Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-02-28
A Knight Of Labor Answers fr'
Royal.

| RiceViile, va.
A Knight OF Labor Answers mr.
Hoyats.
To the Editor Of the Dispatch
If left to my own inclinations, an an
swer to MIR. Royals communication N
your editorial columns Of the Goth
would come from some other pen--one,
doubt not, much better equipped to
cope with lawyer recognized in both
The old and new world as profound
thinker and logical reasoner. My
friends have urged me to undertake the
task. and in doing so ! must admit my
inability to argue any question from a
legal standpoint.
Ii is with no little pleasure ! bear
testimony to the fact that Mr.. Royal
has been fair. just, and liberal en-
ployer, and a sincere and true friend OF
the nottingham. AS such j have sup
ported him whenever his name has been
before the people for their suffrage. !
do not now consider him " an enemy Of
the workiDgman." Unlike lawyer,
he has read only one side Of the ques-
ton; he has not investigated the causes
that led to this "new-fangled idea"
and therefore opposes 1.-THE new faith "
because he has received his information
from the enemies, not the friends, OF
"the new faith"
] confess the word boycott pos
sesses no charm for me. Its existence
and use clearly demonstrate that when
ever and wherever it is employed there
is to be found some one opposed to
arbitration, for it is never resorted to
until all efforts at arbitration have
failed. The Knights of Labor and the
Typographical Union are enjoined by
their constitutions to exhaust every
channel leading to arbitration before
they are at liberty to use the only wea-
pom permissible under the laws govern
ing this countryside right to spend
their money with whom they choose.
Though have been informed by law
yeIs acknowledged to be well posted in
criminal law that -" boycotting" is not
a conspiracy, yet from hasty reading
Of the second volume of Bishop on
Criminal Law am willing to admit
that from lawyers standpoint boy
cottiDg" might be considered an in
dictable offence.
In the following paragraph you claim
that boy cOtting" is a conspiracy
Undoubtedly each individual has a right
TO refrain nom dealing with Messrs. Smith
& Jones II he pleases, and IL II so happens
that all individuals cease dealing with
them by accident, at the same moment,
and that they are thus left without Gus
u mers, no harm is done. But H. in point
OF fact, all those who had been heretofore
dealing with them agree together that from
q certain hour no one OF Them VIII so deal
again, and that they Will terriW all others
fom dealing with that firm In the future,
his has become conspiracy to destroy The
business OF Messfs. Smith q Jones' Not
only is such a conspiracy clearly a criminal
offence under the law as IL stands. but 10 is
Directly IepugnaDt 10 the most elem entary
princil les upon which every man must hope
To rise IN the worlds scale, whether he be
'laboling man. or whether he be lawyer.
doctor engineer, editor, or preacher
If this be so, then why do you not
institute criminal proceedings against
Mr.. Tinsley and all the other treasurers
in Virginia for not receiving the cou-
pons Of your clients in payment Of
taxes?
Why not have the Democratic party
indicted for conspiracy: Has not that
party, through one of its State officials,
made public the names Of those who
paid their taxes in coupons?
Did you not say lin substance) in one
of your briefs before the United States
Supreme Court that the county and city
treasurers were endeavoring to intimi-
date, by levy and trespass, the GUS
toners Of your clients?
Did you not also claim that the DEM
ocratic party 'aims at defying and de-
IeatiDg the judgments and decisions
Of the United States Supreme Court |
= respecting the States coupons ~:
If the Democratic party, the General
Assembly Of Virginia, and the trea-
'urers Of the State are allowed to 60 |
Notwithstanding their re-
,eated and continued attempts to de-
troy your business and the property |
If your clients, surely you will per-
nit the members of Typographical
Union, the Knights Of Labor, and their
riends to withdraw their patronage |
rom Messrs. Smith 4 Jones because
smith & Jones are depressing the
classes of this city and State
Smith q Jones may have rendered
themselves overbearing to the Union
md Knights, but doubtless you will
lain that you and your clients have
,een kind and considerate to Virginia.
You say {" do know that could
rot gain admission into it (the Typo
graphical Union; yet ! might be able
o earn a support by printing"
Neither can | become member of the
Bar Association, nor could you learn
! support at the printing business.
would not be admitted to practice be-
ore any OF the courts in this city.
Why? Because i never studied law.
You have never studied the printing
business in its practical details, and
therefore, could not become a member
If the Union for the same reason that
would keep me out Of the association of
awyers. Is there any interference with
the right of aperson to use every talent,
mercy, and muscle" in the above pro.
'eeding?
The Union does not hinder you from
'arning every cent that your employer
will pay you. On the contrary, its aim
S to get the employer to pay you what
Tou are really worth.
A farmer, ifpermitted, might sell his
obacco or wheat on Change and realize
more from his muscle" than if forced
o sell on the street; yet do not see
my lawyers coming to his assistance
md branding the members of the To-
'acco Exchange and the Grain and
'lour Exchange as conspirators and
,rigands."
-Four shoe-dealers in this city not long
ince agreed not to buy of Brown if he
old Henry shoes, yet no one felt called
lpon TO get up meeting to denounce
hem as outlaws.
| heartily concnr in thu cant;,ooo. |