The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-08-07
BRYAN ISSUES A STATEMENT Repliesto Circular of
 H4anufacturers. TWv QUESTIONS ARE RAISED Creation of Labor Department Can Not Offend Business Men. He Also Declares There. Is Nothiag in Labor Plank to Which Bps-
 iness Men Can Justly Take
 ExceDtisn.
TWv QUESTIONS ARE RAISED

Lincoln, Neb., Aug. 6.--W. J. Bryan to-day issued statement replying to circular issued some weeks ago by the National Association of Manufac- turers and signed by James w. Van Cleave.
 Mr. Bryan declares that the pamph- let of MT. Van Cleave's raises two questions First, is there anything in the labor plank of the Democratic platform to which business men can jrstly take exception? And. second. is the labor question so important to these men as to justify them in ig- noring all other issues?
 Mr. Bryan declares that the rro- vision in the Democratic platform for the creation of labor department with a cabinet officer at its head, cannot possibly offend business men. He then says.
 The platform draws a distinction between associations of wage earn CTS organized for the protection of wages and the improvement of labor conditions and industrial corporations which act in restraint of trade, Ths difference between a labor organiza- ton and trust is 50 apparent that no disinterested person will deny that they EHOulU UG lIGAbS0 DCRaIdLStJs V class the two kinds of organizations together and deal with them under one law. is bound to do injustice to one or the other. Surely the busi- ness men can have no vital concern in including the labor organizations In the antitrust laws"
 Trial By Jury.
 Mir. Bryan takes up the plank pro- viding for trial by Jury in cases of indirect contempt. He insists that this cannot raise question o&~ vital concern to business men because every man has g right to jury trial He then says:
 "An attempt has been made to raise a false issue in regard to the courts. and to make 1t appaar that the demand for trial by jury Is an assault upon the. integrity of the courts. Those who make this argument might as we'll in sist on the abolition of the jury in all eases. for the jury system itsef Is just as much a reflection upon the bench as is this demand for trial by jury in these particular cases.
 But there is another labor plank that Mir. Van Cleave probably has In mind. This Is the plank that declares that parties to all judicial proceedings should be treated with rigid impartial ity and that an injunction should not De Issued Tn any case m Wnlcn an ln- junction would not lie if an industrial dispute were involved. Do the busi- ness insist upon partiality in judicial proceedings? Do they insist that the mere fact there is an industrial dis pute should justify an injunction? That plank does not attempt to interfere with the issues of an injunction where other conditions justify 1t. but it does oppose the issue of an injunction mere ly for the purpose of bringing the court into the discussion of an industrial dispute.
 Class Fav0rs.
 MT Van Cleave asserts that this plank rousea class spirit and consti- tutes a demand for class favors.' But this is not true. It is declaration that the writ of injunction should not be used for the purpose of creating class or favoring 8 class. The labor. ing men resent an attempt to discrim. mate against them in favor of any other class.
 Mir. Bryan. in conclusion, declares that Mir. Van Cleave does the business men an injustice in assuming that his waking hours are filled with fears of the wage-earner. and that his nights rest is broken by imaginary disputes with those who toll.