The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-08-11
Parker and the Open Shop.

In his address of acceptance yester-
day, Judge Parker reviewed the strug-
gle between the miners and mine own
ers in Colorado, and made the follow
ing comm nt:Ss$y .3s.s,7. J.
Z These illustra tons present some evil
dence of the failure of government to pro-
tect the citizen and his property, which
not only justified the action of your con-
ventioir in this regard, but made it its
duty to call attention to the fact that
institutional guarantees are violated
whenever any citizen is denied the right
to labor, to acquire and enjoy property,
or to reside wherever his interests or his
iEclination may determine, and the full
fillment Of the assurance to rebuke and
punish all denials of these rights, whether
brought about by individuals or govern
Inent agencies, should be enforced by ev-
cry official and supported by every citi-
hen.
This is plainly a declaration in favor
of the "open shop" Unfortunately
however, Judge Parker's record does
mot square with yesterdays delivery.
In April 1902, in a sweeping de-
cision, Judge Parker took radical
ground against the open shop" and
thus accelerated the movement in New
York city, which soon thereafter re-
suited in the reign of lawlessness and
crime Of Sam Parks. Late in 1898 the
New York labor unions were attaining
that perfection Of organization which
was soon to make them such effective
tools in the hands Of the notorious
Parks. The steamfitters were about the
last to get into line. A small body Of
. L1-.- 4 = u. s.a4o
regular union, but organized an assoc
citation of their own. These men found
work in the spring of 1899 on three
large buildings, whereupon the walk
ing delegates ordered strikes. The re-
suit was that, after a long contest,
these non-union steamfitters were pre-
vented from earning a livelihood In
New York. AS a last resort. they
asked the courts to restrain the unions
from interfering with them. The case
finally reached the supreme court OF
appeals, of which Judge Parker was
chief Justice. Both sides had fought
earnestly, for upon the decision would
hinge the ability Of organized Labor
in New York state to shut out all non
union men. On it's way to the SUI
preme court of appeals, the non-unior
men, of the "open shop" were twice
upheld, and the unions once.
Judge Parker wrote the majority
opinion of his court, and there wa:
strong minority opinion, prepared
by. Judge Vann, in which the "oper
shop was forcefully defended. Judge
Parker handed down a sweeping de
cision which upheld the right to strike
III against the employment of non-unio1
men, not only in the case of unio1
that has an examination in skill fo
admission, but of all unions whatso
ever. He quoted from the dissenting
opinion of fellow Justice in the sam,
case, this sentence: .'Workmen can
not dictate to employers how the.
shall carry on their business, no
whom they shall employ. or shall no
employ" And then. as if to EN-
phasize his own position in the mos
striking manner, he said: From
that proposition I dissent absolutely.
And going farther, he declared tina
the motive sof the union in strikin.
had no weight whatever in law Ar'
yet the dissenting opinion Of Judg
= ~ u