OCR Text |
Show Pllffi TIES I IIP LABOR ISSUE I Makes Public Letter to Senator P. C. Knox Dealing With H Injunctions. QUESTIONS SINCERITY H OF BRYAN'S STAND H Demands of Democratic Leader Explanation Concerning Several Points. WASHINGTON, Oct. 21. Campaign literature was enriched today by a let-ter let-ter from President Roosevelt addressed to United Stales Senator Philander C. Knox of Pennsylvania, in which Mr. Roosevelt pa3s his respects to Samuel Gompcrs, president of the American Federation of Labor. Speaking at Philadelphia on Tuesday, Senator Knox took issue with Mr. Gompers on the question of the attitudo of organized labor in the present campaign, and the president's letter of tochu is in sup- jH port of Mr. Jvnox's views. Mr. Roose-volt Roose-volt says: Text of President's Letter. My Dear Senator Knox: In your ad-nilrable ad-nilrable speech of yesterday you speak of the action of Air. Bryan and certain gentlemen claiming to be the special rep-resentatives rep-resentatives of organized labor, foremost among them Mr. Gompcrs, to secure tho support of laboring men for Mr. Bryan on consideration of his agreement to per-form per-form certain acts nominally in lh& Inter-est Inter-est of organized labor, which would lie really cither wholly Ineffective or else of widespread injury, not only to organized labor, but to all decent citizens through-out through-out the country. You have a peculiar rigiil to speak on the labor question; id: It was you wiio. as attorney-general, first actively Invoked the great power of the federal government on behalf of the rights or labor v.-nen, for ttic urst time in 1110 history of the government, you. speaking for the department of justice, intervened in a private lawsuit which had gone against a locomotive Ilreman who had lost an arm In coupling cars, and by your Intervention secured from tho su- pre mo court a contstruction of tho safety appliance act, which made it a vital re- medial statute, and. therefore has secured to hundreds of crippled employes and IH widows of crippled employes compensa- IH lion which they would not have other- IH Aviso obtained. Discusses Gompers Plea, The daily papers of October 13 con-tain con-tain an ' open letter from Samuel Gom-pers, Gom-pers, president of the American Fedora-tion Fedora-tion of Labor, appealing to workingmcn to votc for Mr. Bryau. In that letter are certain definite state-mcnts state-mcnts which Interest the American pub-lie pub-lie quite as much as those to whom Mr. Gompcrs makes his appeal. These ctute-meats ctute-meats warrant all you have said in your speech, and they would warrant ou in asking Mr. Bryan to say publicly wlfcth-er wlfcth-er Mr.,,Gompors states correctly tho r.ttl-tudc r.ttl-tudc of his party and himself on a sub-Jecfthat sub-Jecfthat Is of vital concern to every citizen, including every business man, aa well aa every farmer and every laborer wiio loolss to the courts for the protec-tion protec-tion of his rights. Mr. Gompers, in his letter, asserts that the judiciary of this country la destroy-ing destroy-ing democratic government and substi-luting substi-luting therefor an irresponsible and cor-rupt cor-rupt despotism In tho Interest of corpor-alu corpor-alu power, and he further makes clear that tho means by whloh he believes thli: alleged despotism nas been set up in tho place of democracy Is by the pro- cess of Injunction In tho courts of equity. fM Mr. Gompcrs. in his letter, stales that JjM his appeal to the Kepublicau convention VM at Chicago for remedy against the in-junction in-junction was denied, and then he goes on to state not only that the Democratic puny promised a rcrnccy, but promised him tho particular remedy that he had already aslud of congress. Ills words BBJ aie. "Labor's representatives lh"n went BBBJ !" tho Democratic party. That party BBBJ made labors contentions its own. It IBBJ pledged its candidates for every office to flBJ those remedies which labor had already jBH submitted to congress.'' T.io la&t sentence in this i)U':tnMor. hi- BBBJ dicnlcs very dellnitely tho spoclllc rcmr- IBBJ dies 10 which Mr. Gompj..? understands IBH Air. Bryan's tarty lias pledged itself. BBB Attitude of Bryan. His statement now makes perfectly clear an Important plank in the Uryanlt BBI platform, which has heretofore seeiueu BBI puzzling to a vast numbur of earnest- BBJ minded, thinking people, who are tin- BBH cerely interested in tho steady advance BBBa of tho legit. mate aspirations of labor and BBJ who careful! v read both platforms lo BBI know preclselv what hopes each hold out BBJ for the Improvement of the conditions BH of wage earners. The plank