Herald and tribune. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1869-current, 1894-08-22
ST A YEAR IN ADVANCE

N'SN"N0 vi eho ContraCC. lney could
not have secured situations except upon
the understanding that they would
faithfully obey the orders and promote
the interests of their employers. Their
hrst allegiance was due to those en-
ployers in all matters affecting the
welfare and success of the enterprises
thus represented; and yet, without
day 8 warning, and in the absence of
any provocation, they repudiated that
allegiance, and placed themselves in
direct and mischievous antagonsm to
the sources from which they had been
ueriving the means of living. Such is
theposition they now occupy, and such
is the conduct that the countr is asked
to indorse.
The only plea of justification that
these men offer for this sudden and in.
furious severance of friendly and mu-
tually advantageous relations existing
between them and their employers is
that they were commanded to do 30 by
the leader of labor organization to
which they belong. At the autocratic
bidding of that individual, whose au.
thority is not recognized by the laws,
they have chosen to break contract,
to betray a trust, to return evil for
good. They can not reasonably ex-
pect public sympathy under such cir
cumstances. The logic of honor, of
justice and of common propriety is
against them. 1t is impossible to popu.
larize the idea that the laborer owes a
higher allegiance to a man like Debs
than he does to the corporation that
provides him with work and pays him
the wages which support his family.
The American sense of fair dealing is
opposed to that theory of personal duty
and responsibility. If the strikers had
any distinct and substantial grievance,
II their contract with their employers
had been in any way violated by the
latter, the case would be different, and
they might consistently claim indul-
gence and encouragement. But they
acknowledge that there is no such con-
dition in their favor, and thus they are
left without any rational excuse for
their lack of fidelity to the railroad
companies.
There is a distorted impression afloat
as to the right of man to quit work
when and for what he pleases. In
strictly legal sense, no man can be
forced to render service against his will
except under sentence of court and in
punishment for crime; it is true at the
same time that every man who acceps
service on given terms thereby incurs al
obligation of honor which forbids him
to quit that service without due notice,
or reasonable cause, and regardless of
the injury that may follow to his en-
ployer or to others. This applies with
particular force to railroad employees,
whose occupation is of quasi public
order, and whose faithfulnes is of more
Importance than that of any other class
OF laborers. The most radical advo-
cate of the right to quit work would
hardly justify switchman in aband.
oning his post when a train comes
laundering down the track and dis.
aster must ensue IL he does not open
switch; and yet this is only an extreme
illustration of the story of the present
strike. Trains have been abruptly de-
serted before reaching their destina-
tion, leaving passengers helpless, and
causing great loss of perishable freight;
and in general way the operations of
dozen different railroad lines have
been practically suspended because of
the sudden desertion of duty by their
employees in obedience to the mandate
of Debs and on the pretext of supreme
fealty to the head of a labor organiza-
tion that has no legal authority and
no responsibility. This is not loyalty,
but perversion and mockery of that
splendid virtue. The strikers are in
the wrong from every point of view;
and in no other one respect so much as
that of their false and pernicious atti-
tude upon the question of allegiance
st. Louis Globe Democrat.