Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-04-26
THE BREWERS WINNING

The master brewers are everywhere re-
ported as winning in their lockout. What
else could have been expected, since they
are right in principle and their action is
such that no man can justly complain OF
it. They have not discharged their men:
they have not refused employm ent to
workmen; they have simply said, Here
Is work, there the wages you ask; come
and do the one and take the other; but
we will manage our business in our own
way and without dictation from any one
not lawfully invested with authority to
command us. You must not attempt to
run our business if you do, out you CO."
They stopped their works just long enough
to give all their employees moments
thought before accepting or rejecting the
terms, and that is the full extent of the So
called lockout" On the other hand the
maltsters and brewers insist that their
unions must make the rules for the govern
ment of the breweries determine the
number of the laborers, of apprentices, of
helpers, etc; declare for certain free priv
ieges, as free beer, etc; fix the hours of
labor and declare what shall be sufficient
cause for discharges and suspensions, and
when the unions resolve to increase the
scale of wages or decrease the tasks of Ia
Dor, that the brewers must submit. A
New York paper well says:
1t is well known that the men employed in
breweries have carried their disregard of the
interests, and, indeed, of the legal rights of
their employers further than the men employed
IN almost any other trade. One of the chief
brewers in the country. whose relations with his
workmen seemed to be very creditable to him
self was made the subject of most persistent
and vindictive boycott by the union TO which
they belonged. The boycott grew out OF an
other boycott in an allied trade, and the origi-
mai cause of it seemed to be that the brewer in
question had not committed perjury. He was
summoned to testify to facts within his knowl-
edge in a case that enlisted the partisanship of
labor 1t was not pretended that he testified
otherwise than truly, or that he could lawfully
or even safely, have avoided testifying at all
But the testimony that he gave was damaging
to labor" and labor accordingly set to work
70 ruin him by closing the market against his
goods or, in the language of the Penal Code,
consplring to injure him in the exercise of a
lawful calling. The men In his employ, who
derived their wages from the sale Of the pro-
duct of his brewery, joined with the rest in per
scouting him. At least they did not leave the
association that had ordered and was irving to
enforce the boycott, nor did they make any
effective protest against it. They aequieseed in
II as the act of their union 1t is certainly high
time that stand was taken against a union
capable of such an atrocity as this and this
though the most hagrantly outrageous of all the
acts OF the Brewers Union. is not more high
handed or tyrannical than many others that are
reported of that body.
The stand of the master brewers will
have an important effect upon the Labor
question, the more so that they have not
made a solitary change in the brewery
labor system that increases the hours of
labor, or the tasks of the employees, or that
reduces their wages, privileges and perqui-
sites. They simply decline to recognize
Unions" except as social and beneficial
organizations, and propose only to treat
with employees as individuals. If the
Brewers Unions do not now cut loose en-
tirely from the political maltsters and brew
ers who are running them straight upon
ruin, they have great deal less sense than
We give them credit for.