The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-07-13
AN IMPORTANT DECISION.

AN NMfOHTANT DEC1SiONs
The Appellate Court of Illinois re-
Gently rendered a decision on the sub
ject of open or closed shops which is Of
interest TO the people of the entire
country and especially to the South
and to Alabama. In brief. the court
holds that a contract between an en-
ployer of labor and a labor union, by
which the former-binds himself not to
employ non-union labor, is not only
void but is illegal and may be criminal.
The Chicago Chronicle cites the I'LL
nois statute upon which the decision is
based and adds:
decision. employers and labor unionists
who have entered into an agreement
for CLOSED shop are guilty of an
unlawful act. which, If voluntarily per-
acy. Neither employers nor labor
unionists who hereafter enter into
agreements for closed shop" can
plead ignorance of their legal rights in
he is nevertheless guilty of an unlaw-
full act for which there are ample rem
edies at law: II he voluntarily enters
into such contract he can be prose-
SatSo thC Stdtutto.
All over the North and West the la
Dor unions have been gradually work
ing towards one end, and that end is
to deprive employers of labor of all
right to choose the men who work for
them. The labor unions insist on the
closed" shops, which means that no
employer shall have the right to en-
ploy man In his shop who does not
belong to the union. 1t shows how
far the intolerance and tyranny of the
union sentiment and action has gone
in Illinois when the labor organizations
require employers to enter into an iron
clad contract by which they bind them
selves not to give employment to any
non-union man.
1t was a contract of this kind that
brought the matter before the Appellate
Court of Illinois, and the effect of the
decision Is to make 1t plain that such
contract Is illegal, and may be crimi-
nal. The same decision of the court
would apply to a contract by which the
employer binds himself not to employ
any diiioh CihpAoyCS. Al Sbott, thc AZ >"
and the opinion of the court is that
only the s"open shop" can exist. A
contract to bar out either union or nom
union men is a violation of the law. An
employer must have the right to en-
ploy such laborers as he sees fit,
whether they belong to the union or
not, and he cannot legally surrender
that right, even by voluntary contract.
This is the kind of law and judicial
decision that should prevail in Ala
bama. We have State of vast posi-
bilities. and the development of our re-
sources is going on at rapid rate. If
we are to get capital interested and in
vested it must be free from class in
reference. If we are to get the best
labor it must also be free. Every man
who wants to work must have the alb
solute right to. work for whom he
pleases and for such wages as he
chooses to accept, and that without
outside dictation or interference. Nc
contractor should be forced to reject
good workman for the reason that he
is not a member of any union, or that
he is a member. Either way it is a
class distinction of the most dangerous
| type, for the fact that a man does OIL
does not belong to any labor organiza.
ton, or to any other organization
| should cut no figure. An employer OIL
contractor could with as much right
and justice bind himself not to emplo,
man because he is a member of some
| religious denomination
The fact is that union s.nd non-unior
labor should occupy the same ground
before the law and have the sam,
standing. They should have equa
protection from the laws and the court,
and no contract should be allowed t,
deprive either form of labor of it.
rights. If we are to have the best la
Dor In Alabama 1t must be free labo
and no labor is free If it must wear tn,
shackles of a labor organization. Be
longing to the union should give NJ
privileges, as falling to belong to /
should incur no penalties, Let Vi
have laws and courts which will ensur,
equal and exact justice to the union ant
the non-union man, and let neithe
have any special privileges. In NJ
other way can labor reach its highes
stage OF efficiency. and in no other wa.
can 1t be free. The employer who Il
forced to employ men solely because
they belong to an organization is no
a free American citizen. The laborint
man who cannot get employment un
less he belongs to the union is littl'
better than a serf. We are for free
dom of labor just as we are for free
dom of conscience. Both are guaran
toed to us by the constitution and NJ
man or combination of men should b,
allowed to abrogate or curtail thos,
rights.
/ 1t is reported that Charles A. Walsl
of Iowa, for some time Secretary of tn,
Democratic Committee, is a candidat,
for reelection. If the members of tn,