Mtab
BRUARY 14, 1908
The Commoner.
9
rcuRReNT Cop
JH fcjJ
5 E3p-" r-TPTr-T'-r-.-
'v-u
-jssiT
i-tTSWiEi
jrywnaTnrrg
-u
fT'.u . ... vrr"t . "V Wfltf v ijij:ww.
.j i
-'ffl
iHE FIRST convention to be held in 1008,
(rennhllean ntjito. of Florida"! was called to
$?y-$0Wet at St. Augustine, February 6. The con-
antion split In two, one body being Known as
iCthe office holders' convention," and the other
idy being know as the "anti-Taft convention."
Lne convention instructed for Taft and the other
Sleeted an uninstructed delegation. Concerning
two conventions the Associated Press says:
KThe office holders' convention elected as dele-
fiates to the national convention J. N. Coombs,
lember of the national committee from Florida;
loseph E. Lee (colored), collector of internal
svenue; Henry S. Hubb, receiver of the United
tates land office at Gainesville; M. C. MacFar-
ind, collector of customs at Tampa, and four
Jternates. The anti-Taft convention elected as
legates Joseph N. Stripling, former United
ites attorney; J. Do Hazzard, J. H. Dickor-
n, B. R. Robinson, the latter two colored, and
ur alternates. Tno congressional district con
ditions of the First and Second districts of
Jlorida were held by each faction immediately
Fgfter the adjournment of the state convention,
Said each of those conventions elected two dele
tes to the national convention, and adopted
3 same resolutions as the state convention of
their respective factions had adopted. The
iriiifirR'hnl nnrl n rlnv.nn TinUcdmpn wore nn rlntv tn
"iv.the hall and were frequently called upon to eject
. ';&.unruly delegates. Nine-tenths of both conven-
luons were negroes.
? X?3
'yj tfAtKU
Miwim
sl
; '
& r&WT&QTL THE THIRD time within thirtv davs
the United States supreme court delivered,
z'. nm Irfihriifirv 3. nn nnininn nnnstni nc laws
v '. " zz-r.. 7' I iiZ izzz" r., ,lt'z
,iRferrine: to former decisions the Washington
icorresponueni Tor tne Associated ress saia:
gLuc! mau ui iuc uuuiaiuna vvuo iciiuciuu ouuu-
ary G, in the case of some railway employes who
ougnt to secure aamages under wnat is Known
Si, the employers' liability law, making railroads
, responsible for injuries resulting from the negli-
' gence of fellow servants which law the court
'wheld to DG unconstitutional. The second impor-
- J 'tant finding in this line was announced January
V323, when the Erdman arbitration act, forbid-
ATlng the discharge of employes because they are
Wjl$fcinembers of labor unions, was also declared to
$$Jhjjlje invalid. The verdict rendered February 3
was in uic case oi j-ioewe vs. .uawier, me latter
ar member of the Hatters' Union and the former
a hat manufacturer of Danbury, Conn. The case
Involve I the applicability of the seventh section
p the Sherman anti-trust law to conspiracies
by labor unions to boycott articles entering into
interstate trade. Under the terms of that pro-
ision the complaining party may collect three
times the amount of his loss if the charge is
sustained. The union fought the case on the
ground that the law was inapplicable to such
organizations; but the court, whose opinion was
announced by Chief Justice Fuller, failed to ac
cept this view and in effect held that the unions
could not be permitted to interfere by boycott
with the free exchange of commerce between
the states. There was no dissenting opinion."
AFTER QUOTING precedent and reciting the
complaint In the case the supreme court
Baid: "The averments here are that there was
an existing interstate traffic between plaintiffs
and citizens of other states and that for the
direct purpose of destroying such interstate
traffic, defendant combined not merely to pre
vent plaintiffs from manufacturing articles then
and thero intended for transportation beyond
the state, but also to prevent the vendees from
reselling the hats which they had imported from
Connecticut, or from further negotiating with
plaintiffs for the purchase and transportation
of such hats from Connecticut to the various
places of destination. So that although some
of the means whereby the interstate traffic was
to be destroyed were acts within a state and
Borne of them were in themselves as a part
of their obvious purpose and effect beyond the
scope of federal authority, still, as we have
seen, the acts must be considered as a whole
and the plan Is open to condemnation, notwith
ttanding a negligible amount of interstate busi-
ness might bo affected in carrying it out. If
the purposes of the combination were, as al
leged, to prevent any interstate transportation
at all, the fact that the means operated at one
end beforo physical transportation commenced ut
the other end after the physical transportation
ended, was immaterial. Nor can the act in
question bo held inapplicable because the de
fendants were not themselves ongaged in inter
state commerce. The act made no distinction
between classes. It provided that 'every' con
tract, combination or conspiracy in restraint of
trade was illegal. The records of congress
show that several efforts were made to exempt
by legislation organizations of farmers and
laborers from the operation of the act and that
all these efforts failed, so that the act remained
as wo have it before us."
J . t
DANIEL DAVENPORT, of Bridgeport, Conn.,
associated with James M. Beck of New
York as counsel for the plaintiffs in the caBe,
made the following statement regarding the de
cision: "The United States supreme court by
its decision in the case of Loewo vs. Lawler,
declared illegal and criminal under the Sher
man anti-trust act all combinations of working
men to boycott the interstate business of man
ufacturers who sell their goods in other states
than that of manufacture. So long as the
American Federation of Labor and other labor
unions resort to the boycott as a weapon of
attack upon the interstate business of manufac
tures, they are illegal and criminal combina
tions, and it Is the duty of the department of
justice to proceed against them the same as
against illegal and criminal combinations of cap
italists. The court holds that the Sherman anti
trust act applies to combinations of working
men and of capitalists and for the same rea
sons." When asked for an expression of opin
ion in regard to the decision, Samuel Gompcrs,
president of the American Federation of Labor,
declined to make any comment.
