The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1902-03-29

of Arbitration.
Shall disputes between capital and
labor be settled in the future by arbi-
tration, and If so, by what form Of
arbitration?
The increase in the number Of adyo-
Gates Of arbitration does not indicate
that this method Of settling disputes
will prevail, but the apparent newt
ableness of labor becoming organized
in all countries, where it is competent
and intelligent, the certainty of it's
making demands for improved condi-
tons when organized, the improbability
of it's demands being acceded to with
out contests, the increasing size Of the
contests owing to the greater strength
Of the contestants, with the consequent
increased discommoding Of the public
and increased loss to the nation and
the parties directly concerned, make it
fairly certain that some method of pre-
venting these losses will be searched
for, and that arbitration of it can be
made to work satisfactorily towards
this end, will be generally adopted
There appears to be but four posi-
bilities in this Connections continu-:
ance Of strikes and lockouts, the labor
organizations suppressed-the laborers
becoming an inert mass incapable Of
resistance, the capitalists compelled to
submit to whatever labor feels inclined
to allow them: arbitration.
Although there are a few dreamers
who believe the third almost a certain
ty, and some narrow minds who still
think the second desirable and practice
able, for the immediate future, at least.
there is little use in discussing any but
the first and last.
In conflicts between capital and lab
or, it is now generally recognized that
there are three interested parties-cap-
ital, labor and the public. It should be
recognized that all three of these par
ties have certain needs and are power
full; therefore, that no innovation is
likely to be successfully adopted which
greatly Injuries any Of the parties. and
that no innovation can be adopted
ties. No law can compel laborers to
work for less than their market price.
no law can compel capitalists to Fay
| more than the market price for labor,
and capitalist and laborer cannot con-
tinue indefinitely to seriously disturb
the country without the intervention
OF the public. A solution Of the prob
lem, therefore, demands harmonizing
Of the interests Of all three. This
should be thoroughly understood. Those
who advocate compulsory arbitration
make the error of not allowing suffi-
cient weight for the power and needs
OF capital and labor and Of overest;m-
cting the power and needs Of the state.
The only conceivable means Of peace
fully settling disputes between capital
and labor, which does not require he
complete submission OF one or the ot her,
is arbitration. 1t will answer the pur-
pose, if, in the main, it is economical
to both capital and labor, for peace is
the only requirement of the public. If
it does not yield an economy, all the
power Of the strongest state III the
world will not make it work.
Compulsory Arbitration.
There have been attempts to fix a
maximum wage, and attempts to fix a
| minimum wage by power Of govern
ment. and they have proved futile. It
is now proposed to fix a fair wage by
the same power. It will prove futile
if attempted. The laws of ti1a market
are more powerful than th;se Of the
state; they are natural laws.
1t is proposed that the state regulate
the sale Of labor-that it snail fix a
| price at which employers shall bay,
and at which labor shall sell, and it
is proposed that the state shall enforce
the payment and acceptance of the pri-
ces it sets. If labor receives the ad-
to confiscate portion Of the property
of the employer: If the employer wins
the advantage, it is proposed to con-
fiscate the laborer's wages.
Even if this is desirable thing to do.
and even if it be constitutional to do it.,
it cannot be done.
For illustrations: If state board Of
compulsory arbitration fixed a price
or condition of. work which was un-
acceptable to an individual working
under it, how could it compel him to
continue in his place if he chose to take
a position with some other firm? 1t
would be absolute deprivation Of per-
sonal liberty. How could the board
prevent two workers from quitting I?
How could it prevent three, five, ten or
hundred? If the decree Of the board
could not be enforced on the workers,
what justice would there be in trying
to enforce it on the employers? But
this also would be impossible. The
employer could quickly change the con-
ditiOns Of emnloYment to make an en-