The labor world., 1899-03-18

weeks, the words, Boycott and anti
Boycott appears on every tongue, as a
sequence of the unti-boycott legisIa-j
ton in st. Paul and the inefficient
boycotts now trying to be enforced in
Duluth. Now while we are all con-,
cerned in the above facts, L think
they are a very proper matter for dis
cussion through the columns Of your
PAPER at the present time.
As I recollect the agrarian out
seventies, + remember the word boy
colt being used in connection with a
person named Boycott and the CO.
ersivc measures of that period and
place, and from the opinion of it's
working as reported by the press, I
think it the logical sequence Of the
war or ruin policy inaugurated
against the poor downtrodden labor
ing classes of Ireland, and which
flooded England with class Of har
vest laborers who reduced the aver
age earnings of the English farming
lahorer at his harvest time by the
cheap labor of. these travelling but
needy class of workers, Just as the
East Indian farmer completes today
against them now in the English
market and from which Lne British as
well as American farm laborer has
suffered so long. If the boycott was
born of ignorance and was adopted
as temporary measure to correct
greater evil and till experience frames
more reasonable and just measure
of defense, for it is not the proper
weapon of an intelligent community,
in fact it violates all sense Of justice
as understood by our system of free
government such as we are supposed
to enjoy, as it relies On brute force
by denying the free citizen to exist
as such by destroying his means of
support from his legal investment, by
stopping the sale of his commodities,
and injuring the trade facilities of the
community to that extent, for l be-
lieve it is in the interest of all that
all trade will be free and untram-
meled by the restrictions of any class
of citizens whatever. Of course, being
a union carpenter and joiner by trade
I am not authorized by the constitu-
lion Of that order to recognize any
boycott, it not being interested in the
sale of the buildings or fittings
wrought Oh by the wage laborer. Its
sphere Of action stops when
the labor is paid for, and
leaves the builder free to reg
ulatc his trade with the outside public,
so any action taken by any nnionist
carpenter in any boycotts is his own.
private affair and the union is not re-
sponsihle for his civic duties in that
discretionary power invested in him
alone, but with that constitutional
power invested in him as an individual
citizen, he will in all probability rec
ognize all boycotts till the evils of the
system is superseded by more cor
rect and just measure, if the boycott
appeals to his sense of justice. And
to that extent he will purchase where
he likes, change when and to where
he likes for his purchases, and also
retain the right to give his reason for
change when and where he likes in
spite of any boycott bill that may be
passed that may infringe on that
right. Has he not the right to refuse
to take White Rose flour or outside
flour, when it is pushed on him by
the retailer in the place of Imperial or
other Duluth flour and state rea-
sons for doing so.
Finally, would be willing to see a
boycott bill passed and put in force
that would stop the boycotts on the
day laborer as well as on the sale of
commodities and from which organ
lied labor has suffered so much, and
although unionist, am in favor of
the proposed boycott bill. knowing
that experience will eliminate any
weak feature that may be in the
text of the measure, when it is pass
ed and put in force, knowing no force
is stronger than the weakest element
in it.
HUGH WAKEFIELD.
Duluth, March Is, 1899.