The Tabor independent. [volume] (Tabor, S.D.) 1913-19??, 1915-01-28
COERCION UPHELD
BY HIGHEST COURT
Supreme Justice Rules En-
pIoyer May Impose Condition
That EmpIoye Quit Union
or His Job.

Washington. Jan. 26.-The Kansas
Io-called coercion statute. making it
unlawful for any individual or corpor-
Ition to coerce or influence any per-
son to enter into an agreement not to
ioin or remain a member of a labor
organization as condition Of such
person securing or continuing in the
employment Of such individual or cor
5Oration was today annulled as I'M
constitutional by the supreme court.
The decision was regarded as of the
irst Importance in the labor world,
ind was announced by Justice Pitney.
strong dissenting opinions were given
by Justice Holmes and Justice Day.
Justice Hughes ConCurred with Justice
Day, leaving Chief Justice White and
Justices McKenna, Lamar, Vandevan-
ter and McReynolds cOncurring with
Justice Pitney.
The decision was in the case of 7. Il.
Coppage, a superintendent of the st.
Louis & San Francisco railway, at
Fort Scott. Kan, convicted of violating
the law in threatening A. r. Hedge,
switchman, with discharge if he did
not sign an agreement to withdraw
from the Switchmen's union.
Right to Organize.
THE court intimates nothing incon-
sistent with the right of individuals to
Join labor. unions" said Justice Pitney.
Nor is the legitimacy OF such Organi-
cations questioned so long as they con-
form to the laws of the land as others
are required to do. But the individual
has no inherent right to join the union
and still remain in the employ Of one
who is unwilling to employ union
man. any more than the same indiVid-
ual has q right to join the union with
he Of a ron nj
Just as labor organizations have the
inherent and constitutional right to
deny membership to any man who will
not agree that during such membership
he will not accept or retain employment
N company with nonunion men, and
just as a union man, has the constitu-
tional right to decline proffered employ
men unless the employer will agree not
to employ any nOnunion men. so the
employee shall refrain from atfiliating
with the union during the term of the
employment
One Rule Of Liberty.
There cannot be one rule Of liberty
for the labor organization or it's MEM
bers, and different ana more restric-
tive rule for employers.
The employees liberty OF making con-
tracts does not include Il liberty to pro-
cure employment from an unwilling
employer or without fair understand
ing. Nor may the employers be fore
closed by legislation from exercising
the same freedom of a choice that is
accorded to the employe.
'"rO ask q man to agree in advance
to refrain from affiliation with the
union while retaining a certain posi-
ton Of employment Is not to ask him
to give up any part of his Constitu-
tiOnal freedom. He is free to decline
the employment on those terms, just
as the employer may decline to offer
employment on any other for it takes
two to make "A bargain. And having
accepted employment on those terms,
the man is still free to join the union,
when the period OF employment eN-
pires or, if employed at will, then at
any time upon simply quitting the en-
ployment. And, If bound by his own
agreement to refrain from joining the
union stated period of employment
he is in no different situation from that
which is necessarily incident to con-
tracts in general
Justice Day Dissents.
"FOr constitutional freedom of con-
tract does not mean that n party is to
be as free after making the contract
as before: he is not free to break it
without accountability. Freedom Of
contract in the very nature of the
thing can be enjoyed only by being eX-
ercised and each particular exercise
of 1t involves making an engagement
which. if fulfilled. prevented for the