Results of the
Election

CURRENT COMMENT

"Not only is free silver, which defeated the party so overwhelmingly in the last two presidential elections, utterly wiped out as an issue, but the defeat of Hill in this state, with his socialistic coal plank, and of Tom Johnson in Ohio, with his crazy-quilt platform, and the loss of Nebraska for the third time in succession under Bryan's leadership, eliminate from the presidential candidacy and the national platform in 1904 a group of men and a line of un-democratic policies and principles which would, if endorsed by the party, surely have led to another campaign of suicide."-New York "World."

"It was the fight of a leaderless party, with terrible internal dissensions, with no common principle and no common aim. . Doubtless there has never been a time in America when the opposition party understood itself less than it does today; there never was a time when it was more variedly discordant and more magnificently unled. The democracy can hope for no permanent success until it becomes one thing or the other, until it finds and unites upon its principles and gets leadership that is bounded by more than state or sectional lines."-Springfield [Mass.] Republican.

"One of the most significant results of last Tuesday's elections is the proof they give that the states west of the Mississippi River, from having been nearly evenly divided in 1898, have become almost solidly republican. There are fifteen states in that region, of which the republicans carried eight four years ago and the democrats seven. This year the democrats carry only one of the fifteen states.

"The following table gives the majorities in each of these states in 1898, the previous mid-presidential year, and in 1902:

"If the democrats would succeed, they must establish with the leaders of labor the relationship which the republicans have established with the leaders of the trusts. In return for financial support the republican party gives to the trusts always predatory and usually illegal-full protection; the right to dictate laws and name executives. The democratic party must join with the laboring citizenship of the nation—the backbone of the nation. The democratic party must give to the man who works the encouragement, support, and the legal protection which the republican party gives to the trusts."-"New York American and Journal."

"Now that the votes are counted, both republicans and democrats admit the popular admiration for the president was a great force in saving the house of representatives for the administration party and in securing heavy votes for administration candidates on local tickets. . . . The only explanation is that Mr. Roosevelt possesses qualities that are not too common among politicians. He has not sought to popularize himself, and therefore he is popular. He has not solicited the suffrages of the public, and the peo

ple make haste to vote for men who bear his party name, even though he is not himself a candidate. He has not supplicated the favors of his party, and his party—and a good many of his political opponents-are ready to follow him unasked. There is universal confidence in Mr. Roosevelt's courage in meeting all emergencies, and in his absolute sincerity and intellectual honesty. No one believes that he would sacrifice the public interests for his party or himself, and the result is that he occupies a position of strength in the opinion of his country that has been attained by very few other men."-New York "Journal of Commerce."

"The result of the elections contains but one lesson for the democratic party, and we may as well be honest

with ourselves and admit it. Try to disguise it as we may, the fact stands out boldly that a vast majority of the American people are not willing to trust the democratic party with the affairs of government as that party is now organized, or, rather, disorganized. This meaning is unmistakable. It has been sufficiently emphasized to remove all doubt.”—Atlanta “Journal.”

"The fact everywhere admitted that the president's personality and administration were potent factors on Tuesday last will confer upon him an influence that few presidents have had. His own renomination is no longer questioned. Those who would have it otherwise recognize it and will make themselves as agreeable as possible."-Des Moines "Register and Leader."

The Coal Strike
Arbitration

"At the present time the United Mine Workers of America has contracts with the operators of fourteen states and districts, fixing the amount the miners shall receive per ton, the amount the various classes of labor shall receive per day, the number of hours which shall constitute a day's work, and the methods and machinery for the adjustment of local grievances by joint conference with the mine owners. These are mutual contracts which are advantageous to both miner and operator and protect the public against the effects of strikes and lockouts. The reports of the United States government on strikes in the mining industry show that the number and duration of strikes have been materially reduced each year since the system of joint conference and mutual agreement has been introduced."-From statement by John Mitchell before arbitration commission at Scranton, Pa., Nov. 14.

"The address was temperate in tone, as all Mr. Mitchell's public utterances have been. With the clearness of statement of a trained lawyer he set forth the position of his organization. He claimed inadequacy of wages, when the danger and the arduous character of the work are considered. He showed that the eight-hour day is the stand

ard day in the mines of England-in the bituminous mines of the United States and in all the silver, gold and copper mines of this country. He declared that it is unjust to make the miner's ton from 2,740 to 3,190 pounds when the consumer's ton and the ton upon which railroads base their transportation charges is reckoned at 2,240 pounds. He declared that in all justice anthracite miners should be paid as much as the men who mine bituminous coal, and that their wages should be as large as the average paid to skilled labor in other fields."—Minneapolis "Times."

"Further answering, it [Phil. & Reading Coal & Iron Co.] says that if and when a labor organization limited to workers in anthracite mines is created which shall obey the laws of the land, respect the right of every man to work whether he belongs to a union or not, and shall honestly cooperate with the employers in securing good work, efficiency, fair production and necessary discipline, trade agreements may become practicable.

"And further answering, the company says that it does. not and will not discriminate against workmen belonging to the United Mine Workers of America or any other labor organization so long as they perform satisfactory work and behave as law-abiding people should, but that the company will at all times employ any person it sees fit, and will not permit any labor organization to limit the right of employment to the members of its organization."-From statement by George F. Baer, filed with arbitration commission.

"This company unequivocally asserts that it will under no condition recognize or enter into any agreement with the association known as the United Mine Workers of America or any branch thereof. Nor will it permit said association or its officers to dictate the terms and conditions under which it shall conduct its business."-From statement by President W. H. Truesdale, of D., L. & W. Ry. Co., filed with arbitration commission.

"The continued effort of Mr. Truesdale and a few hundred or few thousand men like him to ignore labor unions, to refuse to do business with them, and to destroy