Omaha daily bee., 1903-04-27
ORGANIZED LABOR PROB LEM
Should Unions Be Required to Become
Corporate Boaies2
VIEWS OF GRAND CHIEF CONDUCTORS CLARK
No Consistency I'm Requiring Them 60
he Incorporated Under Laws
Formed Especially for Corr
pOratiOns of Capital.

Formed Especially for Cor
pOratiOns of Capital.
In ali important conflicts between capital
and labor which result in stopping produce
tion or transportation, three great interests
are involved. Capital and labor are In
volved as the principles In a contest in
which each strives to gain conditions most
favorable to itself, writes Edgar e. Clark,
grand chief conductor OF the order of Rail-
way Conductors, to Golfers Weekly. The
third interest involved is the public. and
upon this interest 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 irretriev-
able loss ant 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 a word as to the Incorporation
OF labor organizations. The argument adj
vanced by the attorneys for such employers
as clamor for Incorporation Of labor organ
] lLhlluuh 10 Nudl Tue unlOnS bnOulu bt OpllbCu
to incorporate and thus assume RESPONSE
billty. Capital incorporates for the purpose
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 incorporates
for the purpose of laying on.
Evils of Mergers.
II is urged that a labor union should be
held responsible for losses which might oc-
cur to others. as a result of a strike which
the members OF the union might inaugurate.
Let us see. An industry is established at a
point which necessitates building up a set
Element or town around the works. In the
course of years many Of the employees pur-
chase homes there with their savings. 9th
ers 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. or trust, which has gained control
OF the industries Of that nature. and buys
this particular factory or mill and decides
that its effort to control the commodity de-
mands that the establishment shall be
closed indefinitely. The employees income
is cut of entirely. His home Is of doubtful
value, because he can neither sell nor rent
It unless the factory Is operated. He must
go elsewhere for employment. The trades
mans business is gone and he, too often,
must sacrifice much, or all. No one thinks
Of holding the corporation legally liable
for these losses. 1t has simply exercised
its right TO operate It's property or close
It town as It chooses. -
Or the other hand: The employees OF that
same industry believe that there are ques-
lions affecting their wages and terms of
employment which need adjusting. The en-
ployer refuses to adjust them, and, per-
haps, refuses to even talk with them about
adjustment. The employees agree among
themselves that they will retire from the
service in concert. They do so; and the
industry Of necessity stops. The employer
may not be able to get other employees
and the revenues from operation are cut
of from both employer and employe. Others
who depend upon the output Of that in
dustry are .nconvenienced and suffer loss.
Will anyone say that an incorporated labor
union to which those men belonged would
be legally liable for those losses? Would
the employees have exercised their simple
right to work or refrain from working as
they chose?
Individual Responsibility.
IT is contended that violations of law
are committed in connection with strikes.
Unfortunately, that is true; but II a labor
union were Incorporated could It be legally
or reasonably held responsible for other
than corporate acts; that is, acts OF, or
authorized by, the officers or directors of
the corporation? II any man, member of
a labor union or capitalist or vandal, COM
mits a criminal act, he alone should be
held responsible for 1t unless he is in con-
spiracy with others to perform unlawful
acts, when, OF course. all participants
should be held responsible. An Incorporated
labor union could be and should be held
responsible for the acts OF it's chosen on
GERS and agents and the members of the
union would have to look to their officers
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 cor
porations Of capital. II 1t is desired that
labor unions shall incorporate II is incum-
bent upon the legislators to provide the
foundation by enacting healthy, reasonable
and fair lave under which such corpora
lions can be formed, with full knowledge
and clear understanding OF the liabilities
assumed and the exemptions enjoyed there
under. The liabilities Of an Incorporated
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 stockholders. TIL
exemptions guaranteed to the individual
member Of the incorporated union should
be as liberal as those extende to the in.
dividual stakeholder OF the corporation Of
capital. Labor unions, as such, do MOI
wish to avoid responsibilities which properly
belong to them; but they viii hardly IN.
corporate under existing laws, for the pur.
) pose Of taking responsibilities which they
. should not be expected to bear.