The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923, September 11, 1908, Page 2, Image 2
"wi fammm. m iimuwBI ? s. 2 The Commoner. VOLUME 8, NUMBER 35 ! I ' r i who road what I say to you. The labor question is more a moral than an intellectual one. Tolstoy, the great Russian philosopher, in defining the doctrine of "bread labor," gives as one of the reasons in support of it, that personal contact with manual labor not a recollection of former toil, but continued acquaintance with it is necessary to keep one in sympathy with those who work with their hands. He contends and is it not true? that lack of sympathy, one with another, is at the root of most of the problems of society and government. The world is growing toward brotherhood, and our nation is lead, ing the way. There is more altruism in this country than anywhere else in the world, and more today than there ever has been before. There is more recognition of the kinship that exists between us, more thought about the questions which concern a common human ity than at any preceding time. The labor organization is a part of this great movement of the masses toward closer fellowship. It has worked wonders in the past and its work is only commenced. The labor organization helps those outside of it as well as its members because the increased wages and improved conditions are shared by non-union men as well as by union men. Do' not understand me to say that a labor organization is perfect; ' "the king can do no wrong" can no more be spoken of a group than -'of individuals. The labor organization is composed of men; its af fairs are controlled by human beings, and human beings are not per fect. All that man touches is stained with man's imperfections, and his frailty can be traced through all his works. But, fortunately for the laboring man, the judgment pronounced against his mistakes must be tempered by the fact that those with wiom the laboring man comes into contact are also likely to err. When tbe employe deals with the employer, he is dealing with one of like passions with him self. Each is likely to be insistent upon what he believes to be right and the opinion of each, as to what is right, is likely to be colored by selfish interests and aifected by incomplete information. as to the lacts. If the employe has sometimes resorted to violence to enforce his wishes!, the employer has sometimes employed his position to se cure an unfair share of the joint product. It is the province of the law to place limitations upon both, and the security of our govern ment is found in the fact that both employer arid employe in their calmer moments, will jjoin in the enactment of laws which will re strain them m moments of temptation. Some assume that labor is lawless and that to settle the labor question permanently we need only enforce the law rigorously. I yield to hone in insistence upon obedience to the law. Law is necessary in human society, and ite en forcement is essential to peace and oder, but we must remedy abuses by lawif we would insure respect for, and obedience to, lawf The important lesson to bd learned by the citizen in a government fate ours is that the ballot , both shield and sword-it pfoLXlnm 732fiE7 and enforces his rights. B mni nsideration: . ,, . . , , ' auestionfr would isneededfor a better Understanding of laborV questions u .. . ition of the equal rights of all. and second more intimate aCq&Jtan 'We have rights & ma be Sa' natural rights jjgiey are-inherent; weliave them because we arehu man beings. The government did not bestow them upon us-the government cannot ncrhtfullv withd timn, . 7, lua imto the world without our volition; the enviTonmentof youth tlaS determines the course of our li x ,- 1:2?.$ urea by wealth or position in society. Man has used nettv diW -boas to separate loeiety into different classesXttfese ZtS? are insignificant when compared with the 'grelt sMaritfe S On this day it is well -to emphasize the fact that we ZSV tether by bonds which we could not break if we wSuld andlhLw the United States, for here, more than anywhere else ramSpf 5 tteir interdependence. We have no law of primogeniture to ha arate the oldest son from his brothers and sisteri; and we tove nS Faw of entail to prevent the alienation of an estate tw . ?! nolaw 9 resting upon birth.r kmgly SlftSS?SS civic dutiewie w-be no plutocracy ruling totteuamoftlS dollar. Here the roau ,o advancement is a public hiXv and it i within our power to keep it open to all alike. slvtZTkrn ment is within the control of the people, and no dbnartntrf t service is out of tiie reach of the voter 'or bema thnfmenl ??P Undei-ou5 constitution, some branches ?he gov ernment are more responsive than others to the public will but our f ovemment can be controlled by the ueonle friVm ,. V2.!! i which we call the constitution toVeX?t A long step toward the elevation of labor to its proper p02 in the nation's deliberations is to be found in the eSiJhSf a Departaent of Labor, with a cabinet officer at SfflTO earners deserve this recognition, and the executive is entitied