The Parker post., 1916-10-07
HUGHES DODCES ISSUE
ON EIGHT HOUR Law
Attacks Wilson's Plan but Won't
Tell Public What He Would
Have Done.
ONLY WAY TO AVERT STRIKE
Republican Nominee Is Asked to De-
clare If He Would Have Vetoed the
Bill With Certain Assurance of
Industrial Disaster

So busy has been Charles +.
Hughes criticisng the deeds OF the
Wilson Administration that he has
had little time, or has purposely
evaded, telling the public what he
would have done had he been PreSl-
dent under similar circumstances.
Lately Mr.. Hughes has turned his
attacks upon President Wilson's sue
cessful settlement of the crisis in the
railroad world by causing to be
passed by Congress the Adamson
eight-hour bill Mr.. Hughes has char
acterized this action as d ''surren-
der to force; he is opposed to being
dictated to by any power on earth
before the facts are known; and he
would not act until he had had a fair
investigation and candid treatment
Taking issue with the Republican
candidates attitude the New York
Times, in an editorial, asks:
'.WHAT WOULD MIR. HUGHES
HAVE DONEt
well, what way would Mr.. Hughes
have taken?" continues the Times.
"What would he have done? Here
was Mr. Wilson's position: The
brotherhood refused arbitration, the
railroad presidents would not accept
the settlement Mr. Wilson proposed.
granting the eight-hour standard day
with provision for an impartial inquiry
into It's working. There was no law
on the statute books to enforce arbi-
tration.
'The President knew, knew with
certainty and beyond question, that
he could not get such a law from the
Congress now in session. The sure
and inevitable alternative to his ac-
ceptance of the eight-hour standard
day measure was strike, the sus-
pension of railway service, freight and
passenger, all over the country, be-
ginning on the morning of Sept 4th.
WOULD HUGHES HAVE DONE 1T?
"Mr. Hughes would not surrender
to anybody in the country Then he
would have surrendered the country
to the disturbance, immeasurabe loss,
and peril of strike. Would he, in
fact, have done that? Had he been
President, confronted by that situa
ton, would Mr.. Hughes have brought
on strike by refusing to sign the
bill granting a wage increase? There
was the strike in plain sight, a few
hours away, sure TO come. Would Mr..
Hughes have vetoed the bill? On the
contrary, would he not have done just
what Mr.. Wilson did, sign it?
1.-THE Republican candidate stands
for two things: First for the prin-
ciple of fair, impartial, thorough, can
did, arbitration; and second, for
legislation on facts according to the
necessities of the case Mr. Wilson
stands for those two things and, much
more, has pledged himself to use all
his influence to secure them.
"What more could Mr. Hughes do?
Would it be too much to ask the Re
publican candidate to put little com
mon fairness into his speeches? Is
he afraid to tell his audiences what
the President actually did urge upon
Congress?
las a true champion of arbitration,
President Wilson recommended that
arbitration judgments be made rec
Ords of a court of law, in order that
their Interpretation and enforcement
may not lie with the parties to the
dispute. but with an impartial and
authoritative tribunal 1t was his
purpose in this recommendation TO
provide against future emergencies
to prevent the recurrence OF such
dangers as then confronted him and
the country.
ADVICE TO RAILROADS.
''The people of the United States
are not going to be put off with the
misinfOrmation as to what the Presi-
dent did to avert a strike and to pre-
vent the threat of future strikes. We
have reason to believe that the full
revelation of what he did, what he