The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1893-05-12
COMPULSORY ARRTTRATIoN

| There has been of late a revival of a
discussion of compulsory arbitration as
means of settling labor troubles. DR..
Lyman Abbott is an advocate of this plan.
In the May Forum, Colonel Carroll d.
Wright, Commissioner of Labor Statis-
tics, takes sharp issue with him, outlin.
ing several serious objections to the
compulsory principle
Colonel Wright's illustrations are
quite stirling. Let it be supposed that
A represents the employer. His men
are earning 81 a day He orders a 10
per cent. reduction. The workmen re-
fuse to continue for $1.S0 day. They
strike, and A appeals to the court of
compulsory arbitration for his district
The court upholds him. Says Colonel
Wright:
"Now two results may follow this &C
ton. The men, under the decision of
the court, acquiesce and return to work
at Sl.SO per day, or they refuse to re-
turn to work at that price. Then comes
the execution of the Judgment of the
court II the workmeu will not obey that
Judgment. 1t is levied on them per-
sonally or on their property by proper
process, and by the proper officers of
the court They may be arrested and
brought into the factory. If the Sheriff
or the single officer authorized to serve
the execution cannot do it alone, he can
summon the posse comitatus. If the
posse be insufficient he can appeal TO the
Governor. The order of the court must
be enforced, as DR.: Abbott and Rabbi
SCHNEIDER assert, and all the power of
the Government brought to enforce it.
This means cOmpulsion, and at the point
nf the haVnnpf Tho nnnoIn
to the decision of the court of arbitra-
ton and work for $3.50 per day, whether
they will or not''
Or on the other hand, if the decision
goes against A, the employer, "He must
obey, under the rule of compulsory ar
bitration," says Colonel Wright, tthe
order of the court. In other words, he
must pay 81 per day when, it may be, the
market cannot be supplied with goods
on any such basis. He cannot close his
works without disobeying the order of
the court; he cannot pay the 50 per day
without loss of his property. Compul-
sorry arbitration then works confscatiOn."
But there is an instance in which it
does not work confiscation, as Colonel
Wright proceeds to show. The employ
er, submitting to the judgment of the
court, pays the 50, though he cannot af-
ford it. There are two things which he
may do. He can adulterate his goods
sufficiently to cover his 10 per cent. loss
i'll wages, or he can enter into "com-
bine' with other manufacturers to adj
vance prices, thus leaving the consumer
to bear the weight of the courts decree.
This later course would be the one he
would probably follow. Whereupon
Colonel Wright asks whether the adj
vocates of compulsory arbitration are
ready to accept the full and logical con-
cluson of their system by forcing, at
the point of the bayonet, all Industries
under State control, and thereby estab-
lish, by military force, the rule of State
Socialism,"
Colonel Wright makes a strong case
against this method of adjusting wages |
controversies. The arbitration princi-
pie IN itself is just and sound one. 1t |
has come to stay. But it is found in its
best application in those cases where
both parties voluntarily submit the
point at issue to board of arbitrators
as to referee, and the mutual consent |
of the employer and his workmen, rather
than the machinery of the law, is de-
pended on to enforce the decision.-Bos.
ton Journal.