The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-10-15
compulsorv Arbitration.

Mr. Carol D. Wright, who is at the
head Of the commission appointed by the
President to investigate the recent strikes
in Chicago. delivered an address before
the Union League Club of Chicago the
other night. in which he Gwelt at length
upon labor troubles. their cause and pre-
vention. AS Mr.. Wrights commission
has not yet reported on the trouble in
Chicago, he prudently avoided discussing
railroad troubles and confined himself
to expressing himself upon labor disputes
in the productive industries.
one Of the chief points IN the commits
sioner's address was made against COM
pulsory arbitration, a fallacy that has
apparently taken a pretty firm hold upon
some people who have not put themselves
to the trouble Of following the PROPOSE
ton to its logical conclusion. Said Mr.
Wright: The advocates Of compulsory
arbitration say that, first. both parties to
a dispute must be compelled to come into
court and that, second, when the court
issues its decree it must be enforced as
any other decree would be enforced. Let
us see how this viii work. A is a manu-
facturer who pays his men on an average
s. day. Owing to some cause he finds
he cannot pay this any longer and re-
duces wages to $3.50. The men oppose
this. They say they cannot live on less
than 81. The employer says he cannot
pay more The matter Is taken before a
compulsory court of arbitration. Suppose
the court says the men must take the
$3.50? How can this be enforced? Say
there are 5000 employees. Who can make
them work? The constable, the sheriff,
the posse comitatus, the military forces
may all be called out. But none can make
them work. The decree is dead from the
beginning"
And so it is. Arbitration implies mutual
consent and freedom of action. If mutual
consent is lacking. the act becomes CO.
ercion, and not arbitration And it would
be just as sensible to speak of voluntary
coercion as compulsory arbitration The
terms are contradictory; the adjectives
are in direct conflict with the nouns.
Mr.. Wright pointed out that so-called
compulsory arbitration meant nothing
more or less than state socialism. If the
decision of a tribunal established to en-
force compulsory arbitration were against
the workmen, they would be compelled
to abide by it, and the government would
have to use all the force necessary, in
GLIDING military force, to drive the reluc-
tant men to their task. That would be
slavery. If the decision was unsatisfac-
tory to the employer he would be made
to accept it if possible. But 1t would not
be possible to compel him to go on with a
business against his will. The only way
in which government could enforce the
decision and give the men employment
in accordance with it's terms would be to
take possession of the plant and carry on
the business by its own agents. And that
would be state socialism.
Enforced arbitration cannot be brought
about by legislation without bringing
about system of state socialism; but by
legislation it may be made easy for en-
ployers and employees to arbitrate their
differences. Legislatures may provide an
official board of arbitration and invite
parties to a controversy to submit their
differences to the board. But legislation
can legitimately go no further.