rends as follows: BBBJ "Questions of Judicial practice have BBBJ arisen cspeolally In connection with in- BBBJ (Mistrial disputes. Wc deem that the IBBBJ parties to all Judicial proceedings should BBBJ bo treated with rigid Impartiality and that BBBJ Injunctions should nol be Issued in any IBBVJ cases In which injunctions would not Issue BBBJ If no industrial dispute were Involved." BVB This la tho plank that promises the jBBBJ "rcmedv" against injunction which Mr. BBBJ Gompcrs asked of Mr. Bryan's party. I:i BBBJ actual fact It means absolutely nothing, BpBJ no change of the law could be based on BB it; no man without inside knowledge could BBBJ foretell its meaning would turn out to be BBBJ for no man could foretell how any Judgo UBB would decide In any given case, as the BBBJ plank apparently leaes each judge free BBBJ to say when he Issues an Injunction In a BBBJ labor case whether or not it is- a case in BBBJ which an injunction would Issue If labor jBB were not Involved, i'ol this plank is ap- BBBJ parenlly perfectly clear to Mr. Gomp"rs, BBBJ and In his letter to his followers lie indl- BBpJ cntes beyond question just what he under- BBBJ stands It to mean, lie asserts that he BBBJ has the requisite lnsldo knowledge. His BBJ statement that Mr. Llryan's party (for it BBBJ whs Mr. Kryan who dictated the plat- BJBJBJ form) plodgod Itself "to those remcdien BBJ which labor had already submitted to VJ congress" Is a perfectly clear and definite BBJ statement, BBBl Analysis of "Remedy." IH The "remedy" which Mr. Gompcrs has ll already submitted to congress aro mat- flBJ ters of record and the Identification of ttBH his "remedy" against injunctions In labor BBJ disputes is onsyw and certain. J his BBJ "remedy" Is embodied n nouso bill No. BJBJBJ 71. of the first session of the sixtieth cOft- --flYA gress tho complete text of which is hereto BBBB annc'iided. The gist of the bill, as can be BBBB ei'n by referring to the complete toxt, is BBB '''First, after forbidding any federal judge to Issue a restraining order for an Injunc- BBBJ tion In any labor dispute excopt to pre- BBBJ ent irreparable injury to property or BBBB propcrtv rights, It spuclflcally provides fljBjBJ that "no right to carry on busl- BjjJ noss of iniv particular kind or ut any par- BJBJBJ tlcular place, or at all, shall be construed, BjBjBjJ Continued on -Page Soveu. fgTEDDATTACKS BRYAN AND GOMPERS an 3- " y" Continutd from Pace One. L' -i hold, considered or trentcd as property or T fis constituting a property right- ' , 1kbi Second. It provides that nothing agreed DU iupon or done by two or moro part e In ""l connection with a labor disputo shall con-4 con-4 stltutc a conspiracy or other criminal tt. offense, or he prosecuted as such unless . Utai ; the thing agreed upon would be unlawful "US ul if done bv a single Individual, heron?! t The bill here described Is not only the jhv V "'remedy" that Mr. Gompors has already ,,' -T submitted to congress, but it Is the i one i 1 U?U!innd only "remedy" which he and thono m( associated with him In hla present rnnvo-tneir rnnvo-tneir meat have announced that they will ac-f ac-f theu ccpt in tins matter of his grievance against f the 5tl10 courts on t,,e Injunction Itf.suc. foc cja Matter of Record. fJlf The counsel for the American Federa-lh Federa-lh ? iHtlon of Labor, and Mr. Gompcrs, its .""'Mvresldent. are on record to this effect. lir fo'lf At a hearing before the house com- tbe Bsmitteo on Judiciary the counsel of the thtmerlcan Federation of Labor on Fcbru-aing.L&ry Fcbru-aing.L&ry 5. 100S (as appears from the printed ChtnS.Wic.-i rings . slated: af!;' "The bill was considered by at least l .ttwo sessions of the executive council of nl Withal organization, and unanimously ap-laft ap-laft Of ((proved. It was considered by two of Us .jalatlonal conventions tlie two latest U thTjand by theso unanimously indorsed. And eejEtd?!" ihv 1nct ot 1,1 e Ina proposition!! of Jlfto omejid it. In the face of mnny proposed -' ''fcubslltuios. in the face of picsdur" from ?noWfcveiy dncition, from high sources and 0(1 it SeourccH not so cxaited. the organization ilauiusJias flood by and is today standing by inally rfhis bill without amendment." icaJathCL aIr Gc.mrct himself, introducing thi3 x .!"fblll before the same committee. Feb:i-itpp Feb:i-itpp t?rJr 28 190S as nPI"-'lrs from the printed , "Shearings), went on record as follows: ratbfjl; "Events Lave demonstrated elenrly to '"HOlc afrny mind that there is only one bill be-'jfore be-'jfore the committee that can at all be cf-we cf-we inflective to deal with this abuse, with this tion .iVlnvaslon of human rights, and that is the 6nnrrcarro bill." -inntr Further on in the same page of the V .'hearings, Mr Gompers states: to ezW rropl federation's Position. 