The Indiana State sentinel., 1894-08-08

for five years Cor ink or paper, and dur
ing the time there was a heavy fall IN
the price of these articles would il live
up to its contract? The Sentinel entered
into a contract for five years, and 1t al
ways regarded the contract as binding
as any contract it could make. It never
had any apprehension Of any injustice
from arbitration, and stin believes that
no employer need have any apprehension
if he has the intention to be fair with
his employees. Neither need employees
have any fear of arbitration If they in
tend to be fair with their employer.
The Sun further says:
Suppose. again, there was a system Of
true compulsory arbitration: that there
were courts Of arbitration able to enforce
their decisions as United States
courts now are. How long would
employers or workingmen put up
with a system that put the regu-
lation of wages and profits and
losses into the hands of third persons?
How long could business stand such a
system? But. of course, there can be no
such thing under our present form Of
government. As a matter of fact. mighty
few persons want such system. once
Il n.
or freSh-Water professor, or an editor
who thinks that sentimental idiocy is
good for a subscriber or two. bleats
about compulsory arbitration. The labor
unions don't want it.
We see no reason why any one should
not put up with the decisions Of such a
court. If we go into the supposing busi-
ness, suppose some one should set up
an utterly unfounded or unjust claim
against the Sun, and the courts should
uphold it; how long would the Sun and
the community submit to such decisions?
Undoubtedly the courts do sometimes
make erroneous decisions and infict
great injustice, but courts are not estab-
lished because they are infallible, but
because the public peace and general well
fare require that there should be some
lawful and peaceable method of de-
termining controversies. There is no such
method for determining labor contro-
versies. There ought to be such a method.
and there will be such a method when
the American people fully realize the
evils Of their present anarchistic method
of dealing with such troubles.
The Suns statement that "the labor
unions don't want it, is hardly con-
sistent with its claim that the proposal
is simply a scheme to put capital into
the clutches of labor. There is a class
of labor leaders who oppose compulsory
arbitration, but we believe that it can
no longer be truthfully said that labor
unions oppose it. Certainly it has re-
ceived public Endorsement from some
labor unions and assemblies of working
men. And even those labor leaders who
have opposed it are beginning to realize
that labor is no match for capital in law
lessness or in lawless struggles for ad-
vantage. As we showed yesterday, even
Debs has changed front entirely on this
question. But more important than the
sentiments of either employers or en-
ployes is the fact that the general public
is becoming weary Of the present sys-
tenn, whose chief evils fall on the general
public, and is coming to the opinion that
some lawful method of settling such con-
troversles must be established.
The pronounced opposition of the Sun
is very good evidence that the accom-
plishment of the reform is near at hand.