Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1908-07-30

republican convention Of this wear
and by previous conventions, said the
| speaker, is that tariff shall he i'm
pose on all imported products. whether
of the factory. farm Or mine, SUFFICE
emily great to equal the difference be
tween the cost of production abroad
and at home, and that this difference
should, of course, include the differ
ence between higher wages paid in
this country and the wages paid
abroad and embrace a reasonable pro
| fit to the American producer. A sys-
} TEN Of protection thus adopted and
/ put in force has led to the establish
ment of a rate of wages here that has
I greatly enhanced the standard Of liv-
! ing of the Iaboring man. 1t is the
policy OF the republican party perman-
emily to continue that standard of Iiv-
ing. In 1897 the DingIey tar # BIZ.
was passed, under which we have
had, as already said, a period of enor-
nous prosperity" Then Judge Taft
added;
The consequent material develop
ment has greatly changed the condi-
tons under which many articles de-
scribed by the schedules Of the tariff
are now produced. The tariff in a
number of the schedules exceeds the
difference between the cost of produc
ton of such articles abroad and at
home, including a reasonable profit to
the American producer. The excess
over that difference serves no useful
purpose, but offers temptation to
those who would monopoIize the pro-
duction and the sale of such articles
in this country, to profit by the exces-
sive rate On the other hand there are
some few other schedules in which
the tariff is not sufficiently high ID
give the measure of protection which
they should receive upon republican
principles, and as to those the tariff
should be raised. A revision of the
tariff undertaken upon this principle
which is at the basis of our present
business system, begun promptly upon
the incoming OF the new administra-
ton, and considered at a special SEES
sion with the preliminary investiga-
tons already begun by the appropri-
ate committees of the house and SEN
ate, will make the disturbance of bust
ness incident to such a change as lit
tie as possible.
The speaker said that in order
to induce their employer into
compliance with their request for
changed terms of employment, work
men have the right to strike in a body
They have a right to use such persuan-
sion as they may, provided it does no.
reach the point of duress, to lead their
reluctant co-labOrers to join them in
their union against their employer,
and they have a right, if they choose,
to accumulate funds to support those
engaged in a strike, to delegate to
officers the power to direct the action
of the union, and to withdraw them,
selves and their associates from deal
ings with, or giving custom to those
with whom they are in controversy"
What Labor Can Not Lawfully Do.
What they have not the right to do
is to injure their employers property,
to injure their employers business by
use of threats or methods of physical
duress against those who would work
for him, or deal with him, or by car
rying on what is sometimes known as
a secondary boycott business. All
those who sympathize with them may
unite to aid them in their struggle,
but they may not through the instru
mentality Of a threatened or actual
boycott compel third persons against
their will and having no interest in
their controversy to come to their as
sstance. These principles have for a
great many years been settled by
the courts of this country
Threatened unlawful injuries to
business, like those described above
can only be adequately remedied ny
an injunction TO prevent them. The
jurisdiction of a court of equity to en-
join in such cases arises from the
character of the injury and the
method Of inflicting it and the facc
that suit for damages offers no ade-
quate remedy. The unlawful injury
is not usually done by one single act.