1om;Jj r say lllJg( tiint J thlnk i Win try t.Pito make my position clear that the ttal jrAmerlcau Federation of Labor has so dearies de-aries Vclen red Itself that It must Insist upon the e (Syprlnclples involved in the Pearrc bill and the fjithat I explained as best I could the po-Uiii po-Uiii jEltlon of labor that we would rather bo A jjcompelk'd to bear the wrongs which we i C)have for a longer period than to glvo ttiaur assent to the establishment of a the tfwrong principle. believing and knowing Oftniafthat time would give the Justice and re-matfiillef re-matfiillef to which labor the working people diWfr-are entitled." lv tli 'f,,ls D,,' then, and none other, rcpre-yjrsents rcpre-yjrsents exactly the relief that Mr. Gom-r Gom-r 8.W-Jra demands in the way of anti-lnjunc-Jmitlfalon legislation, and if the statement in urcLRhis letter is correct, this bill represents lie (j&vliat Mr - Bryan and his party are n nriUplcdged to In tho matter of antl-lnjunc-Mi Zjbion legislation W The Injunction plank in the Bryanltc is '15 platform mny sound vague and hazy, but ratlfiaij there Is nothing vague or hazy about Rcpflffthls bill 0 of St It is more than a bill; It is a programmo ns ntipt tno most fixed and definite kind; and ,aln!lf Mr Gompers is correct, this bill be-"fiij be-"fiij comes, as it were, an appendix to Mr. lBA23ryan's platform or a footnote explaln-10 explaln-10 lng in detail the briefer and vaguer ln-tt ln-tt .dfsljunctlon p;ank in that platform. p watt DoeH Br'an accept it as such? TflfOi Mr. Bryan should state publicly wheth-hcr-iSR01" he In fact accepts the principle of Up2thls bill, which Is the official programmo J lslot Mr Gompers and those who stand JdlWMwith him. DjCrfini Gompers announces publicly that ling ulMr. Bryan's party has made this pro-l pro-l jfsalgramme ita own. Is Mr. Gompers cor-mportBt'1 cor-mportBt'1 In this statement? a6 Questiou Is Settled. ined.'' Either Mr. Gompers is mistaken as to thisnfWhat Mr. Bryan's party has promised In Hll rwtnc matler of anolhcr Injunction leglsla-li, leglsla-li, fltlon or those who drafted his party plat-iv. plat-iv. :JJorm' hi their haste, failed to maku his tne.Wpromlse so clear that the general public aommivould understand it precisely as Mr. jrtrai, Gompers understands it. thatjftMr- Bryan failed. In his letter of ac-le ac-le to cp'ncc, to discuss this labor plank of ..u SJis. party's platform. So far as I am ,.,i7iware he has failed to discuss it since. imX There should be such discussion a8 a iwattor of common fairness, not only to "Tlabor. but lo ail citizens alike. On a wjuestlon of such grave consequence the i . Bpeople are entitled to know where Mr, M. 'flfBryan stands. I il Mr. Taft has repeatedly explained ex-where ex-where he Ptands In this matter of riTfgulnilng injutif Hons. - Are we not entitled to know with equal ' ,jclearnes3 exactly where- Mr. Bryan Wlands7 WlMr. Gompcrs's public statements as to Itwhat his party promised make It imperative im-perative that Mr. Bryan should declare jUilmsi.!! ijft Tins bill "o the prlnclpln of which, hi dvi Mi R-yun is plciifci-d .U-.'l.u.s that i Jr.fe rlgl't to carry on a business In a v lawful way bhall be not teganlo-1 ns a I (propertj rigl.i or entitled to the protcc- ition of a wourt of equity throng i the - process i-f an Injunction ai.u th.it Die i r.glr t such pioiucliun. whicu aduvti'-d- Jy now wait- under '.he Ir.w. shall he J nken an ay. r Statoment of Attorney. ' Ju.T,lc c0l,llsel for the American Fcdera- -j "on or Labor. In his examination before J She House. February 3. nt win. h Mr ilOninpur:: l.ii .self was p-'es-in. gave a Viy 'lur.'...l: illus'ratlon of wnac he and Mr. , (jumpers oe.ieved to u tl cpncqu'iite-lie cpncqu'iite-lie tliRt -irowslon of that hll, whKli kqxo l Jie nht 10 carr- oa ivisiuoss shall not fright"1' "' U' prolec',oa as a Propei ty i t His words arc: M "Suppose that workingmen by some on- enition of proceedings In the community s . lv, ; uf say b)" violence or persuasion or I aipicketlns away from the premises) rc-, rc-, flxluce those works to a state of utter help- fiaow:iesy, nnd there wa3 not a wheel moving, nor a process In operation, and this company having no help at all that would be an Interference with his right to do business; and for that I say he has no right to be protected by injunction." in-junction." Is Mr. Bryan In reality pledged to this point of view? Will he definitely say, either In writing or in a public address, whether ho believes with Mr. Gompcrs that