HERMAN RIDDER, editor of the New York
Staats Zeitung, recently visited the White
House but, according to the New York corre
spondent for the Chicago Record-Herald, he was
unable to see the president. This correspondent
says that when informed that Mr. Ridder want
ed to see him Mr. Roosevelt said: "Oh, it's that
limburger envoy, hey?" and would not see the
distinguished German-American editor. Mr.
Ridder was cut to the quick by the reported
"utterance of the president, and said a few caustic
things to this efTect: "Perhaps Mr. Roosevelt,
who is a politician, when he learns that more
than fifty per cent of the population have German
blood in their veins, may next time think twice
beforo he slurs a citizen on account of his Ger
man birth or descent, ne has known mo quite
well for many years, and he knows I have never
been a candidate for public office nor sought a
political favor for myself from any national or
state administration, and that whatever I did I
did as a matter of conviction and not as a mat
ter of self-interest. I also have the greatest
respect for every citizen who takes an active in
terest in politics, and I do not believe that this
race is a subject for vulgar criticism."
IT IS CLAIMED by many republican politi
cians that Mr. Roosevelt sent his special
message to congress at the time he did for the
special purpose of checking the boom for Gov
ernor Hughes of New York. The Washington
Herald of February 2 told this story: "If the
old leaders In the senate and house had been
right 'on the job' all the week President Roose
velt would have had no opportunity to present
his special message Friday and thus 'muss up'
the Hughes meeting of the New York Republican
club. They were full of chagrin yesterday that
they did not 'catch on' to the suspicious doings
under their very noses. Thursday the telephone
bell rang in Speaker Cannon's office at the capi
tol. The White House was on the other end of
the wire, inquiring If the house of representa
tive were to meet Friday. An affirmative' reply
was given. Nothing more was thought of the
matter. That sumo Thursday afternoon Senator
Lodge was hustling around at the north end of
the capitol. Usually (ho senate ndJouriiH over
Friday. Mr. Lodge was quietly ascertaining
what senators had business they would like to
present the following day. Thereupon he plead
ed with the steering committee not to adjourn
till Monday, ns (here was plenty of work to do.
I ho bigwigs of (he senate did not tumble to Mr.
LodKe'M real program and placidly acquieiicod.
Had they 'Hinollod the rat' President Roosevelt
would not have had the chance to get before
the country first. The senate could have boon
adjourned over Friday easily. Speaker Cannon
could and would have done likewise with the
house. That would have made it Impossible for
the president to deliver his special message be
fore tomorrow. Congress was not in session
yesterday, but. Us senators and representatives
were generally discussing the president's re
markable words. The message has for the tlmo
being supplanted the politics of president-making
and even side-tracked perusal of the Hughes
speech. While opinion continues to vary as to
the circumstances which impelled Mr. Roose
velt to pen this most remarkable document,
there seems to bo general unanimity, in the
view that its object was to produce a marked
effect upon the deliberations of the forthcoming
national convention of the republican party.
Following, as the message did, close on tho
heels of the mysterious suggestion to critics of
Mr. Roosevelt's policies that if the Chicago con
vention did not nominate Taft on tho first ballot
it would be compelled to nominate Roosevelt
on tho second, it was Impossible for senators
and representatives to escape tho suspicion that
Mr. Roosevelt's hot shot was intended to empha
size that suggestion. A widespread feeling ex
ists in the capitol that the message was born of
the president's anger over the manner In which
he had been,, attacked by prominent men and
the press since the recent money panic, but
that its development brought tho conviction that
he might kill two birds with one stone slap
back at his critics and do a little electioneering
for tho Roosevelt policies and Roosevelt or
Taft."
THE CHICAGO Record-Herald and various
Chicago dispatches say that Governor John
son of Minnesota will soon issue a statement an
nouncing his candidacy for the democratic nom
ination for the presidency. The Record-Herald
says: "Direct information to this effect reached
Chicago yesterday in a letter from a personal
friend of Governor Johnson and who is also a
member of the Minnesota state administration.
Plans have been made for the consolidation of
all party interests in Illinois on Governor John
son and the selection of fifty-four delegates from
the state co the Denver convention who will be
uniiiBtructed for the presidency. One of tho
paragraphs of the letter from St. Paul reads as
follows: 'Such pressure has been brought to
bear upon Governor Johnson from representa
tive democrats in nearly every state in tho
union that he has determined to make clear his
personal views on national-topics. Such a state
ment will come from Governor Johnson early
next week. The statement will be perfectly
clear in its terms and make his nomination by
the national convention .entirely possible and
acceptable to him, if his fellow democrats see
fit to choose him as their leader.' The under
standing among some of the Illinois politicians
is that a Johnson movement will be launched in
a majority of the states. Party leaders in Chi
cago were reticent as to the possibility of an
expansion of the Johnson boom until it reached
a size sufficient to swamp William J. Bryan's
aspirations. More evidence of the active but
quiet work which Is being done for Governor
Johnson developed with the appearance of pam
phlets attacking Mr. Bryan for again seeking
the democratic nomination, charging him with
being solely responsible for the repeated defeats
of the democratic national ticket and pointing
to Governor Johnson as a candidate who can
carry every state which Bryan can and at least
ten more which it is claimed Bryan ran not
win." . . . . . , ,
ii uHife i ii nUl'iTi ftir
ifthr' "" ' -'
ut.Uf&L.
..
