Arizona republican., 1920-07-04
The Democratic Platform


 It is an ingredient of the platforms of all parties tonal, state and county do know why is so in this day of disseminated intelligence when any man capable reading a platform readily de- tects the bunk and loses something of respect for the contiguous But the framers of the San Francisco platform appear have largest and most reckless individual bunk, which is alleviated by little reasonable sensible adjacent matter
 There is this difference between the two national platforms: the republican declaration is at many points vague, result much of an intention 10 deceive, a compromise of widely varying views in the resolutions committee If any one man or any group of men the committee could have prevailed, the uncertain utterances would have been clear and distinct. regardless their quences. There is. though, no compromise in the San. Francisco platform. There any It was prepared n Washington according to the specifications of one man who however conflicting his Views of any and all important questions have beePa different times any particular time brooks no Opposition His platform therefore pre- sented, creased, with ears pinned back and the convention directed swallow it. It did so no doubt with grmace indicating distaste
 But that man, despite his domineering nature and' his former belief that he held by AmeFican people to be super-nan. is also a poli- tieah. He that concessions must be made at least apparently. popular sentiment and that he is not always followed blindIy He remem- bers that it only by a he was saved from defeat in 1916 and that he overwhelmingly huniiliated 1918.
 So, in the construction of the platform, without yielding, he gives an appearance of yielding on all important points that blanks dealing with them are of the straddling character. On al- most every issue thus raised may sup port of his own pre-conceived opinions
 Take the labor question. The pronouncement of the republican platform that subject was clear and distinct It recognizes the rights of the Orlrt 0x-ar fba of the publicof the employing or of the labor ing fass and it determines that must be com pulstfry arbitration disputes which affect the pubsr closely-such as the grievances of those en- gagged in public employment and those engaged in industries such the railroads, uninterrupted condpct necessary for the welfare of the whole people It does not, however. propose to compel the eomposition of disputes in purely private em- ploy4nent.
 The democratic plank on this subject is composed of thread bare generalities: not a commod- ity;2"labor is entitled just compensation likewise is the employer; we recognize the right of organi- zatian of labor; likewise, capital is also recognized that strikes in many cases are inimca to the public good but they must be composed by friendly conference and persuasion only
 There is to the record of the ad- ministration as composer by conference" of the differences between itself and the railroad workers in which it yielded under pressure every demand setting the high wages and thus instituting the "vicious circle" which have been making ever since in vain effort overtake the high cost of living.
 The plank promises labor nothing that it does not already enjoy. It offers country not the slightest relief from industrial woes It fails to recognize that there such a demand by the public mot employers, not organized Iabor-as there never before. In the guise a loaf the plank hands public a stone
 The peace treaty in another plank is put before the country issue contrary to the advice of leaders who solicitious for the democratic party than they for the glorfication presi dent In that the specifications in q vague manner actually appear to authorize some yielding Though demanding the ratification the treaty the plank does not demand that "i's" shall remain un- dotted and some 'ts uncrossed but permits reser vations, which while not destructive the covenant of the League of Nations would make clearer our obligations under this yielding is only ap- parent. It does not authorize the preservation of Sovereignty. integrity, but only permits us put into clearer language the obligations which the covenant imposes upon us. In other words, it proposes that by language we shall be more firmly bound by those obligations; that we by our act in supplying interpretative shall be cstopped from complaining of the burden shall thereby voluntarily assume with n apparently full understanding. It would be better by to have accepted the pact precisely it from Yer sailles Then when it's operation sover- eighty United States appeared to be menaced, could have claimed misunderstanding because of the of the language of the covenant.
 It is in this section the platform the bulk of the bunk to which have referred has dumped. We hear there again of our national honor having been pledged Paris by the president; of the object O America protect against German aggression. but learn raised billions and poured those rivers of bood-for what? enable president General snuts to frame covenant of League O Nations-