Connecticut western news., 1920-10-21
Claim He Had "Neyer Pressed a Soldier Into an Industrial
 Controversy" Not True.
USED OHIO MILITIA TWICE
Question Not About Merits of Strike or Need for Military,
 but as to TruthfuIneSS.
By WILLIAM ROSTER,

| Cox's boasted labor record has been shattered by his own official act. | Claiming that he had never pressed soldier into an industrial controver- | sy," the record of his action as gov ernor of Ohio In mobilizing the Ma I honal Guard of this state for service in the steel strike of 1919 has been produced in flat contradiction of his 1 assertion.
 Not once, but on two occasions was the Ohio guard, at an expense of $23.- 900 to the people of Ohio, called into | service and sent to Akron and held in readiness for action in nearby Canton The question is not as to the merits of the strike or as to the necessity for l the presence of the guard within strik- ing distance of Canton, but concerns wholly the truthfulness of Governor Cox's statement, obviously made to win favor among the workingmen. The facts as brought out In the speech of Republican State Chairman George Fl. Clark, formally opening the campaign at Columbus, are as follows: l. Ordered Guard Out Twice. a-.. . After the steel strike had progressed fdr some days, with more or less disor- der, Governor Cox on September 28. 1919, suddenly ordered the mobilization of the guard at Akron. A period of quiet followed, and the troops were withdrawn. And then again suddenly on October 25 the guard was once more mobilized and sent to Akron, and while 1t lay there at that strategic point awaiting a summons into action staff officers representing Governor Cox kepe close watch on the situation in Can- ton.
 on the night of August 14 Governor Cox said:
 "For six years have been in execu- tive authority in the great industrial state of Ohio. During all this time have never pressed soldier into an in- dustrial controversy"
 The question is, did Governor Cox ssal the truth? Answering this ques- ta=, Chairman Clark in his Columbus sssA displayed to fsis audience pho assyegase copy of Special Order No. 52
 
 EG=- = tse State e. Ohio, dated Osise..>>s. 0cee@es 2a, 1913, which des- ignate1 certain officers for immediate active service and paragraph of which reads:
 Facts Presented.
 Tn anticipation of the development of rioting condition at Canton, O., the AE nhia ho. sary to assemble sufficient number of state troops at Akron, O.. to be held in readiness to render aid to the civil au- thorities at Canton, O., and has so di- rected the Adjutant General of Ohio. who, pursuant to such order, directs Colonel Benson W. Hough to proceed without delay to Akron, O., to take command of all state troops upon ar rival at Akron, O., and to hold them in readiness for duty, awaiting further orders"
 The order is signed by the Adtutant General and counter-signed in these words, By command of Governor Cox"
 Did Governor Cox tell the truth to the workingmen?
 Supplementing this documentary proof, Mir. Clark produced photograph ic copies of headlines from Canton, O., newspapers of concurrent date, which read: "State troops mobilizing for duty here. All available companies are or dered out" And, Governor orders troops for duty here, Ohio soldiers re- porting to armories following trouble"
 Truth Should Be Known.
 The surprising thing about 1t all Is that Governor Cox in his Wheeling speech should have made so fiat an as- sertion when all of the facts with re- gard to his mobilization of the guard were still fresh in the public mind, at least in Ohio. Of course 1t Is not to re expected that workingmen elsewhere In the United States would be familiar with the circumstances, and 1t was for that reason that State Chairman Clark In his speech stressed the necessity for the people all over the country to be informed that Governor Cox's assertion that he never pressed a soldier into an industrial controversy" was abso- lutely at varience with the truth. ' Publication of these official facts has utterly confounded the advocates of Governor Cox's election, who have been making special plea to the working men on the basi; of his West Virginia speech. < The revelations as to MT. Cox's mobilization of the troops are being compared with the essworn state ments of liquor league contributions to his gubernatorial campaign fund, in refutation of his statement that "the vets have never contributed one dollar, to any of my campaigns" In both cases the point Is made that the issue Is not as to the merit of his moblliza-
 ion of the troops, on the one hand, or IS to the status of the wet and dry question, on the other hand, but that he real Issue Is as sto the degree of
 ruth and accuracy absolutely neces- @ary in one who seeks to be. president