Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-05-06
CORPORATE UNIONS
SHOULD LABOR ASSOCIATIONS BE
LEGAL PERSoNsP
A Representative of Organized Work.
ingmen Discusses Vexing
Question.

and labor which result in stopping produce
ton or transportation, three great interests
are involved. Capital and labor are In
VOWED as the principals in contest in
which each strives to gain conditions most
favorable to itself writes Edgar E. Clark,
in Golfers Magazine. The third interest
involved is the public, and upon this inter-
est Inconvenience and loss necessarily fall
Compulsory arbitration by legislative en-
actment. enforced by the judiciary and the
police power of the state, would mean that,
on the one hand the employer might be
forced to continue his business under con-
ditions which meant certain and irretrfeva-
BILE loss and financial ruin, and, on the
other hand that the employees might be !
forced, against their will, to continue in
employment which was unsatisfactory and
Improbable to them
And now word to the incorporation
OF labor organizations. The argument ad-
Vanced by the attorneys for such employers
as clamor for incorpora ton of labor organi-
cations is that the unions should be oblig-
ed TO incorporate and thus assume respon-
s1bllity. Capital Incorporates for the pur-
pose of evading or limiting responsibility;
and the attorneys of capital say that labor
unions should incorporate for the purpose
of taking on that which capital incorpo-
rates for the purpose of laying Of
Responsibility for Losses.
held responsible for losses which might oc-
cur to others. as result OF strike which
the members of a union might inaugurate.
Let us see. An industry is established at
point which necessitates building up a
settlement town around the works. In
the course of years many of the employees
purchase homes here with their savings.
Others come in and establish themselves in
trades. dependent, of course. upon the pa
tronage of the employees of the industry
which has made the town. Now comes the
merger trust, which has gained control
of the industries of that nature, and buys
this particular factory mill and decides
that its effort to control the commodity de-
mands that the establishment shall be
closed indefinitely. The employees income
is cut off entirely. His home is Of doubt
full value, because he can neither sell nor
rent it unless the factory mill is Ope-
rated. He must go elsewhere for employ
ment. The bridesmaids business is gone
and he too. must sacrifice much, or all.
No one thinks of holding the corporation
legally liable for these losses. 1t has sim
ply exercised it's right to operate its prop
erty or close 1t down as it chooses.
On the other hand: The employees of that
same industry believe that there are ques-
tons affecting their wages and terms OF
employment which need adjusting. The
employer refuses to adjust them, and. per-
haps refuses to even talk with them about
adjustment. The employees agree among
the mselves that they will retire from the
sc rvice in concert They do SO; and the
industry of necessity, stops. The employ
er may not be able to get other employees
and the revenues from operation are cut
off from both employer and employee. 9th
who depend upon the output of that in
dustry are Inconvenience and suffer loss.
Will any say that an Incorporated
labor union to which those men belonged
would be legally liable for those losses:
Would the employees not have exercised
their simple right to work refrain from
working they chose?
Liability for Torts.
1t is contended that violations Of law
are committed in connection with strikes.
Unfortunately, that is true but If q labor
union We're Incorporated could it be legal
ly or reasonably held responsible for other
than corporate acts; that is, acts of, or
authorized by, the officers directors or
the corporation? If any man, member OF ;
a labor union or capitalist or vandal, COM
mits a criminal act he alone should be
held responsible for It unless he Is in COM
spiracy with others to perform unlawful
acts when, of course, all participants
should be held responsible. An incorpo-
rated labor union could be- and should be,
held responsible for acts of its chosen
officers and agents, and the members or
the union would have to look to their Off
GERS and agents to see that no unlawful
act was authorized.
There is no consistency in demanding that
labor unions shall incorporate under laws
especially constructed and intended for
corporations of capital. If 1t is desired
that labor unions shall incorporate, 1t is (
incumbent upon the legislators to provide
the foundation by enacting healthy, rea-
sonable and fair laws under which such
corporations can be formed, with full
knowledge and clear understanding of the
liabilities assumed and the exemptions en-
joyed hereunder. The liabilities of an In
corporated labor union and of its members.
as SUCH should be substantially the Same
relatively as those imposed, for pecuniary
profit, upon the corporation and ITS stock
holders. The exemptions guaranteed to the
individual member of the Incorporated
union should be as liberal as those extend
ed to the Individual stakeholder of the
corporation of capital. Labor unions, as
such, do not wish to avoid responsibilities
which properly belong to them, but they
will hardly incorporate under existing laws
for the purpose of taking on responsible
ties which they should not be expected to
haa