Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-10-22
Frank Illustration.

"'rhe counsel for the American Fed
GRAFTON of Labor in his examination
before the house on Feb. 8, at which
Mr.. Gompers himself was present,
gave very frank illustration of what
he and Mr.. Gompers believed to be
the consequence of that provision of
that bill which says the right to. carry
on business shall not be entitled to
protection as a property right.
His words are:
"'Suppose that working men, by
some operation or proceedings in the
community (let us say by violence or
persuasion or picketing away from the
premses) reduce these works to a
state of utter helplessness, and there
was not a wheel moving, nor a process
in operation, and this company had no
help at all---that would be an inter-
ference with his rights to do business;
and for that l say he has a right to
be protected by Injunction
is Mr.. Bryan in reality pledged TO
this point of view?
will he definitely say either in
writing or in a public address whether
he believes with Mr.. Gompers that the
protection heretofore afforded by the
courts of equity to the right to carry
on a lawful business in a lawful way
is despotc power and that the judges
who exercise that power are irrespons-
ble despots?
80 far as the second section of this
bill is concerned, it is perfectly clear
that it would legalize the blacklist and
the sympathetic boycott carried to any
extent 1t would legalize acts which
have time and again been declared OPP
pressive, unjust and immoral by the
best and most eminent labor leaders
themselves.
Right to Paralyze Business?
Does Mr. Bryan believe with Mr.
Gompers that he and that part of the
labor movement that agrees with him
has the right morally, and should be
given the right legally, to paralyze or
to destroy with impunity the business
of an innocent third person, against
whom he or they have no direct griev-
ance. simply because this third person
refuses to join with them aggressively
in a labor controversy with the real
merits of which he may be utterly UNI
acquainted, because he refuses to class
as his enemy any and every other en-
pioyer whom they point out aus their
enemy because he refuses merely upon
their peremptory order, to eXcom-
municate some other employer by
ceasing all business relations with
him? The blacklist and the secondary
boycott are two of the most cruel
forms of oppression ever devised by
the wit of man for the inflction of
suffering on his weaker fellows
NO court could possibly exercise
any more brutal unfeelng, or despotic
power than Mr. Gompers claims for
himself and his followers in this leg
islation, which would permit them
without lot or hnderance of any kind
to carry on every form and degree OF
the secondary boycott.
"The anthracite strike commission,
as fair minded and distinguished
a body of men as ever passed
Judgment on an Industrial question,
thus refers to the secondary form OF
boycott. that is, the boycott of inno-
cent third persons for refusing to take
an aggressive part in q controversy
when they have no concern:
Ito say this is not to deny the le-
gal right of any man or set of men,
voluntarily W IelldlH AAOil SOSAeAh AAAsNA
course or business relations with any
persons whom he or they, with or with
out good reason. dislikes. This may
some times be unchristian, but 1T is not
illegal But when it is a concerted
purpose of a. number of persons, not
only to abstain themselves from such
intercourse but to render the life of
their victim miserable by persuading
and intimidating others, to refrain,
such purpose is malicious one ana
the concerted attempt to accomplish 1t
is a conspiracy at common law, and
merits and should receive the punish
ment due to such q crime
"The commission further states that
this boycott can be carried to an ex-
tent which was condemned by Mr..
Mitchell president of the United Mine
Workers of America, in his testimony
before the commission and which GER
tainly deserves the reprobation of all
thoughtful and law abiding citizens
Where Does Bryan Stand?
Does Mr.. Bryan agree with Mr..
Gompers that all existing legal restraint
on the enforcement of every degree of
the boycott should be withdrawn; that
the industrial communication of the
innocent merchant who refuses to rem
der unquestioned obedience 70 the or
ders of Mr.. Gompers should be legalized
and encouraged; or does he believe
with us, and with Mr.. Mitchell and
other labor leaders who differ with Mr..
Gompers in this matter, that this form
of the boycott is morally wrong, that
labor at war should fight with it's enc
mics and respect the rights OF neutrals,
that innocent third parties should not
be coerced into taking sides in indus
trial disputes to which they are in no
sense parties, under penalty Of having
their business attacked and destroyed?
Mr.. Taft is perfectly definite on
this proposition.
where does Mr.. Bryan stand?
THE citizen who votes for or against
Mr.. Taft on this proposition does so
with his eyes open and with a clear
understanding from Mr.. Taft himself
Rheumatism