Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-10-09
Richmond and Boycotting.

RlCuhOnN anu DoyCOttlhS'
We cannot imagine why the Alexandra
Gazette should persist i'm repeating IT.
charge against the businessmen OF Rich
moud tbai they at a public meeting en-
dorsed boy colt for no other conclusion
can lie drawn from such statement than
that the gentlemen thus maligued were at
ono time. II they are not now, In favor OF
bOycoitlng. When TINT paper last week
again brought out the unfounded charge.
we asked /, 10 tell us when. where. and
how The businessmen OF Richmond
had endorsed the boycott. Instead
Of acknowledging that it bad created,
or endesyored to create. IN impress
sion entirely false a. TO what our business.
men had done at their meeting OF February
hast, the Gazette again returns to the original
charge against them, and adds a specifica-
ton against the Dispatch. We had said:
GAS We haven't copy Of those resolu
lions, and know not where In our files to
look for them, we a'e unable to do as the
Gazette suggests. But we are confident
that the businessmen Of this city are OPP
luiions may reid.
And the Gazette comments as follows:
"The Dispatch has made many bad ex-
hibiis since 1t joined the Repudiitors, but
the above is the worst Of all. Don't know
where In it, own files to look for the pro-
ceedings Of recent public meeting II the
businessmen ~ its own city, which ere
ated more comment and had more iniuri-
Gus eject upon that city than any meeting
held there since The war
Thus challenged. we have turned to our
flies, and we find that the meeting which
the Gazette charges with having endorsed
the boycott passed among others the follow
ing resolution:
Q. That whilst II Is the right OF any class
who have grievances 10 use all proper
mems Of Informing the public OF their
wrongs and 10 secure support 10 their cause
from all other citizens by reason and argyll
mcnt addressed to the conscience and judg-
mcnt. yet ii is the sense Of this meeting
ih,i the system Of bOycolting" as re.
Gently inaugurated and carried on IN this
city under the sanction or direction OF the
"kni2hts OF Labor is not legal or proper
remedy for any grievance or wrong they
may haye, hut conspiracy, punishable by
the law Of the land; that the enforcement
OF such a system against individuals i an
sttempt 10 cOefce their conscieuces and
judgements, l. an invasion and infringe.
ment OF inherent rights, Is contrary to the
spirit and genius Of our institutions, and
will not lie cOuntenaDced or submitted to
10y the people OF this community.
Could language be stronger The meet.
Ing was called to antagonize the practice OF
boyeotting, and this 1t did in language
which no man can possibly misunderstood.
Why, then, does the Gazette continue to
misropresent the good people Of this citys
There Is no good reason for so doing. 1t
is 10 be pre>umed, however, in all charity,
that, forgetting the purpose OF the Rich
mond meeting, and the action which il took
In regard TO the practice OF boyeotting, the
Gazette has in mind mistaken notion as
10 the meaning Of the following resolution,
adopted 10y the same meeting:
as. That We most heartily endorse the ac'
ton Of the Business Committee OF this meet
ing in having conference with the repre-
seDtatiyes II the labor unions. and thereby
seeking TO harmonic and adjust all mat
tiers apparently In issue between them and
the resi- II our citizens; and IL the Legis.
ture In its wisdom can frame such an act
A. will legally and properly enable all di-
ferenees between employers and employees
TO be settled by arbitration, then we ask
that such a law lie passed as speedily as
practicable"
II would be prepOsterous under any cir
cuustat ces 10 charge the businessmen OF
Richmond with being boycotters. TO do
so in face OF the facts above reclted Is an
offence against society. The reader will see
exactly what the meeting "endorsed y
namely, the action OF the business commit
tee Of the meeting in having a conference
nth The labor unions, and thereby seeking
to harmonic and adjust al matters appa.
reniiy IN issue bet,oeen them and the rest Of
our citizens" That was all that the NEST
ing endorsed.
The businesS-committee had agreed that
the boycott against BlUGHNAS should con-
tinue; the circular issued against BAUGH.
MASS patrons should he withdrawn; aud
all the parties, II their action was atfed
by their constituent bodies, should appeal
10 the General Assembly for legislation re-
quirlng the settlement OF disputes between
employers and employe, by arbitration.
The "bOycott" against BAUGHNAN that
was to continue until final settlement OF
the matter (but even this was not endorsed
by the mee,ingl was not really the sort Of
"boyeott" which the meeting had under
consideration, and to which 1t objected, but
was mere resolution Of the Printers
Union thai they themselves would not have
business relations with BAUGmNAS. This
sort q "boyco,t" may be wise os may be
foolish, but Il cannot be easily prevented
as long as men have the right to buy where
they will. II may be foolish or il may be
wise; but ii could not amount T. anything
10 The case before us. the printers needing
nothing that BAUGBvAN had 10 sell, and
therefore having no power TO iDlure him.
IL was the boycolting OF BAuGnNiS's
pa,rous that caused public meeting Of the
business men TO be called. This boycoltlng
they denounced in the strongest terms;
and the circular issued against BAU0HxAx
the printers agreed TO withdraw.
This is the history Of the meeting which
The Gazette declares "created more com.
ment" and "had more Injurious effect"
upon Richmond than any other meeting
held here since The war;.
Need We ssy moTey
--------------
Logans Logic.