The wageworker. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1904-????, 1909-01-09

defendants to the bill, each and all of
them, have combined together for the
purpose Of
'First-Bringing about the breach OF
plaintiffs existing contracts with
others
"Second-Depriving plaintiff of prop
crty (the value OF the good will of it's
husiness) without due process of law.
"Third-Restrainin trade among
the several states.
Fourth = Restraining commerce
among the several states.''
The above is taken from Justice
Wright's decision. in sentencing Com
pers, Morrison and Mitchell. 1t can.
fairly be stated that these views.
stripped of his honor's abuse and
TRADE, constitute the real offense.
To better understand the workers
position, let us become acquainted
with the views of our opponents, for
don't forget that it is not Gompers,
Morrison and Mitchell who stand con-
victed, but the entire trade union
movement of America that is hit over
the shoulders of three men.
Special attention is called to the
courts second reason, viz: "Depriy-
ing plaintiff Ducks Stove company
of property-the value of the good
will of it's business-without due
process of law"
This is the milk in the cocoanut-
for if workers were not charged with
this offense, there would be no breach
no restraining commerce, alleged in
the other reasons.
The court clearly says, in reason
No. Two, that a business man has a
monopoly on your good will, and he is
entitled to protection of the court.
Around this theory wages the en-
tire battle of dollars versus men, and
property rights versus human rights.
This idea of CHASING good will as
property could be extended to mer-
chants, who strive to capture each
others customers, but just remember
that this is good business, and there
fore legal" Only when workers ex-
ercise the right, does the court get
busy When the Bucks Stove COM
0to1 fcI, nd
they told their fellows throughout the
country. Men were asked to not buy
the stove.
What was the result?
Naturally, less stoves were sold.
This meant a lessening of trade trea-
SON No. 81, and restraining COM
merce among the several states (rea-
son No ~. Merchants could not sell
Bucks stoves, ana they we're returned
treason No. u.
Now the court holds that the metal
polishers had no right to ask workers
to refrain from patronizing business
men who handled the scab stove. Be.
cause that patronage belonged to that
business man.
The court says you can't Withdraw
| your trade in body, even If your
fellows are injured.
| Do you realize what this means?
F.. The court says the metal poishers
| must suffer in silence, for If they
make public their wrongs, their asso
| ciates will cease buying the Bucks
stove.
This Injuries business, which the
court insists is illegal, and to stop this
"iIIegaI" action, the court orders work
ers, under penalty Of fines and i'm
prisonment, not to mention the Bucks
stove in their official journal, or te
"write, print, in any manner whatso
ever, or to even mention" the non.
union product.
Does this filter through your dui
brain, and have you awakened to its
significance?
Remember, please, that it is perfect
ly legal for John Smith, grocer, to at
! TACK JOun LUG, LIS COAlpC1AIoA, III e1hJ
manner this side of violence. That's
rusiness-both are scrambling for Gus
tomers-for trade. There is no prop
erty right in "good wilI'' then.
No one ever dreams of enjoining 6
| fraternal society or religious sec'
from withdrawing their business from
| a firm because OF a real or fancieG
wrong, but when workers exercise this
right, howl is heard about property
rights" Restraining trade" etc., etc
1t will do no good to abuse Justict
Wright.
His views are accepted by the gov