Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1908-09-24
Enormous Crowds Greet Sec
ond Entry Of the Democratic
Standard Bearer Into Ohio;
Dozen Speeches Yesterday,
WILD ENTHUSIASM
FEATURE OF GATHERINGS
NebraSkan Contrasts His Party
Position on Anti-Injunction
Plank With That of RepubIi-
cans in Appeal to Labor.
IBy Morning Journal sDsclar xeased Vine

IBy Morning Journal Special X.eased WIIel
Columbus, Ohio, Sept. 23.-Twelve
speeches to enormous crowds marked
the second entry of W. j. Bryan, dem
ocratic candidate for president. into
Ohio during the present campaign.
His concluding speech was made here
tonight to an overflow crowd of 90
600 persons, while just previously he
had addressed the largest audience
that had ever assembled in Memorial
nail. The seating capacity is 5000. but
this was increased by 1000 others.
who were satisfied to stand Mr. Bry-
ans appearance on the platform
created Il scene of the widest enthu-
siasm, which took some time to die
out, but the demonstration was re-
peated when he was formally intro
duced by James Killibourne, demo-
cratic candidate for governor of Ohio
several years ago,
While Mr. Bryan was speaking
Judge Harmon, the present democrat
ic candidate for governor of the state,
and others were addressing the crowd
outside.
In none of his remarks did Mr.
Bryan touch on the bribery charge
against Governor Haskell.
During the day in this city the dem
ocratic presidential candidate spoke to
1000 precinct committeeman, the
number being so large that the hall
was emptied in order to accommodate
tnose VINO httd noe heard nim talk on
organization. These meetings were
followed by addresses to the CONNER
clal Travellers league on the trusts,
and to the Brotherhoods of Locomo-
Ife
marks tonight were on the issues OF
the campaign generally, but his speech
TO the representatives of the brother
hoods was devoted exclusively to the
labor question and more particularly
to the plank of the democratic plat
form, demanding jury trial in cases
of indirect contempt. In these re-
marks he took occasion to refer to the
attempts made in 1896 TO pass a law
covering such cases, and quoted a
telegram signed by Frank P. Sargent,
grand master of the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Firemen; f.. f. Clark,
grand chief of the order of Railway
Conductors Il. NJ Arthur, grand
chief of the Brotherhood of Locomo-
tive Engineers, and w. v Powell,
grand chief Of the order of Railway
Telegraphers, in behalf of 100000 em-
ployes asking that the proposed law
of 1896 be passed.
Mr. Bryan used that as an argument
against the position of Mr. Taft that
the plank of the democratic platform
relating to indirect contempt cases was
an insiduous attack on the judiciary.
He mentioned the names of Senators
Allison, of Iowa; Hale, of Maine; Nor
rll, of Vermont; Cullom, of Illinois;
Sherman, of Ohio; Hawley, of Con-
Int 70
ed the measure in the senate, and he
again demanded that Mr. Taft "apolo-
gize to these big republicans for SLAM
dering them as he slandered them in
this matter"
Discussing the question, Mr.. Bryan
said in part:
eve say that there ought to be
fury trial and the republicans say
there ought not. This Is a clear issue
between us, and, my friends, / want
to give you briefly our reason, so that
IL YOU are called upon to defend your
position on this subject, If your posi-
ton on the subject Is our position, ana
our position is your position, / want
to give you few arguments, so that
Won will be prepared to defend them.
Now. there is this difference between
direct contempt and indirect contempt.
In the case of direct contempt, the
contempt complained of or alleged Is
committed in the presence OF the
court He does not have to examine
witnesses; he is an eye witness; ne de-
cides the question pending on his own
knowledge. But In the case of indi-
rect contempt, that is where the act
complained of was committed outside
OF the presence of the court and
where Il must be established by evil
dence Now we are not complaining
of tbe case of direct contempt, but we
insist that as this indirect contempt
involves a prosecution which is in It's
nature a criminal prosecution, with a
nunIshment by fine or Imprisonment,
nr hoth. the man accused shall nave
tha nrotection of trial by jury to as
cartaIn whether he Is guilty or not
Rut some OF you may not know how
etronq your position on this subject Is,
Tor N Il stronger than a good many
neonle Imagine. II Is not only impor-
tant 10 have trial by jury IN such
case. because II Is In the nature OF a
criminal prosecution. WhyY Because
in a criminal case the judge Is not the
man who made the law; therefore, tne
violation of 1t Is not personal Oh
sanse to him. and in the criminal pro-
ceedInR he Is not prosecuting attor-
new and therefore not personally IN
torested In the conviction. The judge
a. criminal case simply sits ana
hears the evidence and tries the case,
ana gives his instructions, and decides
noints of law, and has no personal In
terests as TO the result; but In the case
of indirect contempt the Judge gives
the order. That Is, he makes the law
IN the case, and he Is the prosecuting
attorney, and he is the Judge. and the
man would have TO be more than hui
- - r1..s--. = SsoI,,..,., K