New-York tribune., 1891-05-10
A QUESTION OF FREEDOM.

The vicious practlco OF DOycOJtlnB, inc uh-
lawful interference with freedom of labor and
of individual action by conspiracy against those
wE0 fail to obey the demands of labor organlza-
tons. will presently have forcible illustration
in this city, if the contest between The Lumber
Handlers Association and the Lumber-Dealers
should not be speedily settled. The circum-
stances in this case are quite unusual. The
trouble begins with a boycott ordered against
the lumber-yard of Bucl1i & Co. The lumber
handlers ordered that the housebuilders and the
workers in tho various unions should refuse to
work on lumber taken from that yard, with in
tent TO force the proprietors to submit TO the
orders OF the union. But according to state
ments publicly made at the meeting OF the
Lumber Handlers Association, the men en-
ployed by Bucki & Co. have no grievance what
ever, and are entirely willing to continue work
at the rates and on the terms hitherto observed.
1t is stated that their spokesman, Patrick Carey,
announced at the meeting Of the association last
Sunday night that they had no grievances, and
that they were perfectly satisfied with their pay
and Che manner in which they were treated"
Mr.. Bucki also stated that his men had refused
to strike, although ordered to do so by the
union, and they were consequently declared
If the laws in this State have not been fully
msintelpreted, these proceedings are clearly
unlawful conspiracy to deprive both the firm in
question and the men it employs of their free
dom. The firm wishes to employ them on GER
tain terms. They wish to remain at work on
those terms. There is no dissatisfaction among
them, and no demand for any change in hours
of work or rate of wages Yet it suits the pol
icy of the union to demand q reduction Of hours
to eight per day and sundry changes in the
rate of wages and because the workers en-
ployed by this firm refuse to join in the, de-
mand others conspire to deprive them of their
livelihood until they consent. The law ought
to be able to deal with such cases. and if the
laws of this State are not now so explicit that
q conspiracy Of this nature can be punished they
clearly require amendment.
| The retaliatory action Of the Lumber Dealers
was announced after their meeting on Friday.
They resolve to furnish no lumber to any build
ers or buildings whatever in the city until the
| umber-handlers have removed the boycott from
| BucSi & Co. Their reasoning is that this step
will compel a great number of men employed
in the building trades, said to be $50, 900 at
this time, to choose between prolonged idleness
|
Bucki & Co. and their workmen of their legal
and natural right to make terms with each other
as they choose Undoubtedly the purpose of
this action is justifable, as it seems to be the
only efficient mode Of defence against the COM
bination of workers and the boycott 1t is not
a conspiracy against any individual TO deprive
him of his rights or to destroy his business, but
means Of defending the lumber-dealers, each
and ALL against an unreasonable and unlawful
attack upon their rights. 1t is believed by many
that this movement like that Of the brick pro-
ducerS last year, will presently force the asso-
Citations to come to terms. Although the supply
of bricks on that occasion held out well, and
building operations did not entirely cease, am
icabe adjustments were effected when it be-
came evident that the supply would soon be
exhausted.
If the dealers refuse to deliver lumber, as
proposed, the work of building throughout the
city will not be instantly arrested, because many
of the building concerns have on hand supplies
for a considerable time. But there seems to be
a probability that the pressure will be felt by a
great number Of workers in the various build
ing trades much more quickly than the effects
of the similar step taken by the brick producers
were felt. In that case it is possible that the
trade. unions may realize that they have gone
too far that while exercising their own right to
demand eight hours or a change Of wages wher-
ever they desire, they have noright, and under
the laws are not permitted, to conspire for the
purpose of compelling anybody else to make the
same demand or to grant the same terms. But
T. for the public, which will be greatly embar-
rassed and subjected to serious loss if this strug
gle goes on, the practical question is whether
the proper authorities of the law have no power
to put All end to it. 1t is their duty TO prose
cute without delay, in cases of open and fragrant
violation Of law. II the conspiracy against the
workers employed by Messrs. Bucki & Co. and
that firm is not illegal, and proper matter for
prosecution it would seem that no similar con-
spiracy can be reached by the laws. II is clear.
ly the duty of the authorities to examine the
matter at once, not in the interest of the mar
ties TO controversy, but in the interest of the
public and to save it from loss and incon-
venience II the laws have been violated the
officials are in duty bound to prosecute without