The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1910-03-11
Declares President GOmpers
in Current Issue of Amer
lean FederatiOniSt. DeCi.
sion i'm HatterS Case r1OSt
Momentous to Organized
Labor in Past Decade If
allowed to Stand it Will
Work Havoc With Trade
Union Treasures.

out occurred are now again IN agree
ment with the Hatters' union. In the
case in point, the lockout of the hat
manufacturers against the union, they
exercised their legal right to use their
combined power to coerce the members
of the Hatters' union to accept the en-
ployers conditions. No one hailed them
to court nor dreamed of so doing. 1t
was coercion; it was the coercion which
they were legally entitled to exercise
If the wageworking hatters in defense
of their rights and their interests,
made the coercive methods of the hat
manufacturers abortive, and thereafter
entered into an agreement to renew or
parties, it was an act directly in the
interest of both, involving and result
ing in the public good.
The amazing view which the supreme
court took in its decision is that the
Hatters' union attempted to "force all
manufacturers against their will' to
make agreements with the union. As
matter of fact, time and events have
demonstrated beyond cavil of a doubt
that industrial peace and the best pos
sible relations obtain in the voluntary
agreement entered into between the en-
ployers and organized workers
The Hatters' union was not engaged
in trade or business and had nothing
to sell in competition with Loewe. The
court, in reaching its decision, did not
consider this important feature, that
even if the boycott against Loewe was
successful there would be no lessening
of the number of hats manufactured
and used, that it would simply mean a
transfer of the trade from Loewe & Co.
to some other and fairer hat manufac-
turer.
Since the supreme court decided that
labor unions are punishable under trust
penalties, We feel that it is necessary
to point out how widely different is a
labor union from a trust; for upon
tiiCSV NlNtiA dHsl QiIItTeHCeS
of the two are based the main reasons
for the insistence that the voluntary
organizations of labor shall not under
the law be regarded as in the same cate
CORY as trusts and illegal combinations
in restraint of trade.
A labor organization is not trust;
nf
achievements in behalf of its members
and society at large can properly be
confounded with the pernicious and sell
fish activities of the illegal trust.
A trust, even at it's best, is an or
ganization of the few to monopolize the
production and control the distribution
of material products. The voluntary
associatio of the workers for mutual
benefit and assistance is essentially
different. Even if they seek to con-
troll the disposition of their labor power.
the power to labor is not material
commodity. 1t is not a product, 1t is
the personal power of human being
The human power to produce is the
antithesis of the material commodities
which become the subject of trust con-
troll
The ownership of free man is vested
in himself alone.
The only reason for the ownership Of
bondment or slaves is the ownership
of their labor power by their masters.
If freemen's ownership of themselves
involves their labor power, none but
themselves are owners of their labor
power.
The product of free man is his own.
If he, by hoice or by reason of his
environment, sells his labor power to
another and is paid wage in return
therefor, the wage is his own.
These propositions are so essentially
true that they are the underlying
philosophy upon which is based the en-
tire structure of private property. To
question or TO attempt to destroy these
principles involves the entire structure
OF civilized society.
The freeman's ownership of himself
and his labor power implies that he
may sell it to another or withhold III
Continued ON Page Four.l