The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1885-11-20
THE ISSUE CONSIDERED.

number OF the citiLens of Deer Lodge, taking
ofcnse at the action of the Knghts OF Labor In de-
clarng boycott against the Cninese sn s,, .nef
the columns OF the NEW NoErn-WEsr. declaring In
substance that their rights American citizens are
twill resist now and henceforth any such aggression
on their personal rights" The nature OF the resist
Just what they g rssst = MOI maae s %an
the that Of the lodges In this vicinity,
and simply declares that and sitter certain date
nsman or any m person who employs one. Is this
trampling on any Americans rights7 Amy person In
Deer Lodge or elsewhere can employ all the Chinese
Knights of Labor win never violate law 10 redress
grievance. But II the patriots Of Deer Lodge i'm
zstion from M bestowine patronage where he or il
pleases they will fnd they have set themselves
difficult task The signen OF the manifesto need not
get excited the "un-Americsn interference will ex-
tend only 90 far as TO Withdraw the patronage OF
Knights Of Labor from any individual or firm who
sses dane and what Win Continue 70 be done until
the end In accomplished. The Chinese must go,
even II some Of the people of Deer Lodge object
Wdikerritk NeDs.
ting favorite pastime OF the Knights Of Labor, an
amusement to be INDUCED In on the slightest provo:
cation The fact lie, the boycott 10 only inaugurated
when all other means Of settlement fail. The Knights
of Labor regret TO have 10 use this weapon. and al
ways endeavor by honorable arbitration to avoid It.
As 10 the similarity between backsting and boycott
ting, which the Nsw NoRT Il WISER denies exists the
only difference Is that the boycott u an improvement
on the railroad companys' patent, and when used
judicousy as has been done In the past has proved
to these corporations Its superiority to their fsvorlte
blacklist Again, the New NoRTH-WEsT asserts
there 10 no similarity between the two because the
boycott affects others than those directly interested,
while the blacklist 10 confined simply to employer and
employed. Does not the merchant. baker bntr s
trading feel the effects Of the blacklist In this loss OF
patronage Are they not virtually boycotted By the
railroad company when deprived OF their customers
by railroad company But, perhaps as the Helena
Herdtisays the word boycott CRATES harshly ON the
and 10 the principal of all this hullabaloo.
word msy possibly be- coined one that viii be dis
| tinctlyely American and perhaps not have such
distressing effect on the nerves OF some OF our over
sensitive cotemporaries. "a rose by any other
name" etc. and want to keep peace in the family.
WdlkerpiiLe Ners.
Referring TO the first of the above para
graphs we call attention 10 the Inconsistency
Of its Internationally "Any person In
Deer Lodge or elsewhere can employ all the
| Chinese they DESIRE" 2. "The Chinese
must 20, even II some of the people Of Deer
Lodge object" If 'they must co." how can
they be employed? And If "the Knights Of
Labor will never violate q law to redress
grievance" how are they going to expel
people who are here under the protection of
law? We further call attention to the
wording Of the circular from Garrison As
sembly, headed "The Chinese must co."
which included Deer Lodge In Its assumed
| Jurisdiction.
"And that after Nov. Is, 1886, we will
withdraw our patronage from all persons
who still continue to employ or patronize
the Chinese, AND institute a rigorous Boy
colt against them"
Now here are two distinct Propositions
the first to withdraw patronage from persons
employing or patronizing the Chinese, which
is as far rs (the Neaos says) this movement
Is to extend; and second, 1t proposes to Boy
colt them. The Ne,os, In the second para
graph, says: "The Boycott is only inaugu-
rated when ell other means of settlement
fail, and the Knights of Labor regret to have
to use it," but in this instance the very first
notice served on Deer Lodge, and that by
an assembly In another town eleven miles
dist ant, was that both cessation of patronage
and "vigorous Boycott" were to commence
at once. Either the Ne,os, a recognized Or
gan of the Knights of Labor, or the Garrison
| Assembly, Is wrong as to when Boycotting
| Is TO be used, or one or the other does not
understand what "Boyeott" means. As
practiced in Ireland, where the word orisi-
mated, and has been continuously exempli-
| fed, IL means TO crowd . man down and out
| by whatever means are necessary to accom-
plish the purpose. 1t means, aside from
all violence, not TO work for him or employ
him; TO intimidate him; to leave his crops
rotting on the ground and his goods on the
shelves; TO ostracise him socially; 10 have
no business relations with him, and TO place
under ban all who do; TO render him no
assistance in any case, Of any need, and 10
look upon and treat him irreconcilably as
an enemy until the grave has closed over
him, or he surrenders. And this Infamous
word has been adopted in free America as q
watchword and menace to American citi-
| zens who see proper to employ certain per.
sons here under protection of our Govern
ment. Instead Of the Knights of Labor
expressing surprise at the indignation Of
American citizens 81 this outrageous propo-
sition, and proposing not to submit 10 1t, the
Knights Of Labor, three-fourths Of whom
are foreigners, should be among the first to
resent and denounce 1t.
1t is un-American. IL Is an infraction
upon the rights Of people here under protec.
ton of the laws of this country, seeking
employment, and An attempted intimidation
| Of employers that no American citizen
should hesitate to resent and condemn, even
| at peril and sacrifice. The Ne,os says the
General Assembly of the knights of Labor
may perhaps coin another word, distinctively
American, that will be less obnoxious. It is
not the word but the practices 1t covers and
includes that we object to. fthe practice
Is to be Boycotting, let 1t be called Bovcot-
ting. Fit is, rs alleged, simply the purpose
Of the Knights to withdraw patronage from
those who employ certain people they hap
pen to see proper for the time to set the seal
Of condemnation upon, let 1t be known.
But remember that tide once started may
not be stayed. The Ne,os says this action 10
left to the local assemblies. In Galveston
the edict was issued against Negroes; In
Pennsylvania 1t Is against Hungarians; and
ut Tocoma It 10 against Americans. These
things lead to anarchy. What people or
association Of people In this land have the
right to say that any other people here
under the protection of the United States
shall 60? There IL involved In this the
principle Of personal rights and liberty which
once surrendered destroys the very founda.
tions Of the Republic. We are not surprised
that In issuing such mandates the officers Of
the knights Of Labor assemblies withhold
their names. The better sentiment through
out all this land will condemn any such
acts, and signature to such IN edict will
bear stigma upon 1t forever. We have too
much faith In the people Of America TO be-
lieve any such purposes or methods can sur
vise beyond the unnatural heat of unjusti-
fable passion.
Said . knight Of Labor 10 us recently
81 am In hearty sympathy with the objects