The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-08-29
AS TO ARBITRATION.
1t Cannot BE Made Compulsory, Yet n
Remedy Must BE Found.

TO the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal:
There are many valuable suggestions in
the editorial in Thursdays Journal on arbi-
tration, but they all fall short of the real
issue. AS to controversies between en-
ployer and employee no law, in a free coun-
try, can give any right to arbitrate differ
ences. If 1 want a coat made and the
grasping toiler asks s. for the job, have
as much right to bring him into a court
of arbitration and compel him TO make the
coat for 81, or he to bring me into court
and compelt me to pay the s., set of
employees have to bring any employer into
court and compel him to pay their rate of
wages, or the employer to compel the EN-
ployes to work at the wages he offers. The
employer does not own the employees, Meth
er do the employees own the job. What is
true as between me and my tailor is true
as between the contractor and his
employees. Arbitration is out of the
question, and abstractly that com
mon law applies to mine-OWnerS and mine
workers as we'll. But in the concrete there
may be radical difference, and 1 in
clined to to believe there is, and possibly
this calamitous coal strike may lead, and
ought. to class of national legislation
hitherto not thought of. 1t is fast develop
ing situation that Is truly alarming AS
all laws now are and ought to be, no power
on earth can compel men, not guilty of
not want to, nor can an employer be com
PEELED TO pay wages he does not
agree to, hence arbitration as to mere
matter of wages or treatment is wholly out
of the question in all ordinary No
manufacturer or bricklayer or carpenter or
any employer has q right to compel any
no man or set OF men has right to compel
any employer TO pay wages or grant treat
ment he is not satisfied with, and the
employer has no right, and should have no
n al 1t..~m
genial jobs, so no dissatisfied employees
should be allowed to interfere with those
who are content with the employers terms,
whether the employer be mine operator
or a contractor, or a manufacturer.
But the progress of the world has at
tached to cCal an Importance our fathers
meyer meyer dreamed Of 1t is as essen,
TO mention the domestic comfort and
convenience of the whole communi-
ty. This brings it into a different
category. Coal, even under general condi-
tions, belongs to everybody, hence no one
man or set of men has right to lay their
big hands upon it and dictate arbitrary and
restricted terms upon which il may become
tn fuel of the millions. This is good sense,
b there is no law TO prevent the exercise
of this prerogative, and while 1T is no ex-
cuSe for the strikers keeping others from ac-
cepting the places they have vacated, the
development of possibility demands a
most searching inquiry into conditions;
most heroic and radical legislation. TWen-
| ty-tive years ago nobody thought of heroic
national legislation against trusts Their
possibility existed then, as now, but their
| probability was so remote that it was
| thought local legislation of mild type
would meet the case. 1t does not, and cam
| not hence there is practically unanimous
| demand for radical national legislation.
! Only the details of a more effective anti
! trust law remain to be settled. The pos
| sibility of every commercial and domestic
| interest being seriously disturbed by the
| so-called owners of the coal which belongs
| to everybody was never so apparent as
| now, hence this coal strike may result in
a departure in national legislation. In my
! opinion it ought to-
The Journal suggests that probably, I'M
| der the Pigment OF eminent domain" a
right to do this may be found. FUDGE The
| right is found far back of that; ii is found
| in the equal right of everybody to all that
is essential to life and happiness. / shall
not discuss the processes by which this
| divine right is to be enforced. 1t is enough
for the present to say ii can be enforced,
| and must be. 1 may have eminent do
MAN, as ii were, over the little brook that
| rises my quarter section, but which has
! seen fit to make a detour for a few rods
into my neighbours quarter section. fur
| nishing him stock water and other COM
! forts. Ny eminent domain allows me to
| dig trenches make dikes and do many
| other things, but 1 may not dig trench
and make a dixie that will divert that
brook from my neighbours farm, though il
originated on what | am pleased to call
| my farm. Other people have rights as well
as myself in the water that comes TO the
| surface on my farm, and l must respect
| their rights. Just by what process the
"coal barons' are to be restricted l do not
| say but they must be; but that has moth
| ing to do with the monOpolizing of al
| profitable industries by a few of us and
| driving every other man to starvation Oh
| crime by strikes and other methods of VIC
| lence We all have an equal right TO the
| brook that brings comfort and food to our
| respective families, and that right will bt
asserted some way in the very near future
as il never has been. L. l.. SEE.
indianapolis, Aug. Is.