The times., 1901-03-09
THE VALUE OF LABOR UNIONS.
Columbian students in n Debate en-
ihe Inhustrtnl Hrnllleln.

Resolved. That labor unions are detri-
mental to the interests of the lahoring
class. This question was argued before
the debating society Of the schools Of law
OF Columbian University at Jurisprudence
Hall last night The speakers ON the
affirmative side of the question were
Byron Ncflloon. j. Z. Mathews and ].
Taggart. while the negative was upheld
by EoyH c. jerks, p. II. Esterly and G.
g.. olson The Judges were u. 4. Knapp,
G.. H. Trickey. and r. T. Guyton. The
verdict was in favor OF the affirmative,
with first honors on points Of delivery,
consisting of argument and legal aspect
to G.. +. Olson. and second houors to j.
FHEEart Byron .icElocH, the first speak
er uu tuc affirmative, said that late M
the eighteenth century labor began TO
organize in England because they claimed
they were oppressed by the rich lords ana
capitsI An act of Parliament however,
branded labor organization as dangerous
to tho common veal and they were
forced to dishand as such. lie argued
that the introduction OF machines is be-
ing looked upon with disfavor by labor
unions. notwithstanding the fact that the
past has proved that machines are not
detrimental to the Iaboring classes. Mr.
were most selfish: that they want to regu-
late the hours Of labor and the wage
labor is TO receive without consulting
capital He also claimed that there were
nine or ten nonunionists to one unionist
ami that this one unionist was holding
club over the head of his brothers and
preventing them by force from making
their living at their own prices.
Royal c. Jcnks was the first speaker
on the negative side, and he replied that
labor organizations as a whole could not
be held responsible for the misdeeds OF
single branches or individual members.
He argued that combined capital must be
met with combined labor
The. second speaker on the affirmative
J. {. Mathews. based his argument on
the contention that a laborer by joining
a labor union loses his individuality. lie
asserted that a man could do more good
to himself and his felloW-belneS DN act,
ing Singly and retaining ms lhuiNluudI
Tnis contention was met by p. II. Es-
terlv who said that an argument against
united labor was an argument against
or-gauized government. He said that
there was strength not only IN UNION
of States hut also in union OF liDor.
Belgium ne said, has yer! lew ia'os
uuions. and its Industrial history mas
been one Of continual strikes. OF unceas-
ing war of labor against capital Many
beneficial laws have been passed tn o1SA
the efforts OF organized labor. ani bene-
fetal legislation cannot possibly he Cetrl-
mental TO anyone.
J. TaggaIt was the last speaker Tor the
a affirp,atiy, and he COnteuded that every
raise i'm wages obtained by organized
labor was at the expense of the weaker
and less skilIful labUrer. lie SAID that
the taree fundamental prlnclpIeS HIleL-
ly-fna The labor unions were short hours,
no improvements in machinery, AMI wage
rates To be established by themselves
&. l.. Olson closed the argument LOT
tho repa1fvo and made a brilliant and
powerful plea in favor of organized labor.
MIR Olson asserted that the best arsu-
ment for organized labor was america
sI1f.rer7acy i'm the markets Of the world:
the superiority of the American mechanic
in every possible manner. He said that
5miousm had raised the standard OF man
had entirely emancipated the laborer from
the sorvitude in which he was once
placed.