The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1901-05-04
UNIONS Are LEGAL |
STANDS ON THE PRECEDENT OF
49,, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT,

Samuel GOmpers Unravils More Judi
cial SOphistry-He Clearly Answ-
ers Justice Brewer Of the Supreme
Court, Who Lectured Before Yale
University ON Strikes and Unions.
Equality of Rights and Of Freedom
In a lecture at Yale University, JUS
tice David J. Brewer, of the federal SUI
preme court, condemned strikes and
lynch law as two forms of "disobedi-
ence to constituted authority which
are becoming unfortunately too prev
alent and are freighted with DANGER"
1t is sad fact, declared the distin-
guished jurist, that many strikes are
attended with violence, collision and
destruction of property, and sometimes,
of life. He did not stop to inquire
whether the employers or the work.
men are primarily responsible for the
lawlessness, that being foreign to his
purpose. But he proceeded to lay down
number of propositions which we can
not allow to pass unchallenged. Let
us consider them in the sequence in
which they came in the address, says
Samuel Gompers in the April Ameri-
can Federationist.
The first statement to which excep-
ton must be taken is this: 1T may
be true that in many instances this
violence and destruction are not the
work of strikers themselves, but of
mere sympathizers, or even of the mob
of the idle and vicious who are sure
to congregate while there is prospect
of trouble. But he who calls mob
into being can not be pronounced Who'll
ly guiltless of that which the mob may
do"
Does Justice Brewer mean to say
that man, or combination of men,
may not exercise legal or moral right
where there is possibility, or even a
probability, that outsiders will take
advantage of the trouble and create
disorder?" Certainly the law nowhere
recognizes such restriction upon per-
sonal or industrial liberty. The man
who asserts his right in legitimate
manner is not responsible for the con-
duct of any other man. He who de-
tends his liberty or his property in
lawful way does nothing Ito call mob
into being, and if mob is called into
being, it is the business of constituted
authority to deal with it, taking care
to accord full protection to the man
whose action, even if the pretext or
occasion for the mob, remains proper
and nonaggressive A striker is a man
who asserts his right not to work on
terms not agreeable to him. To tell
him that he must not strike; that he
must remain at work in any case, be-
cause mob might be attracted and
rendered turbulent and lawless by his
perfectly innocent action, is to destroy
his Industrial liberty altogether and
make a serf of him.
This, however, is merely prelimin-
airy. The essence of Justice Brewers
ing passage, which we quote in full
from an apparently accurate report:
tits one thing to exercise a right
which the law gives, it is an entirely
different thing for one party to endeav-
or to prevent another from exercising
IN equal rfght under the d.
little difference whether the attempted
coercion is by force or intimidation.
In either case it is an effort not to
change but to break the law. In either
it is a matter of disobedience in the
truest sense of the term. It may be
wise that all who are engaged in pur-
suing the same vocation should be or
ganized into one body; but whether
they sould be so organized or not de-
ponds, as the law now stands, solely
on voluntary action, and to attempt to
deny laborer his right to work,
whether he be within or without an
organization, and to deprive him Of
full protection in that work, implies a
plain disregard of the mandates of the
law. If it be, as a matter of political
economy, wise that there should be a
consolidation of all employees into one
or more organizations. and that no one
should be permitted to work except he
be member of such organization, let
the lawmakers SO enact, and whenever
a constitutional enactment to that eff
feet is passed then every good citizen
should strive to enforce it. But until
such enactment there is no justifiable
excuse for attempting by any, form OF
coercion to deprive one of his liberty
in respect to labor, liberty included
within what our fathers declared to be
inalienable rights, life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness
All this seems very plausible, and
many well-meaning citizens will read
it Cor have read it with much salts.
faction and inward approval. But lei
| us analyze this series of propositions
| and see if it is not open to serious
| criticism. Justice Brewer implies here
that labor organizations deny to non.
union workmen the right to work, an6
| claim for their members a monopol,
| of remunerative employment. He i'm.
plies that the non-union workmen are
prevented from exercising their rights
| by force or intimidation. He pointed.
~ says that at present the law does
/ not give the unionists a monopoly >ol
| work and wages, and that therefore
they are guilty of wrongdoing wher
they attempt to deprive any outsider Of
his liberty in respect to labor.
But Justice Brewer does not tell US
whether he applies this to all strikes
to all organized workmen and to al
methods Of ''coercion.' This failure
to draw the necessary distinctions de.