St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-01-18

this commission might be needed for
the purpose set forth in section 3, that
the condition Of employment subject to
the act may be Investigated and aScer-
tanned, Mr. OlneY meets with the Sug-
gestisn that the interstate commerce
commission, as at present constituted.
might with equal satisfaction obtain all
the information called for, and acting
with the commission on labor ii might
properly be charged by special act OF
congress with the duties of mediation
and Cancellation, for section s of the
bill, THAT arbitration should be resorted
to for the settlement OF controversies
between employers and their en-
plOYeS"
Mr.. Olney says: ut need not be dis
cussed. The only alternative is indus
trial war, and this is as illogical as
brutal and as wasteful as the wars by
which international disputes are often
accompanied"
Assuming arbitration to be both
desirable and useful, Mr.. Olney con-
tends that its tribunal should be Spe-
cial body organized on fixed principles
with reference to each party in either
case as it arises, rather than q perna-
nent body with general jurisdiction
over all cases The machinery of arbl~
tratiOn, he thinks, should not be put in
motion at the instance of one or more
isolated individuals, but only at the In
stance of class, tnat is, OF whole
body of employees performing the same
business, and of the same grade. IN
order that all may be represented in the
proceedings and all be bound by thelr
results. The effect to be given TO the
enforcement of it Mr.. Olney regards as
a matter of very great consequences.
In the first place, the
Arbitration Tribunal
is not judicial in character, but admin
istrative-It does not pass upon rights,
but rules of business eXpedients espe-
cially. The courts are not adapted to
decide questions of the rates OF wages,
or the hours or employment and other
like matters. To impose such duties
upon them IS to load them with tunc-
tiOns for which they are not fitted at the
cost of the discharge OF the functions
for which they are fitted. The award,
therefore, should be Improbable III the
circuit court only for errors of law APP
parent upon the record. and should be
filed in court only tor that purpose. In
the second place, as respects the en-
forcement of the award, two consIdera-
lions are involved, one is definite time
during which an award shall be in force
and not revisable by another award.
Such q time is essential because no
business can be satisfactorily conducted
unless the conditions arc reasonably
stable and certain. An award, there
fore, should not be capable OF being re.
opened BIZ fresh arbitration tor
period of a least two years.
The other consideration relating to
the enforcement of the award arises
from the fact that one Of the parties
Is common carrier; will, indeed, al
most invariably be railroad corpora
ton. That is, one party affected by the
award is an employer VINO is legally
bound to continue to do business, now
ever dispIeased with an award. The
other party affected by the award. on
the other hand, is in the position of en-
pIoyes generally. who may quit work at
pleasure. This
0ne-Sided Operation
of the award is inevitable, and can be
counteracted only in part by meeting
the submission provided that employees
dissatisfied with an award shall not
therefore quit work until the expiration
of three or six months notice, or or
such other time as may be deemed sutf1-
Gent to give the employer a reasonable
opportunity to supply their places.
Such term of the award would not, of
course, be specifically enforceable-a
man cannot be made to work against
his will any more than q horse can be
made to drink. Neither would it
be expedient, probably, TO make a
a refusal to work under such cIrcum-
stances punishable by fine or imprison-
ment. The most to be expected of
submission containing such a term
would be that more or less employees,
from motives of expediency or OF honor,
would govern themselves by conditions
which they know had no effective legal