New-York tribune., 1902-10-13
TIE STATE AND TIE STRIKE.


one of the commonest suggestions, and in
deed. demands. for the settlement OF the pres
ent coal strike and the prevention Of other such
disturbances is that the State or perhaps the
United States. shall take possession Of the
mines and operate them as public works for
the general good. Apart from the very grave
constitutional questions involved as 20 the
power and right of the United States. or even
OF the State of Pennsylvania. 10 do such a
thing. the proposition may have a plausible ap-
pearance. There are many 10 whom the
State appears like an infinitely benevolent and
oInninotent factotum. 70 which everything can
be referred and which can do everything with
unfailing satisfaction 10 all concerned. II
should not require much perspicacity 70 discern
the essential fallacy Of such view. The fault
that is found with what the State is now doing
should be a sufficient reminder. But then. per
spicacity often decreases as enthusiasm in
creaSes.
Let US suppose that the State should acquire
possession of the coal mines. In what way
would the strike be ended: The State could
not send an army 10 force the men 10 resume
work. There is-if their leaders statements are
true-no reason 10 suppose that the men would
voluntarily resume work without a granting Of
the demands which caused them TO strike. Nor
grant those demands. In fact, it is practically
certain IL would not grant all OF them. The
State would insist upon managing its own bust
ness. II would not admit labor organization
TO a share in the management, not even as
much as individuals and corporations have
done. The assumption that State ownership of
the mines would mean immediate ending OF the
strike by yielding 70 the miners organization
is presumptuous and utterly unwarranted.
II must be borne in mind that State manage
ment OF public works and State employment of
labor are not always entirely satisfactory
Even in the FIRE and police departments and
the postal service men have complained OF
grievances. have organized agitated and in
trigued for their redress and have seriously
contemplated going on strike. Such things
have not been unknown IN the United States
and in the State and city OF New-York A few
weeks ago the State Of Victoria, in the com
mOnwealth of Australia, where there is State
ownership OF railroads. was menaced with a
general strike Of all the ten thousand railroad
employees and a sympathetic strike of the nine
thousand other civil servants in all departments
Of government. That strike was threatened
over a question Of wages, and was very narrow
ly averted for the time. with a practical Ger
tsinty that in the near future the menace will
owned railroads Of the Australian republic. why
would IL not he the case on the railroads and
in the mines Of the United States II they were
State owned?
The idea that State ownership and operation
Of mines. railroads. telegraph and the like
would abolish strikes is based upon the SUP
position that the State would pay all IT'S en-
ployes as high wages. and give them as short
hours Of labor, as they might demand and
would permit the labor unions 10 dictate as far
as they please the rules and regulations Of the
service--in other words, that the government
would abdicate its functions. Such state of
affairs would be intolerable. II could not en-
dure for day. II would mean anarchy. II
the State has thus far had little trouble with
its employees that is because they are com
paratively few and are scattered about all over
the land. II they were increased in number
many fold, and were massed together in great
industries. disputes between employer and en-
ployes would inevitably arise.
Such disputes. IL must moreover be borne IN
mind, could be settled in only one way, 10 VIII.
the triumph OF the employer and the submis-
sion OF the employees. There could be no pro
lection OF the employees against the employer
by law, for the employer would be the law
making and law administering power There
could be no arbitration between them for a !
government cannot admit arbitration between
itself and those whom IL governs. From such |
system there could be only one Of two results |
Either the State would become an eleemosynary
Institution. subject TO mob law. or il would be-
come an absolute despot and slave master.
Neither OF those is the American ideal