The Iowa plain dealer. [volume] (New Oregon, Howard County, Iowa) 1867-1895, 1881-06-09
IN FAVOR OF THE LABORER.
a Now York Court Decides chat |
strike II Not Illegal.

a Now York Court Decides chat .
strike IL Not Illegal.
On the ID day Of October, 1880, the
employees Of the Johnston Harvester
Company, Of Brockport, N. I, quit
work on strike. Soon afterward suit
for damages was brought against them
by the company, and in November .
motion in behalf Of the plaintiff was
made before the Supreme Court for an
injunction against the defendants to re-
strain them from interfering with the
business Of the plaintiff, or intermed-
ding with any person in the employ
ment Of the plaintiff or about to enter
into such employment The motion was
denied by Justice Macomber with so
costs. In reviewing the case the Judge
said It appeared that tho plaintiff was .
business corporation engaged extensive
" in the manufacture Of agricultural
implements that all Of the iron-mold-
ers except four left the plaintiffs
employment for the ostsnsible rea-
son that the plaintiff did not
pay sufficiently high wages that
the defendants were members OF the
Iron-M -Molders' Union, and that they had
combined to prevent the plaintiff from
hiring other workmen to supply their
places, thus materially interfering with
the business Of the plaintiff. He also
found that the defendant did not deny
that they had, by persuasion, induced
molders to leave the employment Of the
plaintiff, but they denied that there had
been any acts Of violence or intimida-
tion. It further appears that the strike
was preceded by an order reducing the
wages Of the laborers, and that the mold
ers had not contracted their services to
the plaintiff for any length Of time, but
that they were at work by the day or
piece. The Judge held that the order
II and peaceable assembling or cooper
alton Of persons employed in any pro-
fession, trade or handicraft, for the pur-
pose Of securing an advance in the rate
Of wages or compensation, or for the
maintenance Of such right, ID now per-
mitted by statute; but this did not per-
NIT any body of men to do what
any one Of them was not permitted to
do individually. The act did not shield
person from the liability for his action
| in intimidating or coercing fellow
laborer SO that he shall leave his EN-
ployer's service. Such conduct is, in
its nature, trespass upon the rights Of
business of the employer. If he COM
pels, by assault Of violence, by threats.
by acts of coercion, q fellow craftsman
to leave the employment Of another, he
commits an otfense against the rights Of
such person which is hardly distin-
gllishable from an act which should
itself injure or DESTROY the product Of
that mans labor. 1t il q direct injury
to property rights, and may be regarded
| as the sole proximate cause Of such in
jury, for the laborer, in such cases, has
no freedom OF action and cannot, him.
self, be deemed to take any voluntary
| part IN the transaction. "A distinction
has been sought to be made, the Judge
said, between cases when there was IN
unexpired time contract, and cases where
services were by the day or piece, but
he did not think that such distinction
restesl upon sound reason.
After citing large number of cases,
the Judge said that the origin Of the
kind Of action under consideration was
at time of the substantial enslavement
| of domestic servants, and at the outset
it proceeded upon the theory that such
servant had not freedom Of action which
is conceded to that class Of the present
day. He was disinclined to extend by
any Judgment of mis- the doctrine Of re-
covery for enticing away servants where,
both in fact and in theory, the person
| enticcd is free agent to come and 60 rs
| he will, responsible only, like other per-
sons, for the violation of his contract or
his duty.
In relation to the controversy between
capital and labor, the Judge referred to
| the statute Of Edward III. known as the
statute Of laborers, aud characterized it
as coarse and brutal in its provisions,
and said that ii was designed to meet
coarse and brntalized conditions Of So
ciety which followed Immediately upon
the ravages Of the plague. English leg
islation since then has tended to bring
about q better condition Of affairs be-
tween capital and labor. Justice Ma
comber concluded rs follows:
"The fact that there are vast accum'
ulations Of capital directed toward tho
DEVELOPMENT of the resources Of nature
and Of trade in this country, having al
the advantages Of aggregated wealth
would probably. If not certainly, have q
tendency to induce laborers also to com
bine for their own protection. Capital
would seek to obtain the cheapest labor
and, unless resisted by something moro
than the old methods before the break
down Of ancient industrial systems,
would almost inevitably succeed in dis
tnrbing its relationship to labor to the
detriment Of the community. It Is,
think, for such reasons that trades
unions were organized, and for sucl
reason it il, If ut all, that their policy
can, on principles Of political economy
be recognized and sustained. The com
bination of workingmen undoubtedly
permits Of more prolonged contests viii
capital than formerly. but capital, BY
combination also, threatened to be
stronger than before. It is by comhi
nation in trade-unions that laborers pos
sess and exercise some control over thu
wages and the hours Of labor and w
nave tic uutuOIlty UI 1. f. OAn-A/ccAAc
Professor Of Jurisprudence and Politica
Economy, Queens University, for say
ing that it would be nearer the truth t
say that -nnionism tends to pre-
vent dispute with the employer rather
than to make the common allegation tina
it promotes them.
1.-The fact was shown III evidence be
fore the British Royal Commission OF
tralcs-nnions. which reported i'll lS6.
that there had been fewer disputes Will
employers, and greater permancnce il
the rate Of wages, in the trades with tils
strongest, and richest, and most extend
ed unions.
Undoubtedly, if capitalists and In
borers could truly see wherein their vel
} fare respectively lies, it would be found
that there was m interdependence he
tween them, and that what was for iii.
permanent and substantial good o
either would, in tho long run, be fol
! the benefit of both. But, in the Ian
J guagc Of Mr.. Goodwin Smith, The