Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1891-08-29
MINING JOURNAL.
FROsTBURG MD, AUGUST %, 1891.
The Modern DDog in lhe Manger."

Inc MOlefn Dog III ine Manager.
Contrary to the statements OF
"Knight of Labor in last week
Homecoming Recier, the JOURNAL has
assumed very little concerning the
attitudes and conditions in east
Tennessee.
1t has made no difference whether
everybody in Tennessee was for or
against the class demand of the
miners-the question has been and is
has the Legislature the right to Weld
to the demand of a class
The answer is-no,
That disposes of about half of
"Knight of Labor's' erroneous state
ment of the JOURNALS position, for it
is singular fact that almost without
exception everyone who undertakes to
controvert the JOURNAL feels bound
first to misrepresent it.
Now, then, supposes Knight of
Labor
We are not told whether the objection to
the colored men was on account Of their
color, or because they would work for lower
wages or what, but we assume it was the
latter. If the colored men offered to work
for less than the white men received fOr the
same work that was their right but it was
also right to the white men to use every law
full means to stop them, for it is every man ;
right to make the most he can out OF him
self.
every lawful means -
Has the JOURNAL ever denied that
as a "rigH?'
If so, Knight of Labo" and every
body else is challenged to show it.
But ''Knight of Labor" says
it is every mans right to make the most
he can out of himself.
Provided he does not do so at the
expense of some other mans fright to
make the most cut of HIMSELF
The poor colored men doubtless en-
tertained the notion and the wish to
do the best they could for themselves,
and the men who employed them no
doubt felt the same selfish way toward
themselves.
But "the white men, whose work
had been taken by the colored men
persuaded the latter MOI to work.
In fact, they persuaded them to do
without work-to live on some other
means of income Misunderstanding
maybe; then the penitentiary where,
under the new Tennessee regime. they
can live without labor, or even care.
Why all this?
That the white employee may lord
it over both the white employer and
his property.
Now let us see how this proposal
sounds alongside ''the right Of white
men to use every lawful means to
stop colored men from working at
lower wages than white men are will
ing to take:
But it is every employers right to employ
and discharge whom he pleases and run his
own mine in his own way in order to make
the most he can out of himself and his
property.
If this Fright is as good as the
other, and we believe it is, why will
"Knight of Labor" deny it to the en-
ployer by interposing his own right of
interference
The answer is-simply because it is
his 'right" to do so.
1.-The dog in the manager" enjoyed
the same prerogative and exercised it.
''The dog in the manager" was the
distinguished forerunner of the
"Knight Of Labor" of to-day
"The dog in the manger" trans
mitted his notion of individual priv
ileges and his ignorance of popular
rights with his blood.
1.-The dog in the manger' is the
illustrious gentleman whose policy
furnishes occasion for strike, just
ification for bulldozing and pabulum
for any other ignoble purpose.