The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-10-02
THD RIGHT TO STRIKE DENIED.

So far as we recall, there have been Ifc Judicial decisions denying the right eof an employee to discharge himself that is, to strike for betterment Of wage or other conditions-provided the strike is not accompanied by violence or intimidation. or by boycott in cases connected with interstate commerce. There appears now to be disposition on the part of the National Associa- ton of Manufacturers to deny this right and perhaps to further test it in the eourts. Included in the Dec 1aration of Labor Principles" of the Association is the following:
 aWith due regard to contracts, it is the right of the employe to leave his e4npIoyment whenever he sees fit, and II is the right of the employer to dis 11large any employe when he sees ht.'
 President Kirby of the association con- ubutes to the current number of ifn argan, "American Industries an article dealing with "contractual rela- tions between employees and employers with special regard to the right to leave and the right to discharge"
 The condition. with due regard to contracts,'s he considers the most inn 7ortant part of the principle quoted. and he continues:
 Under that concession "can the right or the eniploye to leave his employ s1ent whenever he sees ft'' be justly construed to mean that he may quit his job with any concerted under at&nding or agreement with his fellow Semploves to the end of -coercing the Employer to submit to any terms agreed upon by them when the pur- poee Of such concerted action is to raise wages, lessen hours Of work, or exact atf1er conditions effecting high er cos4 of production of commodities Involved, thereby causing an increase in the selling price of the same
 The night of such concerted action but the question has not, to my knowl- edge, been passed upon by any court of last resort, and as prices based on dbets naturally advance with i'm crease of the latter, any combination to tncxee1e costs Is equivalent to a com bination to increase prices. Therefore, as the Sherman and the various state anti-trust laws prohibit two or more persons, firms or corporations combin- Ing and Agreeing to maintain or raise prices, is not an agreement between |a number Of workmen to do, or not to kdo certain things, which to do or not to do effects an. increase in the cost of corrsmodity, illegal?
 h not such concerted action by em- b1oyes in any business establishment, an It's face. as much a conspiracy as would be the same act by a number of business men, when the result is f11e same
 And, is not any strike, which in- wolves the question of increase in cost of commodity, in the very nature of things a lawless conspiracy, since it can never occur, even in the nildest conceivable form, without injury to ktEe public, as well as the employer? kIhese questions will, doubtless, some
 be adjudicated and settled in
 thus appears, according to Presi- dent Kirby, that concerted action by employees calculated to increase prices to consumers, is violation of the sherman law, and "a lawless conspi- raey.n and that the matter will even tualIy go to the courts for final settle mert.
 If memory serves alright, this view Of the strike question has not hereto fore been presented. Judicial prece- -f