Workmen's advocate., 1890-11-22
THE STRIKE QUESTION AT THE CHICAGO SUNSET
 CLUB.

strikes AS Educating Forces.
 CHICAGO, Nov. 1.-The regular fort nightly meeting of the Sunset club was held last week at the Palmer House and when the 6 o'clock dinner was over the discussion of the subject for the evening was begun,
 John Barton Payne presided and the discussion was opened by w. A MaXton, who served the club with rehash of the old capitalistic sophism, He admitted the right of employ ts to work for whom they please and to refrain from working when they 50 desired, but insisted that no man had right to say that another man should not work, He spoke parti- cularly of the late carpenters strike, and said while the men might have a right to demand certain scale of wages they had no right to demand that their employers should recognize the union of their trade.
 Henry D, Lloyd said in all conflicts where a question of principle IS involved only one side could be right. The nvcs- tgatlons of the Bureau of Labor Statla- ties revealed conditions among the la. boring classes which would seem lntoler able to his hearers. The public was inclined to look with different eyes on  labor and capital.
 "A man who represents cOmblna. ton nf capital ie called an attorney, u man who represents combination of workingmen k called a walking delegate. Capitalists who cry the workingmen are asking too much, are themselves striving to pile asset on asset, dividend on dividend.
 LABOR THE SLAVE OF CAPITAL.
 The keeping of rctnue of servants, a livcried CoaChman, etc, was evidence that even the present generation has not 0utgrown the idea of the necessity of slaves. The whole tendency of the pos sessors of capital seemed to be towards the re-ensIaving of the working people.
 
 the slave.Owner made both sides of the contract, and the same charge might be made regarding the contracts most employers have with their employees. He referred with Censure t0 the remark of the President of the Chicago Typo thetir that 'organlzed labor IS an organ ized mob" and in similar condemnation of Chauncey NJ. Depews declaration that no man belonging 10 the Knights of Labor could work for the New York Central railroad Such expressions were un American and in opposition to the free spirit of American institutions. The charge that men have no right to strike came with bad grace from the lips of men who claim the right to dlsemp0y If neither is right those whose lives and the lives of their family depended on their actions were most eXCusabie. Shor ter hours and more consideration for the justtiabie demands of employ Gs would do much in the direction of abolishing strikes and lockouts.'
 Mr. Buck advised a study of the un- derlying causes of the conflict between capital and labor. Until the causes were ascertained the proper remedy could not be applied, Restrictive legislation would only stem the tide temporarily, and the greater destruction would be wrought when the waves Of social revolt should sweep over the barriers One cause, he thought, wat the imported system of taxation. without which no monarchy can be sustained, and with which no free nation can endure.
 C. C. Bonney favored State or Ma tional Boards Of Arbitration. Strikes and lockouts affected the entire com munity, and the Government, he insist ed, had right to step Tn and declare how much each side should yield.
 J. A. Harrigan spoke in praise of the walking delegate as an educator of work ingmen, who seeks to arouse them to the necessity of combining for the pur- pose of securing justice.
 GOOD EFFECT OF STRIKES.
 George Schilling gave brief sketch of the history of strikes in America, and said they were caused hy combinations of capital employing unorganized work men. While he deplored strikes he was satisfied that their effect was good, even if they are unsuccessful, because the CdnltdllSlS are lneleDN lldlt to ntSlldle before forcing their employees into idle ness-not because the employe will suf- fer, but because the employer cannot afford it.
 HAS THE HAMMER ANY RIGHTS;
 w. T. Mills, editor of the Statesman, said there could be fair competition only where both sides have equal strength but man could not be expected to engage successfully in a conflict with a man and hammer. The hammer would decide the battle. Machinery and capi- tai were the hammer of the employer, and hammer has no rights The equip ments of labor and the opportunity to engage in labor are controlled by the capitalists, thereby giving him an unfair