the protection heretofore afforded by tho courts of equity to the right to carry on a lawful business In a lawful way Is despotic power, and that the judges who exercise that power arc irresponsible ir-responsible despots? So far as the second section of the bill is concerned, it is perfectlv clear that It would legalize the blacklist and the sympathetic boycott, carried to any extent. ex-tent. It would legalize acts which have lime and again been declared oppressive, unjust and Immoral by the best and most eminent labor leaders themselves. Question for Bryan. Does Mr. Bryan believe with Mr. Gompers Gom-pers that he and that part of the labor movement that agrees with him has tho r ght morally and should be given tho right legally to paralyze or destroy with impunity tho business of an innocent third person, against whom ho or they have no direct grievance, simply because this third person refuses to Join with them aggressively in a labor controversy with the real merits of which he may be utterly unacquainted, because he refuses to class as his enemv any and every other employer whom the'y point out as their enemy, because ho refuses, merely upon their peremptory order to excommunicato excommuni-cato some other employer by ceasing all business relations with him? The blacklist and the secondary boycott aro two of the most cruel forms ot oppression op-pression ever devised by tho wit of man for the Infliction of suffering on his weaker fellows. No court could possibly exercise any more brutal, unfeeling or despotic power than Mr. Gompers claims for himself and his followers in tills legislation, legis-lation, which would permit them without lot or hindrance of any kind to carry on every form and degree of tho secondary boycott. The anthracite strike commission, as fair-minded and distinguished a body of men as ever passed Judgment on an Industrial In-dustrial question, thus refers to tho secondary sec-ondary form of boycott, that Is, the boycott boy-cott of Innocent persons refusing to take aggressive part In a controversy when they have no concern: Amounts to Conspiracy. "To say this Is not to deny the legal right of any man or sot of men voluntarily to refrain from social intercourse or business busi-ness relations with any persons whom ho or they, with or without good reason dislikes. dis-likes. This mav sometimes bo unchristian, unchris-tian, but it Is not Illegal. But when It Is a concerted purpose of a number of per-Fons per-Fons not only to abstain themselves from such Intercourse but to render the llfo of their victim mlserablo by persuading and intimidating others to refrain, such purpose Is a malicious one and the concerted con-certed attempt to accomplish It Is a conspiracy at common law, and merits and should rccelvo tho punishment duo to such a crime." The commission further states that this boycott can bo carried to an extent "which was condemned by Mr. Mitchell, president of the United Mine Workers of America In his testimony before the commission com-mission and which certainly deserves the reprobation of all thoughtful and law-abiding law-abiding citizens." Does Mr. Bryan agree with Mr. Gompers Gom-pers that all existing legal restraint on the enforcement of every degreo of the boycott should bo withdrawn; that tho industrial excommunication of the Innocent Inno-cent merchant who refuses to render unquestioned un-questioned obedience to the orders of Mr. Gompers should be legalized and encouraged; encour-aged; or does ho believe with us, and with Mr. Mitchell and other labor leaders who differ with Mr. Gompers In this matter mat-ter than this fornl of tho boycott Is morally moral-ly wrong, that labor at war should fight with lt3 enemies and respoct the rights of neutrals, that Innocent third parties should not bo coerced Into taking sides In industrial disputes to which they are in no degreo parties, under penalty of having their business attacked and de-troyed de-troyed ? Taft vs. Bryan. Mr. Taft Is perfectly definite on this proposition. Where docs Mr. Bryan stand? The citizen who votes for or against Mr. Taft on this proposition does so with his eyes wide open and with a clear understanding un-derstanding from Mr. Taft himself of his position. He has frankly discussed this subject time and again with working-men working-men themselves, both In this campaign and prior to his nomination. He has been willing to express hl3 position clearly clear-ly and to assure workingmen that to protect them in their rights he Is willing to go to the limits of what he considers Justice, but that he will not go farther. His definition of Justice to labor does