New-York tribune., 1920-08-30
Conpers Group
Seeks to Swing
Labor to Cox
Report of Alleged Non.Par-
tisan Committee Held to
Show Studied Effort to
Discredit MIR. Harding
Analysis Reveals Bias
sUnfavorable' Votes of Sen.
ator Said To Be Based OIL
Distortion of Facts
~, The Trlbnne.s woshinoton Bareo

legged non-partisan report on the rec
ords of Senator Warren G. Harding
and Governor James NJ. Cox. made pub
lie tonight. Samuel Gompers, Matthew
Vol and Frank Morrison. respectively
president, wee president and secretary
Of the American Federation of Labor
make arguments obviously calculate d
TO deliver the labor vote of the country
to Cox.
The records are based on the actions
Of Cox as q member of the House and
later as Governor, and of Harding, first
in the Ohio Legislature and then as
United States Senator.
The impression made by the report
here is that Gompers has strained at
cnats and swallowed camels in order to
pile up the number of "favorable' ac-
tions by Cox and "unfavorable" actions
By Harding.
Surprise was occasioned by the as
sortment of measures placed to Cox
credit. Every bill passed by the Ohio
legislature during his six years in the
Governors chair-ffty mine in all-is
credited to him as favorable There
were no "unfavorables. There was
much curiosity as to the inclusion of
one item, as follows:
IS. B. Senate bilD 80. providing for
!ull crews for through freight trains
and light engines. Vetoed. Favorable -
Ruling Puzzles Politicians
In view of the clamor OF labor gem
erallv for full-crew bills and against
their repeal, no one here was able to
understand why labor should approve
the vetoing of this bill. The general
print Cox is given two "favorables"
and no "unfavorables" as a Representa-
tive in Congress.
One little key to the mental slant OF
the makers of the report is given by
the "accident' made in adding up the
Favorable" and ''unfavorable' actions
Of Harding All of Harding's actions in
the Ohio Legislature we're approved by
Compers. VOL and Morrison. SO this
list Of six actions mentioned by them
was not added in to make the total.
They make score against him by
countirg his Senate actions alone. and
thew make the count ten to seven
against him-ten "unfavorables" to
seven "favorabes.'
Another slant is given by the fact
that although they consider only total
Of eighteen actions, one of them an
urfavorable pair, worthy TO count in
six wears of q very busy Congress, four
of the "urfavorab.e" actions are on
precisely the same question, voted on
four times.
Senator Harding opposed the aboli-
ton By law of the Taylor efficiency
system called the stop watch system,
in government arsenals and navy yards.
Three of these votes against law
prohibiting the use of this system
we're prior TO the entry of the United
States into the war and one since.
System Aimed at Efficiency
The stop watch" system is not, as
its name implies, the holding of stop
watch over every worker to determine
his rapiGi+y, carrying mental picture
| Of pitiful, strained worker, urged on
/ to efforts beyond his strength by some
Y brutal task master 1t is, on the other
hand, the employment of stop watch
with a view to determining the most
efficient and expeditions set of move
1 ments TO any given task. In some in
stances the whole study had been how
to permit women workers TO carry on
certain operations with shells WI III th-
/ least physical exertion. The chief id-a.
however, was to determine precisely the
best way to 10 any given job, with i
view chiefly TO increasing production.
On the occasion of the last battle of
organized labor leaders against this
system Senator Underwood, of Ala
1 bama, since elected leader of the Demo-
I Gratis in the Senate, made vigorous
speech, in which he said that he could
: not think with patience of the boys
suffering untold hardships and offer
/ ing their lives as we'll in France, while
At home men worked to slow down the
4 arsenals producing ammunitions fov
4 them
SO much for four of the ten "un-
i favorable" votes.
4 Senator Harding's vote against an
4 employment bureau for the Department
i o. Labor is also recorded against HIM
ms was on September 20, 1917, at a
ume, 1t is suggested, when there were
as ieast two Jobs for every man who
a commented, when considerable num-
Der OF young men were trying to get
piaces with the government before the
usal' caught them.
Other "Unfavorable" Votes
Another "unfavorable' vote of the
zen was his vote favoring the famous
ootiand amendment. This attempt "to
grind labor into the dust" was also
e:aring the war, on March Is, 1918, the
q iuea involved being to make the gov
4 elnment clerks in Washington work
e'gnt hours day.
q me next "unfavorable" vote to labor
was for substitute retirement meas
uie proposed by Senator Atlee Pome-
cue OF Ono, Democrat, and an ar
rrcne supporter of Governor Cox at San
n francisco
4 otit Is further counted against the
4 on'o senator that he voted for the pro-
spsai 10 strike the labor sections from
sne peace treaty. This motion was
0.aoe by Senator Charles S. Thomas,
~ colorado, Democrat. Senator
4 ~ as.omas considered the labor sections
4 ~ .he treaty so bad that, after his eff
.'i. ols TO strike them out had failed, he
4 W. s.s compelled to vote against the en-
1 saa. ae treaty incidentally these labor
lions OF the treaty were vigorously
4 lSbpIsed by group of very prominent
va.. remaining two "unfavorable"
ls,s and the unfavorable pair all re-
a nss...o the railroad situation. Mr.
q Suing voted against the extension of
ssihment control for two more
,eaas, soss and for the Cummings -Esch Rail-
tnrr.9 9ii under which the roads were
j pasae .neo back to private operation. The
4 sasa sa'otaoie pair was on the final pas
q ens VI the Cummins- Esch bill! confer
4 eoce renort
4 Text of Gompers Report
q aTe are report reads, in part:
/. mere can be but one conclusion
urvs upon careful and impartial
of 10y OF the actions and declarations
shown sae Candidates. Governor Cox has
undess, himself possessed of a fuller