The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-06-13
PROVIDE FOR ARBITRATIoS.

Commenting upon our remarks on the
necessity for courts of arbitration, the
Pittsburg Post says:
The Sentinel maintains that when the
rights of property and the rights of labor
come in conflict the public in self-de-
Tense, has the clear right to adjust the
difficulty" Admitted, but how? For ev-
cry wrong there is supposed to be a rem
edy. but in this case the difficulty is to
ind the remedy. An efficient law against
the "pluck-me stores" would be a great
step in advance. but when it is attempt
ed legislators and judges bowl IL down
that II interferes with the sacred right to
contract between man and man. So it
does, but so does the prohibition or reg
ulation of the sale Of intoXicants and
poisons, and yet way is found as to
them.
We imagine that the proper way to
find remedy is to make one. In this
country if one person falls into con-
troversy with another over any right of
person or property, either may compel
the other TO come before a court and
have the matter settled. But in these
cases of conflicts between labor and cap
ital we have made no provision for any
legal adjustment Of the matter in dis
pute. We say to the parties, You must
settle this between yourselves. You may
quarrel and abuse each other as much as
you like. You may starve each other If
you can. But you must not fight. You
must not resort TO violence" At the
same time we know that they will re-
sort TO violence; they will fight; they
Will destroy property.
These conflicts are conflicts of rights.
The rights OF property on the one hand
are recognized by all. The right Of Ia
Dor, on the other, to a reasonable COM
pensation is equally recognized by law.
If one person sues another for wages or
services the court will give him reason
able compensation. The rule Of guam
tum meruit is as we'll established
as any other principle of law. 1t is also
whose benefits the coal operators have
sought on the ground of desiring oppor-
tunity to pay reasonable wages. The
only hindrance to the decision of these
committing iiSuIS - NllS lued VI IlShL W
contract, but our courts hold that an IN
considerable contract is void, and surely
1t is a small step to take to require con-
tracts to be made considerable to begin
with. If corporation will not work its
property on a considerable basis, let it
stop. or let the court appoint a receiver
for it, If men will not work on a con-
scionable basis let them go elsewhere.
But 1t is urged that there will be no
power of compelling the men to abide
by the decision. Most assuredly there
will be power either to do that or to
compel them TO stand aside and let 9TH
ers work. The only reason why public
sentiment does not act quickly and forci-
bly, in these cases Is the doubt as to
which side is right If an impartial court
should decide that the employees were
wrong there would be no hesitancy in
enforcing the decree of the court The
right of a laborer to work or quit work
is. and must of necessity be, recognized.
The right of a property-owner to work
his property or not work it is recognized.
But there is no reason why the public.
for its own protection. should not require
that when working they should work on
a just and, equitable basis.