not, as we understand It, include cither of the principles contained in Mr. Gompcrs's Gom-pcrs's programme, as set forth officially In this bill. Does Mr. Bryan disagree with Mr. Taft on these propositions? Will he state publicly, definitely, categorically, cate-gorically, whether ho accepts the programme pro-gramme outlined in this bill, as Mr. Gompcrs in his letters has assured the public that he does? Mr. Bryan's party platform paid a high tribute lo our courts of justice. It stated: "We resent tho attempt of the Republican Re-publican party to raise a false Issue respecting re-specting the judiciary. It Is an unjust rellectlon upon a great body of our citizens citi-zens to assume that they lack respect for the courts." "Tho great body of our citizens." to whom this platform refers, are admittedly admitted-ly Mr. Gompers and his followers. Boast for Gompers. Mr. Compels, now Mr. Bryan's open and avowed ally, has in the letter herein quoted attacked the federal courts In unmeasured un-measured terms of reproach because, by a long line of decisions, the equity courts have refused to make an outlaw of the business man; because his right to carry on lawful business under peace of the law has been protected by the process of Injunction; because. In a word, one of the most vital and most fundamental rights 'of tho business world, tho right of a business man to carry on his busl-nesy. busl-nesy. haa been sustained and not denied by the processes of the courts of equity. This sweeping attack of Mr. Gompcrs upon the Judiciary has been made In a frank and open effort to secure votes for Mr. Bryan- Are these attacks made with Mr. Bryan's consent? ! Do they meet with his approval? ! Does he indorso them or does he repudiate repu-diate them? ' Mr. Bryan ha3 frankly questioned Mr Taft during the. progress of this cam- 1 palgn, und very properly so, asking him ' to make clear his Eland on public mat- I ters on which the public Is entitled to ; be enlightened- In turn, with equal ' frankness and with equal propriety Mr ! Bryan should bo asked to break a" losir- : continued silence and make definite and i certain his own position in regard to the I matter which concerns tiot only business i men and every decent, law-abiding citizen, citi-zen, whether a wageworker or not, Just as much as It concerns Mr. Gompers and ' that part of organized labor which stands i with him, There Is none of tho generalities of i vague expression of sympatliv for la- i bor. Let Mr. Bryan simply confine him- self to tho anti-injunction plank of his own platform and tell us publiclv definitely defi-nitely and clearly whether ha accepts or I rejects the statement of Mr. Gompers that ' this plank pledges him to the prlnclnles of tho bill for which Mr. Gompers stands-and stands-and whether if elected he will ondeavor to have hla propositi enacted Into law. This Is asked honestly in the interest of that large, voting public which beUevf.i sincerely In the promotion of everv lenltl-muto lenltl-muto right and interest of labor, but which believes also that from tho standpoint stand-point of the best interest of labor It neither requires or Is entitled to mor-than mor-than Justice, and that thu rlBht to Ho'. atroy business should not be formally recognized rec-ognized in tho law of the land. I reels Right to Speak. j I feel that I have the right to sricil- 1 frankly Ip this" matter because throughout my term ns president It has boon my co -stant object lo do everything In mv power, pow-er, both by administrative action and by endeavoring to secure lglslatlve action to advanco the canpo of labor, protect It from unjust aggression, and secure It to its legitimate results. I have accomplished something; I hope to accomplish something some-thing more before I leave office; and I havo taken special and particular Interest In Mr. Taft's candidacy because I believe that he Is tho man best qualified for continuing con-tinuing the work of securing to the wage-workers wage-workers of the country their full rights. I will do everything In my power for the wageworkers of tho country EXCEPT TO DO' WHAT IS WRONG. I will do wrong for no man; and with all the force within my power I solemnly warn the laboring man of this country that any public man who advocates doing wrong In their Interest cannot bo trusted by them; and this whether his promise to do wrong Is given knowing that It Is wrong or because of a levity or lack of consideration which makes him willing to promise anything without counting the cost If thereby support at the moment 13 to be .purchased. Just as I have fought hard and shall continue , to fight hard to bring