The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-03-17

| ~ NE OF the demands pressed by
some of the leaders of organ
~ lied labor Is for the abolition
| of what they call govern
ment by injunction" A bill carrying
i out their idea has been introduced in
the United States senate by Mr.. Hoar,
of Massachusetts. and has been re-
ported favorably by the judiciary COM
mittee, of which Mr.. Hoar is chairman.
This bill provides that no combination
or conspiracy, to do an act affecting
| interstate trade and commerce, shall
| be Illegal or criminal unless the same
act, If committed by one person, would
| be crime; and it further provides
that no injunction shall issue to re-
strain the commission of any act by
| the conspirators. unless such act if
| committed by one person would be a
crime.
How such a law would operate if in
effect at Boston at this time is shown
by the New York Sun, one of the few
| papers in this country which has not
feared to comment frankly upon dam
gerous phases of labor unionism:
"The Brine Transportation company
does business in and about the city of
Boston, but does not employ labor
| union men, and it refuses to recognize
the teamsters' union. Seeking to ac-
complish the destruction of the Brine
company, in which the teamsters' union
had failed, few freight handlers in
the employ of the New York New
Haven and Hartford Railroad company
in Boston a few days ago refused to
touch the freight delivered by the Brine
Transportation company. These freight
handlers We're, very properly dis
charged promptly by the railroad COM
pany for insubordinatiOn, and there
upon sympathetic strike was ordered
by the chiefs of the various unions.
1T should be noted that in the incep-
ton of this strike there was no possible
excuse for the disobedience of the
freight handlers. They had no quarrel
with the railroad company; they were
not dissatisfied with their wages or
with their hours of labor nor We're
they endeavoring to assert any alleged
rights of their own fellow workmen or
co-employes. They were going outside
of theit own business, with a chin on
their shoulder, to compel a great com.
mon carrier to place itself in a false
and unconstitutional position by re-
fusing to accept freight at it's station,
simply because the transportation COM
pany rendering the goods declined to
recognize a teamsters' union
From early times a common carrier
undertook to convey and deliver goods
for reasonable compensation as n
business with or without special
agreement, and for all people indffer-
emily, and he was bound to treat all
alike; and at common law the carrier
could not unjustly or unreasonably dis
crlminate in favor Of one and against
another, where the circumstances and
conditions We're the same. This has
been the law for centuries back, not
only in this country but in Great
Britain, and the reason of the rule Is
that the property or business of a COM
mon carrier becomes clothed with n
public interest, because it affects the
community at large; and no common
carrier, therefore, has right to refuse
to take any goods delivered, whether
the party rendering the goods for
transportation be or be not approved
by a labor union"
But If the sympathetic strike in Bos-
ton to compel the New Haven railroad
to discriminate between shipments
handled by union teamsters and ship
ments handled by non-union teamsters
had continued to the point of tying up
that road, there would have been open
to it as the law now stands, but closed
10 1t as Senator Hoar would amend the
law, one form of redress; namely, an
injunctive order restraining the lead
ers of the strike from interfering with
interstate commerce. AS the sun points
out:
II would not be a crime for an individual pct.
ing alone to boycott corporation or TO attcmpt
TO ruin the business OF railroad or to tie il up;
whereas conspiracy TO do any such act might
work iTeparable wrong and damage. ANY one
Who knows anything about The law of congpir.
acy understands that the gist Of the oiiense lies
!" Tue to'hplhd'loh' ana mat the danger TO the
community lies in the fact that many men are
banded together to destroy and wreck business
and property. The effort in the same direction
of one individual would be futile and powcr rless
and might well be treated with contempt but a
combination of unreasoning and headstrong men,
animated and prompted by the desire to destroy
the business OF a great railroad, becomes at once
serious menace 20 the welfare of the whole
state. The one existing safeguard against such
conspiraeies today lies in the injunctiye power
OF the federal courts, for the judges Of those
courts are brave and fearless and ENJOYING a
life tenure, are not afraid TO exert such powers
as they have for the preservation Of property
rights.
1t is a mistaken notion that the in
junetlye power of courts Is a menace