The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-11-12

A few months ago the press throughout
the country lauded Debs for his declara-
Ton that hereafter there would = no
strikes. but that labor would seek redress
at the polls. This was praised because
II Is a notorious fact that the loss by
strikes Is enormous even when they are
successful. and the loss falls fully as heav-
fly upon the laboring class as upon the
mercantile community. They seldom re-
suit in affecting the salaries OF corpora
ton managers. presidents or directors, but
the loss falls upon investors who have put
money into great enterprises. but who nave
little 10 say as TO the management. IN
the case OF a railroad strike the loss Is
horne by the men who throw up their
work and by the public which uses the
railroads I'm the transaction OF its business.
No matter how sympathetic merchant
may be. his own losses serve to embitter
him against all who are party TO tnem-
That same sympathy would be exerted to
aid the cause of oppressed employees In
legislative enaetments which should in
sure all the desired results without throw
ing the entire commercial traffic OF several
states into dire confusion.
That the courts are not unavailing 10
insure Just protection TO the aboring classes
has been demonstrated in this county. and
particularly in the case where application
was made by employees against harsh
reduction In wages. Another very notaDle
instance has been afforded by an ONO
court. sitting at Toledo, which denies the
right of a railroad corporation to blacklist
AN employe. Suit for damages was brought
by & conductor who had been black-hsted
for serving on a grievance committee dur
ing a strike. He alleged that he was
earning $40 a month before the strike
and has since been compelled TO take a
situation on the police force at $50 because
none OF the railroads would employ him.
In reading mis- decision Judge Pratt held
the employees right to employment to be
equal in Importance to the employer
right to employ labor. This right OF the
employe stands between the lahorer and
starvation. The right OF an employer ends
with the discharge OF his employees ard he
must not interfere Win ZIG 'ASAS ~ --
Ing men 10 seek and obtain other employ
mont. The court held that it was public
interest 10 encourage men to become pro-
Acton, in the trade or occupation which
they have taken up. If a man left one
railroad 10 seek employment at another
he had a right 70 do 50. If he was hin
dered from so doing by the company. or
II a man was discharged by company
and this company sought by combination
70 prevent the employe from obtaining
work with other roads. The railroad com
NAMES doing such acts were going be-
yond their rights.
This decision viii be generally recognized
"a based upon substantial justice. 1t Is
a principle. however which must be applied
- all alike. No employe viii contend for
a moment tina: a law should 10 one-sided
Indeed. the labor organizations have always
sturiliy maintained that all they ask IS an
equal application Of the law. and that their
chief grievance was the Partially shown
by courts. II they can be assured of an
equal standing with employing corporations
before the courts they believe. and right
fully. that they have the strength. II
united. 70 compel such legislation as shall
no. discriminate against them.
Il may safely be left 70 the acumen OF
labor leaders to see to what far-reaching
conclusions the decision quoted must lead
II inalscrlm,nately followed