Springfield globe-republic. (Springfield, Ohio) 1884-1887, 1885-02-15
BOYCOTTIN0.


Boycott is . man I've believe he is yet
alvey. And boycott is an English verb,
which will 90 into the next editions of the
dictionaries. When q man becomes
verb Of his language, he is pretty immor-
tal Boycott is immortal. He had i'm
mortality thrust upon him.
1t was only few years ago that Boycott
was an obscure renter of an Irish farm.
His fellow-renters united to resist the ex-
actions OF their landlords Boycott re
fused to join them in their resistance, but
went on farming and paying his agreed
rent as usual. But when harvest came,
the union of resisting renters set watch
and guard round his place to prevent Ia
borers from hiring to help him gather his
crops.
1t raised . great rumpus As a new move
ment Of united workingmen, and sent
Boycott's name flying round the world.
The movement WAS taken up in other
places, and, as there was no apt word in
the language for it, and as Boycott seemed
somehow to sound like it, it called itself
boycotting. Like the boys whistling, it
whistled itself To treat man as Boycott's
neighbors treated him was to boy
colt him. So Boycott was doomed into the
language in spite Of himself and he will
live as q verb long after he is dead as q
man.
There has been q great deal of boy
cotting since Boycott was boycotted. 1t
has become . very common proceeding.
| At first it looked little like interference
with a mans private rights; but. as our
entire system of civilization is an interfe-
renee with private rights-a rivalry Of pri-
vate right, with private rights-it has
come at last to be acquiesced in as allow
able tactics in the grand struggle for ex-
istence.
That is, it is allowable, if it is conducted
without violence or duress. If man
does not do business to suit your ideas Of
l your own rights or OF his relations to you,
it is your privilege to slnder the relations
and, through individual or cooperative
action, to retaliate BY withdrawal OF
custom from him. You may refuse to
work for him, and persuade others to re-
fuse. You may withhold your patronage
from his business, and persuade others to
withhold theirs. This is legitimate strategy
in the grand battle of selishness against
selfpreservation which is fashionably
called living.
But, when boycotting goes the length
of forcible coercion, it is war, and must
take the risks and the chances of war.
To compel laborers to leave off work be-
cause they accept less wages than you will
do the work for is to introduce the
methods of barbarism (which is physical
warfare) into the institutions of civilizs
ton (which is intellectual warfare). 1t
is question, then, of civilization or nj
hilism. If you propose to block the pro-
cesses Of civilization in state by violence,
the state must meet you with force or
else abandon itself to anarchy. The
civilized state must preserve itself at all
azards, Just as the man must preserve
himself at all hazards. Peace within it
self is the life of the state. If you fling
yourself against the peace of the state,
the state must suppress you Or perish.
Boycotting as an intellectual and peace
full procedure is an unfortunate, but
it is legitimate, development Of the free
dom of competition in free government
1t is civilized warfare in the business bat
ties of life, individual or collective, for the
survival of the fttest 1t is a weapon
that may be used, provided it is not dipped
in assassin's poison. But. when boycott
ting proceeds to threats or force against
person or property; when it coerces by
violence the action of any citizen; when
it avails itself of firearms, or dynamite
or Internal machinery to accomplish its
purposes, it becomes brutal outlawry,
and the state must deal with it as such, or
else abandon its first supreme duty Of
keeping the peace and preserving its own