National Republican., 1885-12-09
THAT LABOR DEBATE.
III esident Oysters Last Letter 60 Pres
idcut phillfps

| idont Phillips,
Tho following is the latest contribution /,
the controversy over the challenge to dcblt,
the labcr question:
HEnQuAn1Ers FEDERATION or LABoR US
| 2, Cicty-IFAt SlE; Your Cunimuulcat.on'6 ~
The 2Sth uitiuIu. declining, on behalf Of tns'Y
NJ Z. a. lateTnty Society 80 accept the clru.
lei ge OF tlIe Fedetntion ui Labor triOns ot III,
Di trict Of Columbia to publicly dissuss tlr
qu. stiOn-' llcsUlvcd, Tint labor organization.
o'c beneiir 'nl to workinGmen"- mtCly debated
nuu decidt d IN the negative by tho Orgnut:t
ti0n which yur represent. L. received
You stat" that the society declines To acasp.
u g b0llengc for the reason shat 70 "is ubs Or.
gIuigtd ior the purpose nj uiycTtlSiny rpiiiipaI
reds or publishing 10 the world thplries mo
lai or uECns.' and that "whiia IL Is dtsp,utl IN
mCct niiy similar organization uppn npy debit.
uhiH question. II does not nacept GhtilanIa.
Wlich luesupnOsC hut one uugb'u rrOInl Of
ntpumcrt unl that Glrgpdy reserved tn .,Ia
challenging party. But IL cluuli C,r
q reasons given. accept challenges Which ARA
evidently tCndercd to Vcntillic private noiu.
ions upon subjects alcculy cNhaiis'c1 only 10
K ts reputation for polite and oolStiy dij,us.
The Federation Of Inbir untons wit, uisl,,l
ms to the purposes for which your sarir;y WA
organized hv tho ftct that only fu,y yppt; g
rEo It did ''plbllsh to The world theories uu1n
labor unicns.' The following l. taken from
ihe press reports Of the action Of The society on
Tho Lnhrr Question Decided Unions not
Chrmpuned well IN the Y. NJ, c. A. tl,hn,c -
The question whether labor organization, ave
henci ciAl 10 wOrkingmcn came NJ before the
debating society ofthc Y. NJ 9. A. last evening
for discussion and decision. Anof the
arguments 10y the appointed dchlterS the qu19.
tion was decided on tho morits of tho ar,,l.
merits In the negative"
You say that the society "is disposed to NEE:
any similar organization upon amy dob1tnhle
question: Are we to understand that this
question was not dcbatablu ~ the time the 40.
elCiy uScd II rs means OF diScisSlngund pub.
lisling to the world theories unon labor
unons?' Or Is II no longer druntnhis barJu "a
i WIS on that occgs!ou decided In In negative
III accordance with the Views UG n nrnhpr Of
gthtl!ntn VINO wee given ~ opportunity to
Ncntilaio private opinions cOHCc.n ming the
'uljcCt2
II YOU moan that this question ia no longer
dehRtnbic because II Is universally uonce led
That labor organizations Nfc bCnclritl 10 WORK.
lnrmcn, ana need noinrthcr defense, yunf No.
tcEiion ls called to the fact that your sigirty (,
ON record as having decided to the cautriry,
ana has not yet set Itself In accord with what
i@everywhcrc conceded.
II the question Is one which was already cy.
bnuSted, which Is outside Of the purposes OF
your organization, aud which prOvOips imD,.
lilc ana disorderly discussion. It appears tia.
ne society wasted Its time, broke thraugh It's
linitntions, aud rn II grave risk of dln0rali.
zaiion by discussing the question recently
The recent inempcrate dcnunchation Of labor
unions hy Judge ofthis city in tho exercise of
bis judicial functions: the violent dcunnclation
Of The unions. their principles and methods Dy
their enemies, and the extensive ignorlncs
concerning them, shows clearly the need OF
polite and orderly discussion" IL surely is
not much for BODY of men ncesgantly ar.
rnigned at the bnr of public opinion to ask for
q ehance 10 meet their accuscrs ana present
their Justification.
The challenge ior the Federation of Labor
Unions was rendered respectfully and in good
iaith rs the result ofthc previous action of the
y. NJ. G. A. Literary Society. Tho assumption
mat thc intention was to air crecds or theories,
70 ,,fcrye mere selfish interests" to "arouseprc
iudicc," or TO 'vcntilatc private opinions" Is
not Justified by anything appearing on the face
Of the challenge; and prefer to assume that
The INSTITUTIONS conveyed in those words are
Inc unOulhnriZede expressions Ofprivatc opinion
oftllc prt sidcnt of the society.
Although II Is customary to treat labor unions
with inciriity,l regret that your society should
have supposed 1t could address us only In thnt
mqnner, 10 the dctrimcnt of It's repuia.on for
lolic ana orderly discussion. The manner OF
declining our respectful challenge cones very
near inlicting nm Injury to that reputation you
Hre so fearful of riSking, aud again must rs.
sumo that the society has not been properly
renrcsentcdby its president.
If the letter before me fairly represents the
!, ". G. ~. Literary Society | doubly regret
that the challenge has been declined, for
thereby the labor union, have lost an opportu.
nifty not only of cnlightcning your society on II
mot important industrial QUESTION, but OF set.
ting It an cxample,by following which IL canld
derry discussion"
Inc lnDOf organizations indulge verv little In
"orccds' or 'theoiies." Their work Is Intensely
practical, and the outgrOwth of centuries Of
cTpuicrce. Had the debate proposed taken
place, they would have been nblG to prcStn,
an array of facts ample to justify their priuei-
pics, aud TO show that the notion Of ''daugrr-
Gus principles underlying these Orsaniza,iOns'
Is the result of interested msrcprescututll IN on
lhe one band, acting on dense ignorance on
the other
For the purpose of correcting misreprcsan,a.
lions ard cnliGhteninG the public IN regard to
the right, neccSsityard duty of worEingmentp
unite tor protection against the oppression OF
capital the Federation of Labor Unions stand,
ready al any and NIL times to defend the Drinci.
pies OF LAT or ORGANIZATIONS IN polite and or.
EW OYsrER,
President Federation OF Labor illn.ons