The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1915-01-25
TRIBUNAL
ANNOLS KANSAS
COERCION LAW
Justices Holmes and Day En-
ter Strong Dissenting 0piE-
ions in Case Which Is I'm
portant to Labor World.


Washington. Jan. 2a.-The Kansas
SPECIALIZED coercion statute. making II
unlawful for any individual or core
pornfion to cocrcc or influence my
persons 10 enter INTO an agreement
no; to Join OF remain u member of a
labor organization as o condition Of
such person securing or continuing In
the employment Of such individual or
Corporation. was today annuiied rs
Unconstitutional by the supreme
court.
Tho decision was regarded NJ Of
lthe first Importance IN the labor
world and was announced hy Justice
Pitney. strong dissenting opinions
were given By Justice Holmes and
Justice Day Justice Hughes coA-
CURED with Justice Day. icaving
Chief Justice White and Justices Me-
Kenna. Lamar. vandevan'er and Me-
Reynolds ~concurring with Justice
Pitney.
The decision was In the case OF T.
y. Coppage, a superintendent OF the
81. Louis a san Francisco railway at
Fort Scott Kan. convicted Of vio-
lating the law In threatening 4. n.
Hedge. q s%witchman. with discharge
M he did not sign an agreement to
Withdraw from the S~witchmen's
union.
The court intlmates nothing in
consistent with the right Of individ-
uah 90 Join labor unions said jus
tee Pitney. "Nor II the legitimacy
OF such organizations questioned 80
long as they conform to the laws Of
Ihs NunsN - afEaNa. -. W-..s..aan a. u.
But b individual has no inherent
right to join the union and still re-
main In the employ OF whoever T. un-
willing TO employ q union man any
more than the same individual has q
right 90 join the union without the
consent Of that organization.
Just as labor organizations have
the inherent and constitutional right
90 deny membership 90 any man who
will not agree that during such mem
bership ne will not accept or retain
employment IN company with non
union men. md just az a union man
has the constitutional right To decline
prohercd employment unless the en-
pioyer will agree not 10 employ any
n%on-uniOn man. 50 the employer has
the constitutional right 90 insist that
the employe shall refrain from afnl-
iation with the union during the term
OF the employment.
There cannot be one rule 81 lib
crty FOR the labor organization or ita
members and n different and more
restrictive rule fot employers.
"The employees liberty OF makius
contracts d9cs not include "a iibert;
To- procure employment from unWill'
ing employers or without "a fair uu.
d-erstanding Nor may the employer
be forecloscd by legislation from oV.
erclsing the same freedom 81 choice
that Is accorded to the cmployc
ITO ask 70 man 20 agree in advance
TO refrain from uflliltiou OF The
union. while retaining "a certain po
sit,in ~ employment. is not Go ash
him TO agree Co give up any part %
his constitutional freedom. He
free 60 decline the employment pl
those terms. just as the employer ma
decline Ia offer employment ON an
other, Tor 10 takes two to make
bagaiu.'
And. hayifV accepted employment
on those terms. the man is sim IRE
TO Join the union when the period o
employment expires, or 81 employee
nj viii. then az any time upon simpl
uuittiur the employment, and, .
bound by his own agreement to re-
frain from Joining the union during
stated period a. employment, te
In no different situation from 'h'
which Is necessarily incident To con
tracts In general