Arizona republican., 1908-07-29
THE LkBcR QUESTION

lican leadership.
 THE LkBCR QUESTION
 We coIae now to the question Of labor One important phase of the qualities Of tho present admini;- tratiOn has Eeen anxiety to secure for the wage earner an equality of opportunity and such positive sta tutory protection as will place him on a :cvel in dealing with his em- ployer. 1'he republican party has passed an cn,pr ITS liability .aw for .. ter>.aia gal roads. and ,.Is estah- l:shcdl an tciit hour law fn- rJN. ernment employees on government construction. The essence of the reform affected by the former is the abolition of the fellow servant rule, and the introduction of the compara tive negligence theory by which an employe injured in the service of his employer does not lose all his rights to recover because of slight negligence on his part Then the act providing for compensation for injury to govern ment employees, together with the var ious statutes requiring safety applian ces upon interstate commerce railroads for the protection of their employees and limiting the hours of their em- ployment.\ These are all the instances of the republican party's efforts to do justice to the wage eafners. Doubtless a more conservative meas ure for compensation of government employees will be adopted in the fu- ture The principle in such cases has in a-flx somewhat slow course of legislation will be more fully embodied in definite statutes.
 The interests of the employer and employe never differ except when it comes to a division of the joint profits of labor and capital into dividends and wages. This must be a constant source of periodical discussion between the employer and employe. as indeed are the terms of the employment.
 ADVANTAGE OF THE UNION
 To give to employees their proper position in such controversy to enable them to maintain themselves against employers having great capital, they may we'll unite. for in unity there is strength and without it each individual laborer and employe will be helpless. The promotion of industrial peace through the instrumentaility of trade agreement is one of the results Of such union when intelligently conduct ed
 There is a body of laborers. however. skilled and unskilled, who are not or ganized' into unions. Their rights be- fore the law are exactly the same as those of the union men and are to be protected with the same watchfulness.
 RIGHTS OF LABOR
 In order 10 induce their employees in compliance 10 their request for chang ed conditions of employment workmen have the right to strike in a body They have the right to use such per suasion as they may, provided it does not reach the point of duress. to lead their reluctant colaborers to join them in their union against their employer and they have the right if they choose to accumulate funds 10 support those on strike. to delegate to officers the power to direct the action of the union and to withdraw themselves and their associates from dealings with or giving to those with whom they are in controversy.
 WHAT CANNOT BE DONE
 Labor has not the right to injure their employers property, to injure their employers business because of threats or methods of physical duress against those who would work for him or deal with him, or by carrying on what is sometimes known. as a second ary boycott against his customer or those with whom he deals in business. All those who sympathize with them may unite to aid them. but they may not through the instrument tality of a threatened or actual bo, colt compel hired persons against their will and having no interest in their controversy to come to their assist ance, These principles have for great many years been settled by the courts of this country.
 INJUNCTNION
 Threatened unlawful injuries to bus mess like those above can only be adequately remedied by an injunction to prevent them. The jurisdiction of a court of equity to enjoin in such cases arises from the character of the injury and the method of inflicting it and the fact that suit for damages of fers no adequate remedy.
 The injury is not done by one single act which might not adequately be compensated for in damages by a suit at law. but it is the result of a con- stant series of acts, each of which in itself might not constitute a substan- tial injury or might not make a suit at law worth while but all of which would require a multiplicity of suits at law Injuries of this class have since the foundation of courts of equity been prevented by injunction. It has been claimed that injunctions do not issue to protect anything but property rights and that business is not aprOperty right but such a proposition is wholly incon- sistent with all the decisions of the courts. The supreme court of the United States says the injunction is a remedy to protect property or rights of a pecuniary nature and we may well submit, to the considerate judgment of all laymen whether the right of man in his business is not as distinctly right of a pecuniary nature as the right to his horse or his house or the stock of goods on his shelf
 The instances in which iniunctions to protect business have been employ ed by all courts are so many that it is futile to further discuss the proposi-