about In the fullest way the recognition recog-nition of the employee to be amply compensated com-pensated for Injury received In the course of his duty, so I have fought hard and shall continue to fight hard to do away with all abuses In tho use of the power of injunction. Will Work for Labor. I will do everything I can to see that the power of Injunction Is not used to oppress laboring men. I will endeavor to secure them full and equal justice Therefore in the interest of all good citizens citi-zens be they laboring men, business men. professional men, farmers or members of any other occupation, so long as they havo In their souls the principles of sound American citizenship, I denounce as wicked tho proposition to secure a law which according to the explicit statement of Mr. Gompcrs Is to prevent the courts from effectively interfering with riotous violence when the object Is to destroy a business and which will legalize the blaokllst and tho secondary boycott, both of them the apt Instruments of unmanly persecution. But. there Is another account ac-count against Messrs. Brvan and Gompers Gom-pers In this matter. "Ephralm feedeth on wind." Their proposed remedy Is an empty sham. They are seeking to delude their followers by the promise of a law which would damage this country solely because of tho vicious, immoral purpose that would bo shown by putting it upon the statute books, but which would bo utterly worthless to accomplish Its avowed purpose. I have not the slightest doubt that such a law as that proposed by Mr. Bryan would, If enacted by congress, con-gress, be declared unconstitutional by a unanimous supreme court, nulcss. Indeed. Mr. Brvan were able to pack this court with men appointed for the special purpose pur-pose of declaring such a law constitutional. constitu-tional. I happen to know that certain great trust magnates have announced within the past few weeks In answer to the question as to why they wcro openly or secretly favoring the election of Mr. Bryan, that tho laws that Mr. Bryan proposed. pro-posed. Including especially this law. would undoubtedly throw them out and that tho promise to enact them woulu thercforo safely be disregarded. Quotes Legal Opinion. On July 2 last the special counsel to the Central Association of Building Trades of New York. Edward J. Gavegan submitted sub-mitted to that association an opinion on the matter of Injunctions, an opinion which was openly endorsed and approved tho same day by the Central Assocla:Ion of Building Trades of New York. In this opinion In discussing proposals to do away with or modify the power l Issu- II1K IIIJUIIUIIUIIB HI IIIUUOUIUI uioijui", Gavegan said that the proposal to favor defendants In Industrial disputes above all others "would bo class legislation and In tho naturo of special privilege and special privilege Is the bane of the woik-ingman. woik-ingman. Special privilege Is what creates powerful special interests. What the wage-worker wants and all he wants Is equality before the law. It Is playing into the hands of the special Interests to enact laws which are certain of annulment by the courts, even when they are Intended In good faith for the betterment of the workingmen. The special Interests would rather see a thousand favorable but un-enforclble un-enforclble new laws enacted for the wage-earner wage-earner than to have him learn the full power of a single existing remedy. The remedies so far suggstcd and made public cannot In the very nature of our system furnish any needed relief. Labor representatives should concentrato and use their Influence for tho enactment of general measures calculated to protect and not to destroy the remedy of Injunction." Injunc-tion." This Is admirably sound, common sense, the opinion of the counsel to a groat labor body, endorsed and adopted as Its own by that labor party. It Is a scathing condemnation of the proposals, vicious and chimerical, to which Messrs. Bryan and Gompcrs are committed. They promise prom-ise what would bo In the highest degree detrimental to the Interests of the general gen-eral public If It could bo performed and what as a matter of facf could not be performed. I believe both In the patriotism patriot-ism and the intelligence of tho working-men, working-men, the laboring men of America. Therefore, There-fore, I do not believe they ran bo misled to their own deep hurt as Messrs. Bryan and Gompers sopIc to mislead them; I do not believe that they will permit Mr. Gompers to deliver them like chattels to Mr. Bryan In exchange for a sham. Sincerely yours. THEODORE ROOSEVELT. P. C. Knox. United States senator Valley Forge. Pa. |