The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-06-28
Compulsory Arbitration.


public a sovereign remedy for the |
great loss and inconvenience which |
prolonged strike in6icts upon persons |
not directly connected with the start |
ing of the strikc--loss and inConven- |
fence usually far in excess of those |
experienced by either of the immediate
participants? This question, which Is
forced upon public consideration by
such frightful upheavals of disorder
as characterized the recent street
railway strike in st. Louis, is various
ly answered. The Republican of this
city thus well states the negative
view:
public opinion never can and never
will make acceptance of the award
of such a tribunal compulsory upon
both parties to the litigation 1t
would be possible by extreme meas
ures to compel one party to the dis
pute to accept the judgment of court
of arbitration. and it would be espec-
tally easy to do so if that party were
corporation or had possession OF
public franchise which was necessary
to the conduct of it's business Let us
take the St. Louis strike for an Illus
tration. Under compulsory arbltra-
ton law the dispute would have been
submitted to a court with power to
adjust the difficulty. When the de-
cision was reached it might not be ac-
ceptablc to the railway corporation.
But If the law was sufficiently drastic
the corporation would have no choice
but to accept, for refusal might
mean the forfeiture of the franchise
under which the corporations railways
are operated, or it might mean the
annihilation of the corporation by the
abrogation of it's charter. corpora
ton is an artificial person. 1t is Gre
ated by the state and Is possessed OF
certain special rights and privileges
bestowed on it by the state. 1t Is,
| therefore, subject to regulations and
| limitations which natural persons
would not tolerate. The power that
| creates a corporation may prescribe
| any rule of conduct for it. The award
of a board of arbitration could, there
| fore, be enforced against an employ
| ing corporation without changing the
| fundamental principles of~modern So
| ciety in the least. But how about the
other side? If the hypothetical court
of arbitration in st. Louis rendered a
decision distasteful to the men how
would 1t enforce it's award? If men
consider their services worth two dol
lars a day and board of arbitration
decides that they are worth but a dol
lar and eighty-fve cents, who is going
to compel the men to work for the
reduced rate? Could the power of the
county OF the state or the nation put
those st. Louis men on the street cars
and toll them they would have to run
them, and collect the fares? 1t is the
inalienahle right of a citizen to work
for whom he chooses and for what
wages he deems just, if he can get
the employment and the wages. But
nobody can compel him to work for
less, or to work for an employer whom
he does not like. An award of a court
of arbitration must necessarily be a
one-sided affair which may be accepted
or rejected by the laborers as they
please. This fact keeps the official ar
bitration idea in disfavor, and would
render it useless wherever it might be
tried"
Yet it is a fact, stated by eminent
authority, that in New Zealand an ar.
bitration law, virtually compulsory ir
it's process, has been in successful oper-
alton for number of years. Under
this law either workmen or employer
may petition the court to take under
judicial review questions in dispute
and the courts decision, subject to one
appeal, is binding upon both parties
for a term of two years save in the
earlier event of the interpositOn o
new and important evidence. The ap
: peal is to a supreme court of arb
{ tration, whose mandate is final. 1t 4
made by law the duty of every MAJ
= affected by a decision of this tribuna
to accept the judgment during tn
: period named; and if he disobeys h
becomes an outlaw whom the stat
may seize and punish. The essence o
the New Zealand law is that orderl.
: society has the right or protection
r which is a right higher than the in
e dividual right to interrupt or menac
0 the peaceful processes of society b
e arbitrary stoppage of employment o
= labor
r We appreciate the practical Difficult
: ties in the way of the adaptation O
Y such a plan to American conditions
= But are there not practical difficultie
G under the present plan? Can we Vie'
6 as tolerable in free America the spir
= of anarchy that flames into public vic
It lence and outrage the moment tina
= opportunity or Indictment is supple
= by general strike? Is this to be pei
S mitted to develop unopposed in th
o fear that society, in protecting itsel
y might here and there step on an il
e dividual's toes? Bear in mind, it
IS not a problem of capital solely. I'll
l. ours as in St. Louis, or the wome
= who are denuded by maniacal mob
l. are seldom capitalists. Labor inva
lie iaby has to bear the brunt of II
lie mischief and in the long run to pa
N the damages. 1t is to labOr's intere
l. most of all that effort should be p,
forth TO substitute arbitration al
,r common sense for destruction al
st lunacy; and until the attempt to Q
IL tablisn compulsory arbitration is MAJ
er in good faith, under the general re
lie ognition by society of its superlori
m over brute passion, 1t seems to us tn
~ it Will be premature to affirm that
e. is an impossible remedy. our court