tTthe assistance which such an official could render him. I regard the in auguration of this reform as the opening of a new era in which those who toil will have a voice in the deliberations of the President's council chamber. The labor organization has been seriously handicapped by the fact that it has been and I am not sure that it has not been done unwit tinglyyoked up with the industrial combinations known as trusts. The proneness of trust defenders to use the labor organization as an excuse for combinations in restraint of trade has aroused the sus picion that they have been classed together for the purpose of shield ing the combinations of capital. As the result of eighteen years of anti-trust legislation, only one man has been given a penal sentence for violating the federal law on this subject, and that man was a member of a labor organization rather than a trust magnate. The laboring man is justified in his demand that a distinction shall be drawn between the labor organization and the industrial monopoly. The trust and the labor organization cannot be described in the same language. The trust magnates have used their power to amass swollen fortunes, while no one will say that the labor organization has as yet secured for its members more than their share of the profits arising from tneir work. But there are fundamental differ ences. The trust is a combination of dollars ; the labor organization is an association of human beings. In a trust a few men attempt to control the product of others; in a labor organization, the members unite for the protection of that which is their own, namely, their own labor, which, being necessary to their existence, is a part of them. The trust deals with deai. matter; the labor organization deals with life and with intellectual and moral forces. No impartial student of the subject will deny the right of the laboring man to ex emption from the operation of the existing anti-trust law. If the labor organization needs to be regulated by law, let it be regulated by a law which deals with man as man, and not by a law that was aimed to prevent the cornering of a commodity or the fore stalling of the market. I shall; not speak 'of the eight-hour day, or of the employer's lia bility act, because both of the leading parties have endorsed these reforms ; the only question to be considered is: which party can best be trusted to secure these reforms? I need hardly assure you that I am heartily in favor of both reforms. There are two questions, however, intimately connected with the labor problem npon which the Democratic and Hepublicari parties do not agree, and I not only feel at liberty to discuss these, but, under the circumstances, I have no right to ignore them1. One re lates to the issue of injunctions, and the other to contempt cases arising under injunctions. The republican convention did not deal candidly with the laboring man on the subject of the writ of injunc- tion. Secretary tfaft has endeavored to amend his platform'in this respect and to make some promises, which are not Supported by his thitform. tint nia wnmicoa nfFai -r.A4-v.,-, i.j.i.xn -v: j, J vp7 t;;i "; 3r "" " ? " ?ne way 01 w, ,, umiuug uu repuoucan senators and members. Tlte republican tfneress haft aWniV mnHa o a -i-i ht, , -pq,Ek "jzr:irL r - -"" vu "w iue?: "r Jt7u"Utt" paiiy uunnoi escape irom that record. lalt S STieech mn.v hi nnnei1ova1 o -u;,a; V t- ,. ... .. convention which selected the republican candidates endorsed the republican platform not Mr. Taft's personal views. The republi can platform, while pretending to pledge some modification of the ifw111 ei0epj?on clause which reiterates the very language nr !m rVhT fl3f excePtion " was inserted by accident rSSl- ffeol K the S!me- K merelv Provides, in substance, S 1Mlg OTdel? s1laU not 1ssne noce except where JhSLJ? now,.lssue wj110"4 ntte. The platfom was a ill ?? have been opposing the laboring man, and they have been boasting of their victory. , w ocratic platform on this subject copies the language which the labor organizations submitted to the republican and dem-Sr5SZSBBr- " Tafiin "" notifications, object To SSS5L &" & m auti-injuncBon pla4 was ine it SSKL V"" lT??ed for tie "WW Purpose of render Sitoicalfv TSSSi!? w "fetation by one set,f men, and a oia taSy6wterttatl0:n mother." As Mr; Taft has SHSKS;? thl h?b and is therefore skilled in the in site inteSL lKDSa& , I ask him to give us, if he can, two oppo SSMWSS'" lan?"aSe- at plank demands tfiat?'all S5? Sfc V haU be treated with rigid impar- iunctionfShindal pUtes' tte PIaorm declares that "in- SStaSS ttSiw5SB-m a?y CaSes in whioh junctions would teuSEZ be ShSSSS ?l SPU? Were Solved." How can that S 4at SCk SSS f "interpreted? If words mean wyf b7?eWdLP;omffl that an mdustrial dispute shall not, in itself 2K feSTS cailse for an injunction. If an injunction SSvSW based npon acts whici volveV ThL SSS3S there Were no indusWal dispute. in voivea. There is nothing ambiguous about it; there is nothing that 1 A-j1WMi.a.vrfiMY-'Jn':' UE. J Ifc - juy. , ..- ,i,.M . . . til 'i Minim Urmi2mtM