Graham guardian., 1916-11-03
HUGHES DODCES ISSUE
on EIGHT HOUR Law
Attacks Wilson's Plan, but Won't
Say What He Would Have Done.
ONLY WAY TO AVERT STRIKE.

Republican Nominee 10 Asked to De.
clare " He Would Have Vetoed the
Bill With the Certain Assurance Of
Industrial Disaster to the Country.
So busy has been Charles e. Hughes
criticising the deeds Of the Wilson ad.
ministration that he hes had little
time to tell or has purposely evaded
telling the pubic what he would have
done had he been president under sim.
liar 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
BIN. MIR. Hughes has characterized
this action as surrender to force;'
he Is opposed to being dictated to by
any power on earth before the facts
are known" and he would not act un-
~ he had had flair investigation and
candid treatment"
Taking issue with the Republican
candidates attitude, the New York
Times in an editorial asks: "What
would Mr.. Hughes have dons3"
well, what way would Mr.. Hughes
have takenT continues the Times
what would he have done2 Here
was MFR. Wilson's position: The broth.
erhoods refused arbitration; the rail.
road presidents would not accept the
settlement Mr.. Wilson proposed, grant
Ing the eight hour standard day. with
provision for an impartial inquiry into
its working. There was no law on
the statute books to enforce arbitra-
ton.
'The president knew, knew with Ger.
tainty and beyond question. that he
could not get such law from the
congress now In session, The sure
and inevitable alternative to his ao.
esptanes Of the eight hour standard
day measure was . strike, the suspen.
sion Of railway service, freight and
passenger, all over the country, begin.
ming on the morning Of Sept. 4.
Would Hughes Have Done it7
"Mr. Hughes would not surrender
to anybody In the country. Then he
would have surrendered the country to
the disturbance, innmeasurable loss and
peril Of q strike. Would he. In fact
have done that2 Had he been presi
dent, confronted by that situation,
would Mr.. Hughes have brought on
strike by refusing to sign the bill
granting a wage increase?
"There was the strike In plain sight,
q few hours away. sure to come
Would Mr.. Hughes have vetoed the
bill7 On the CONTRARY, would he moi
have done just what Mr. Wilson did
sign It?
"The Republican candidate stands
for two things first. for the principle
Of fair. impartial. thorough. candid |
arbitration. and, second. for legislation !
on facts according tC the necessities |
Of the case Mr.. Wilson stands for
those two things and, much more, has
pledged himself to use all his influence
10 secure them.
"what more could Mr.. Hughes do /.
Would I be too much to ask the Re.
publican candidate to nut little com
mon fairness in.o bis speeches? Is he |
afraid to tell his audiences what the |
president actually did urge upon con
gress7
"As a true champion of arbitration
President Wilson recommended that
arbitration judgments be made records
,f q court Of law in order that their
and enforcement may
not lie with the parties to the dispute.
but with an impartial and authorita-
i've tribunal 1t was his purpose to
provide against future emergencies to
what he nearly succeeded In doing In I
he White House conferences would
put such a face upon the matter that
prevent the recurrence Of such dangers
Is then confronted him and the coun
.ry.
"The people of the United States are
Tot going to be put of with the mis-
as to what the president
lid to avert a strike and to prevent the
hreat of future strikes. We have rea.
Ion to believe that the full revelation
II what he did, what he tried to do and