. He has said he cannot be
| induced to discuss the race question, or
10 to l, or government ownership of
railroads, or any other question outside
the platform upon which he stands.
But here is question right in the plat
form IN which every business man, every
laboring man and every manufacturer
IN the land is interested, and plain re-
ply is needed Mr.. Bryan cannot take
refuge in words. The question for him
to answer is whether he holds to his first
Interpretation of the injunction plank of
the Denver platform, or whether the
Interpretation of Mr.. Gompers, the man
who wrote it, is to be taken or repudi-
ated. For ourselves, we do not believe
that labor" makes any such contention
as that set forth by Mr.. Gompers. Mr..
Gompers is an Englishman and NAV
have ideas suitable for England. But
they are not American, and we do not
believe American labor will approve
them. We do not believe Mr.. Gompers
is labor" We believe that the labor
ing people are too fair-minded, too pa
triotic and too wise to ask for special
privileges, and have too strong sense
OF fair play to contend that man has
no property right in the good will"
which he has built up in his business or
has purchased. We do not believe that
labor asks the privilege Of breaking up
a mans business by forcibly keeping
his customers out of his store. That
may be Mr.. Gompers' idea of a free