New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-04-06
THE BOTCUTT.

THE BOICOIT.
Whatever NAV be the decision of the court
of last resort in the railroad cases in ONO, when
it is understood will be taken to the United
States Supreme Court on appeal, 1t should be
borne in mind that the very essence OF the
whole question is the institution which oligl-
mated in ireland in 1850, and has been almost
universally adopted by the labor organizations
in this country, known as the boycott. 1t takes
its name, as is well known, from Captain Boy
colt its first victim. 1t has come to be rccog-
nzed as the favorite fundamentally by which
organized labor cnfOres or undertakes to en-
force its demands upon capital. The question
raised in the Ohio cases Is whether, under the
provisions If the Interstate Commerce law, the
boycott can be enforced by the labor organlza-
tons connected with the railroad service with
out exposing those who undertake it to legal
penalties. The point made against it may be
very simply stated. 1t is whether the employees
of a railroad corporation under secret organ
ization-which is, OF course, irresponsible, and
cannot be compelled by ordinary process Of law
to disclose its machinery and workng-can
force the corporation 10 violate law III the
transaction of its business. In testing this
question it takes hold, of course, of the funda-
mental one whether or not the law itself Is
constitutional. That being granted it is then
simply question OF cvadng the requirements
of a statute that il, whether a secret org1nlza-
ton can in ell Get and absolutely nullify an OK
press statute. Everybody is interested in this,
and no enc can ford to dismiss il lightly upon
the score of sentiment or sympathy. 1T is tho
most vital issue that can arise in organized so
cicty, or community governed by law
But suppose the law be declared unconsti-
tutional, or fer any other reason the final de-
cison be favorable ~ the strikers and per
missive of the boycott. Does it not then be-
come question Of serious interest whether the
boycott its If is a bcneicent institution? Grant
Ell that il is possible without infringement OF
law: that it he recognized perfectly legal
means to Legitimate and proper end, and that
il may he invoked without mourning penalties;
is it even then good thing to establish in
pefmancnco? Does il in its operation benefit
tho people for whom it is os'ensbly set in mo-
ton? is it effective in improving the condi-
ton of woikingmen and bringing about more
equal and just division of profits between
labor and capital? Does il help more people
than il hurts These arc questions which
the associations of organized labor will
do well 10 take up and discuss without
passion and with the seriousness which they
maniicstly deserve. Men who have. or who
imagine they have, grievances are more apt to
consider swift measures for making the OPP
pressor suffer and for bringing him 10 their
own terms by physical force and coercion than
TO deliberate with calmncss upon reasonable
methods for their own dcliyerancc. II is not
strange, perhaps. human nature being what it
il, that in their heat over their own individual
wrongs they should forget the rights of others,
and in their cagcrncss to wreak vengeance upon
their oppicssors be willing TO subject all classes
-workinemcn and capitalists alikc-to injury
and los But would it not be wiser to give
little more time b dclibcraton and the dis
cussiOn Of principles?
We are inclined To think that even if the
court Of last resort decides that the boycott is
Il process and insrumcntality quite within the
law AMI pcrmis,ibl', the associations Of organ
lied labor, il they should soberly and seriously
consider the subject in all its bearings, would
agree that upon the whole it was not a de-
sirable institution - establish in pcrmanencc in
this country. We are aware that its origin
commends it to the ruling class, IN our cities
and large towns and that there seems sort
of plopriety when we import our rulers in i'm
porting their institutions with them. We are
also aware Of their senSiivcneSs to any al
lusirns that are not entirely complimentary, but
we do venture 10 say that the institution known
as the boycott, however it may operate in other
countries, is not adapted to this. 1t is more
grinding and pitilesS in its operation than any
insirumentality known to modern civilized life,
and it works it, worst upon those who invoke
its aid Organized labor is making progress,
not because it is fighting, but because it is
thinking. The boycott is good subject to
thinl; of.