New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-09-25
A Burlesque Strike.

A Burlesque Strike.
The subterfuge of a general suspen-
sion of work" by which the labor union
chiefs think to escape the odium of having
called a general strike is supremely silly
1t shows that in spite Of all their tall talk
about the Integrity of labor unionism"
and the rights" of workers they have not
the courage of their convictions. If they
had they'd call what they have planned
for Wednesday a strike, they'd fight 1t
through Fundamentally, and they'd glory
in it.
Instead of that their latest action main
tans the whole dispute in the realm OF
technicalites-of labor union politics
where it has been from the beginning.
MANY of the unions have contracts or
work agreements with employers. They
will violate these if they walk out, just
as the employees of the surface lines
violated their agreement when they struck.
These unions hope to preserve a shadow
of good faith by insisting that they will
work if the employers furnish union trans
portation to the place of employment.
The plain truth is that the leaders are
asking the unionists to do thing which
Justice cannot sanction and common sense
cannot defend. A general strike, or even
general stoppage of work, would impose
great hardship on the public at large, OF
which the unionists themselves and their
families form a part. They are being
asked to stop the milk for their babies and
the bread for their tables.
/ 1t is entirely possible that some Of the
unions, in a mistaken spirit of class
loyalty, will be misguided enough to
undertake such an indefensible endeavor
to bolster up the lost cause of the traction
workers. If they do it will be truly un-
/ fortunate-vastly more unfortunate for
them as unions than for the public. The
public, unquestionably, would be put to
serious incopvenience, to actual hardship,
by a general strike; and in such incon-
venience and hardship the union men and
their families as individuals would share.
\ The unions would have to bear the re-
sponsbility of inficting this hardship by
a sympathetic strike in support of an
original strike where the majority senti-
ment of the community, accurately ex-
pressed by the Mayor and the chairman
of the Public Service Commission, holds
the strikers themselves to be in the wrong.
That burden of responsibility cannot be
minmized. Assuredly it cannot be evaded
by any such ridiculous misstatements as
those of Mr.. Bohm that 'the wish of these
men"-Messrs. Shonts, Hedley, Whitridge,
, Quackenbush and Bergoff-"is the law of
the city to-day. The police force is at their
command. The Mayor, his cabinet and
the Board of Aldermen have ceased to
operate to all intents and purposes. No
person is safe, and every person who
works is in constant danger of losing com
pletely every right and privilege for which
we have fought so long"
The city and the employers are not i'll
the position of attacking labor unions or
labor unionism The labor unions, at
present, are in the position Of threatening
to attack the city, not for real issue, a
big grievance, but in support of leaders
and strikers who broke their word who
treated signed agreement as "a scrap Of
paper" The public, under the circum-
stances, will do the best it can for itself.
If violence recurs it will demand, and get,
the efficient aid of the Police Department
and the courts in stamping out criminal
ity. The community, assailed, will protect
itself in every way possible, and in
evitably, whatever the outcome, will visit
the responsibility for the occurrences on
the unionists who made the attack