The Labor enquirer., 1886-09-04
Butler on the Boycott.

/ buIteT Oh ASoy Cosss
saw the other day in the pages Of
the Sun an inquiry what DR.. johnson
would say If he could arise from his
grave and hear some one say Boycott a
scab."
The words are new, the thing is old
Good and patriotic men long ago believed
in boycotting in Massachusetts,. and in
deed it was one of our institutions, and
only differed from the boycott of the
present day in that they did it o Hicially,
of which the following is evidence:
Bo sToN, January, l77O.- Town meeting
assembled in FaneuiI hall. 1000 present
William Phillip, Esq, moderator. Voted,
That William Jackson, Theopolus Lille,
John TAYLOR and Nathaniel Rogers. by
refusing and delaying TO comply with
our reasonable and Just demands, have
abused the lenitY and patience of their
fellow citizens, and have confirmed this
BODY in their opinion that they are OBJ
stlnate and inveterate enemies Of the
country, and we think it our indispensa.
BILE duty to ourselves aud posterity from
hereafter to treat them as such, by with
holding not only all commercial deal.
Ilngs, but every act and Office of common
clvility, hoping that they may be forever
frustrated in this and every other at
tempt to counterwork the generous in
tentions of the patriotic merchants of
Boston and of all America. And we do
fervently wish that all who with US are
exertlng themselves to maintain and se-
cure the invaluable rights of our coun-
Try NAV refuse to sell to. buy Of or have
any intercourse with the said William
Jackson, Theopolus Lille. John TAYLOR
and Nathaniel Rogers, not only during
our present struggle, but forever here
after.
"BRAINTREE. Nov. IA, 1774.-Ata a town
meeting by adjournment from the
seventh of November instant, Deacon
Palmer moderator:
Committee respecting non-consump-
ton agreement voted: The committee
of observation, etc, be desired to inform
themselves relating to the conduct of
such persons within said town uf any
there be) who do not strictly conform to
the non-importatiOn and non-consump-
ton agreement, and if there be any of
the members of the town who continue
to practice in violation of said agreement
by selling or consuming teas or other
wise and persist therein that IN such
case they publish his, her or their names
that they may be known and esteem ed
as practical enemies to our rights and
privileges"
The right to boycott (of course with
out force or Yiolence) has also teen de-
cided in our state after the fullest con-
sideration by our supreme court in the
case of the Commonwealth against Hunt,
Metcalf R p. Ill.
Isn't it time for society to reflect upon
this truth? Every employer, in the ab-
sence of a contract, has right to en-
ploY whOw he pleases Every man, in
the absence of contract to the contrary,
has right to work for whom he pleases !;
and so long as these rights are exercised
without force and violence to carry them
out, they are entirely protected by the
law. The means are not unlawful, and
the end is not unlawful if it is only to
convince the object that it is best for
him to conform to the wishes of the
"boYcotters.
Such has been from the beginning the
law and practice in this regard in this
country where it has not been changed
by statute, and l am not aware of any
such change.
Were there not a good many men
called "copperheads'' Dovcotted by their
loval neighbors during our late war,
precisely as were the merchants in Bos-
ton who would seI tea after the destruc-
ton of the cargo ID Boston harbor, or
deal IN British goods contrary to the
general feeling of the community ?
Very respectfully.
BENZ. F. BUTLER.
Boston, August II.