The Detroit times., 1916-07-28
.BANQUO'S
GHOST is THE
HATTERS' CASE
tContinued from Page opsl

workmen. viii be more than out
weighed by the Dsnbury Hatters
decision.
To those not In actual touch with
the labor movement, this attitude
viii be a surprise II will doubtless
surprise Hughes.
To understand this situation II is
necessary 10 see what the Danbury
Hatyers' decision means 10 labor.
The Danbury Hatters' decision had
a three-foid meaning 10 labor
First, II definitely deprived labor
81 the boycott. one OF its most ef.
fect!ye weapons
Second, g made each individual
union man definitely answerable IN.
der the sherman Ac, for all the &C
tivities OF his organization.
Third i; showed labor like a
flash oi lightning he absolute An
fairness with which the law was
Enforced against labor as compared
with capital
In addition there was a stron z
sentimental appeal in the fact that
Ia this case The law IN its utmos,
severity was being enforced against
a oand ot old and 'in.lrm meE, who
rad grown gray while the I5year.
ola case was he!rg prosecuted
aeains' them.
The Standard OIL and American
Tobacco decisions. in which Hughes
also concurred, had been rendered
JUST long enough for their memoir
still 20 be fresh, while at The same
time their grinly tarcical effects IN
increasing the value OF he corporate
securities and their own strange
hold on their respective indus'ries
could DO plainly seen. Labor re
me1,le-ei that the court in handing
down The Standard OF and Amer
can Tobacco decisions had shown it,
complete familiarity with the Grim.
iual careers OF those corporations.
rad roundly denounced their prac.
tees, and had dismissed them
without any Punishment except a
fake dissolution
Labor remembered also that, as
shown By the congressional record
the Sherman Act was not intended
70 apply 70 labor organizations
The reason that Hughes indorse-
ment 81 labor's right to organize as
expressed In the dissenting opinion
IN The COppage - Kansas case. car
ries little weight with the workers
is very simple
"Of what use" they say. lis an alb
stract right 20 organize and 10 be
protected from being discharged for
being member OF a trade union
when he employer can nre you for
any other reason under the sun on
a moments notice, and when, by the
very court that pretends 70 give US
the right 20 organize. every weapon
except that OF peaceful starvation
under the guise ~ strike 10 taken
from u.s. We cannot boycott. we
cannot picket, under certain cir
curnstances we cannot even strike
under the decisions OF the court
without coming up against a Law
administered for the employers b.
the employers agents"
To tho academic uplifter. Hughes
Confirmation Of the Legislation in
behalf % women and children will
carry grea, weight To labor u
viii probably infer little; partly be
cause labor r unable 20 understand
how any disinterested man could re
fuse ne needed protection 10 women
and children bit even more because
it does not regard these things as
fundamental Give US the right 20
organize ard Ugh, FOR better wages"
they say. and ne will protect our
owl women and children better than
the Law"
These labor law decisions. Judged
abFtrscfIy DO not mark Hughes as
political progressive, take u.
and especially AZ In every case they
received the unanimous concurrence
OF the supreme court, which includes
many reactionaries.
But, however progressive Hughes
may become IN his campaign. when
ever he meets labor. he may expect
to hear OF the Danbury Hatters' de-
Banquo's ghost az the
FEAST
Hanly's third article on breaking
the silence OF Silent Hughes" will
BE- printed in this paper tomorrow