OCR Interpretation

The day book. (Chicago, Ill.) 1911-1917, October 31, 1916, LAST EDITION, Image 12

Image and text provided by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL

Persistent link: http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045487/1916-10-31/ed-1/seq-12/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

This explanation of why I don't
think Cunnea is as strong this year
as he was in 1912 may help- some.
Four years ago organized labor was
at war with the trust press, because
of the lockout of union pressmen.
Hoyne was the Democratic nominee
and a member of the so-called
Hearst-Harirson faction. It was be
lieved then that Hoyne, if elected,
would be controlled by the trusjt
press through Andy Lawrence of the
Hearst papers. I believed it myself
and opposed Hoyne. The state's at
torney's office always had played into
the hands of the trust press. I
thought Hoyne would do the same.
So did labor. And organized labor
supported Cunnea, making one of
the hardest fights for him it ever
made in Chicago. After Hoyne took
office he proved that he wasn't a tool
of the trust press, wasn't controlled
by Hearst, Harrison, Lawrence or
anybody else, and that he wasn't
hostile to labor. As a member of the
arbitration board he fought with all
his great ability for the .Street car
men and helped win a great victory.
He has been fair to organized labor
ever since. He did prosecute graft
ing business agents, but honest
unionists can't find fault with that
The evidence proved that the con
victed men were guilty.
Today there is no fight of organ
ized labor against Hoyne. Socialists
are for Cunnea, which is all right.
But organized labor hasn't endorsed
Cunnea and isn't opposing Hoyne as
a body. Most of the street car men
are for Hoyne, and I believe they are
right in standing by the man who
helped them win a substantial vic
tory. Other unions also are for
Hoyne, and most of the trust press',
led by the Tribune, is against him.
It is true the Tribune is supporting
Cunnea, but not because the Tribune
believes in socialism or wants a So
cialist to win. I believe the Tribune
is trying to split the labor vote be
tween Hoyne and Cunnea so that
Miller can win in the expectation,
probably, that Miller will be entirely
satisfactory to the trust press. There
is another reason. Hoyne's success
ful attack on the Thompson adminis
tration and rottenness in he police
d,ej)artment, together with Wilson's
popularity, threatens the entire' Re
publican .county ticket hence the
Tribune fight to attempt to discredit
Hoyne, and the silence of other Re
publican papers that ordinarily
would be backing a state's attorney
who has waged a successful fight
against crime.
With a Wilson landslide on, with
organized labor not unfriendly to
Hoyne, with the Thompson adminis
tration in bad, with danger of free
crime in Chicago if the same bosses
that control the police in control of
the state's attorney's office, with
Cunnea not endorsed by the Chicago
Federation of Labor as he was in
1912, I can't see how Cunnea has as
good a chance now as he had then.
And I can see grave danger, not to
organized labor, but to the entire
honest citizenship of Chicago in the
election of Miller as state's attorney.
I have seen labor licked so often in
politics because it was divided that I
have come to look for the tricks that
are playedto divide it You can't
make me believe that the Tribune
wants a Socialist state's attorney, or
a state's attorney that will be fair to
labor. I am not urging Socialists or
anybody else to vote for Hoyne. I
am merely telling labor the truth as
I see it When I have done that I have
done my duty, and labor ought to
vote as it pleases. My honest belief
is that the Trib's game is to split the
labor and Democratic vote in "order
fo help Miller, believing it can help
Miller more that way than by open
Up 'til Rip Van Winkle's time paint
brushes were made with' the handle
on the other end.
c-ite. QjjMI! .1

xml | txt