The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1898-03-19
A Question OF Justice.

In our issue Of the 9Th inst. we made
some comments on an editorial con-
| tanned in recent issue Of the Union
Labor Advertiser in which that journal
took exception to the Plumbing Law
recently passed oy theWisconsin Legis-
iature on the ground that 1t was special
legislation and created private sine
cure. Having an abhorrance Of special
legislation of any kind, particularly any
law passed with a view 10 robbing one
man Of his rights or his money for
the benefit of another, we pointed out
that the Union Label ordinance passed
by the Superior Common council was of
the same character as the Plumbing
law, and was the pet offspring of the
Union Label Advertisers friends.
In the American Craftsman, of the
18th March, New York publication, " e
find our remarks reproduced as we'll as
a long editorial discussing the question
raised 10y us, and approving of the
position we took, when We cheerfully
give place to in the TINES, though not
agreeing with the Craftsman in all t
says.
1T may be we'll, then, to see whether,
as the TINES contends, the charge o. in
herent injustice can be rightly laid
against such ordinances, for IL will not
be held Ev men OF brains and consci-
ence that in the end any good cause can
be benefited by injustice. Is 1t a fact,
then, that the passage and enforcement
UnIoulsts maintain. and properly, that
, the right to organize by forming and
Joining unions is one of which they can
not be deprived without an improper
abrdgment of their liberties. They
claim that they also have a right
to use every lawful means to induce
their fellows to join their unions. As to
what may be righttully done, and as to
| how far they may properly 60 III this
direction, there are dltterer les OF opin-
! ion. There are those who hold that
they have no right to do more than
leave the latch strings of their union
rooms out, as it were, and allow their
fellows to Join or not just as they please.
| But it is now pretty generally conceded
and has been held bv the courts both
| here and III Britain-notaDlv in the re-
cent Allen case in the British House Of
|
and rightly refuse to work with non
! Cnionists. Thus the right to use a Ger
tain amount of compulsion in order to
! induce men to become Unionists Is con-
| coded. We take 1t, then, that it will
not be disputed that a trades union may
| rightly endeavor by every availabl
means of moral suasion to bring within
its fold all the workmen of its craft
| And yet this Very contention involves
the admission of the right of nom Union
ists to remain if they choose. The ques-
| ton then arises. How can the unions
refuse to allow mont nionists to work
in shops and factories which they con-
troll without injustice and without i'm
properly interfering with their liberty?
The question is, we must admit, not al
| together easy OF answer. In an ideal
state OF society and under an ideal in
dustria system, possibly the answer
| would be quite different to what it
| must now be. We would not shirh it
or beg 1t, and yet We must confess that
tie answer which we believe to be the
right one, or the one most nearly right,
does not entirely satisfy us. We be-
lleve that under present circumstances,
and having regard to the necessities of
the prevailing industrial system, trades
unions haye right to refuse to allow
| mont nlOnlstS to Work with their mem
| bers. 1t is because of the efforts of the
trades unions, of their expenditure III
time, money aud labor, that the com
paratlyely high wage rate and favorable
conditions of employment are main
tanned, and they may fairly claim that
the mont nIOnlSt, who has done moth
ing to win these advantages. Is not en-
titled to share them.
" But, assuming that we are right in
this. does 1t .ollow that the unions NAV
rightly ask that laws snail be passed de.
prlving non-T nionists Of the right t. lo
work for the doing of which they are
taxed to pay? Have they the right t.
ask for the enactment of laws which
will deprive men Of their civic rights
because they do not choose to Join the
Union OF their trade? Is not this car.
ryin. the principle of taxation without
representation even further than King
George aud his advisers dreamed OF do
ing? Are the trades-unions quite sure
that they are best serving their own In
| tereSt and the common cause of UNION
ism by seeking legislation of this kind
Unless they can take it before the bar
of their own consClences and there
acqut it OF all charge of in Justice they
may be sure that in the end their cause
will not be advantaged 10y it. We con-
Tess, tor our part, that we cannot see
| how such legislation can be held to be
equitable. We do not see how a Union
asking for the enactment of such an or
dlnance can claim that it is doing as it
would wish to be done by. Put even
on the low ground of expediency, we
doubt It's wisdom. Trades unioni,ts are
not a majority OF the voting population
| they are not even 4 majority of the
wage-earnerS. If they succeed in so
asserting themselves that they can get a
city council or a legislature to pass acts
or ordinances out of consideration tor
the 'Iaoor vote" they will be wise to
see to it that none of those measures
snail Involve an injustice which Will
outrage public OPINION. or the lnevl-
table reaction Will more than sweep
away any supposed advantages that
may apparently have been gained. We
have heard legislation Of this nature
defended on the ground of necessity.
II is held that, even ii not entirely eQui-
table, it Is necessary to maintain an eX-
tended organization. We doubt even
this. Some men may be frightened or
cuerced INTO Joining a union, hut III
times Of trial such men give no addition
al strength to the cause. Besides, all
that union can hope to gain by the en-
actInent of ordinances OF this kind could
be gained without doing an injustice to
anybody. Instead of asking that only
members of unions shall be permitted
to do work for a munIcip ality, let it be
demanded that when contracts are let
for any public work. be it printing OF
digging, the union scale of Wages
shall be paid and that the work shall be
done under union conditions. This
would not be open to the charge OF in
| " on
pose it would have t. defend themselves
against the charge of wishing 10 let the
contracts on conditions which would
prevent fair employers, who pay fair
wages. from being able to compete
There is such thing as a pUnEc sense
of right, and the majority of the people
always prefer to baye the approval Of
their own CoHsciences. A trades-uni0n
does itself and the cause of UnlOni.m q