The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1917-04-21
labor "INIQUITIES'' -THE
SALVATION Or THE WORLD

Philadelphia Progressive Labor
World: Not so long ago the Supreme
Court of the United States finally de
creed the boycott illegal.
Not so many years ago the Supreme
Court of American Industries decreed
the sympathetic strike intolerable, in
defensible, outlawed, a blot on civil
lied law and order, anarchy.
Nothing that organized labor ever
stood for has been more thoroughly
condemned by the press, business, pull
pit and the courts than the boycott
and the sympathetic strike.
Hero in Philadelphia the sympa-
thetic strike principle put into effect
by the building trades was met with
determined opposition from master
builders and the business world in
general. And what happened here
happened all over the country. Lead
ers of sympathetic strikes were
branded as public enemies. Some of
the country's ablest magazine writer's
travelled through the land to "expose''
these sympathetic strike agitators.
The sympathetic strike, the right of
a workingman with no grievance of
his own to strike in sympathy with a
fellow workingman with a. grievance
against the common employer of both
workingmen, was discredited by every
means at the command Of employers
and their powerful associations.
Employers of all classes Joined to-
sether In movement against the
sympathetic strike. They did, in fact,
organize sympathetic strike Of their
own against labor's sympathetic
strike.
The boycott at the same time was
fought out in our courts and the
judges could see nothing in the
boycott except an illegal conspiracy
in restraint of trade" The courts not
only decreed the boycott illegal but
went even to the extreme of empow-
ering employers to collect from indi-
vidual members of trade unions such
damages as they claimed to have suf-
fered from the boycott. The case of
the union hatters whose homes were
taken from them because their union
had boycotted an unfair employer is
still fresh in the mind of all labor or
CARNATIONS.
But we learn at last that the SYM
pathetic strike and the boycott, after
all, are not such iniquities.
One of the judges who ruled against
the boycott was Judge William How
ard Taft. We have too high regard
for the former president of the United
States to imagine for moment that
his anti-boycott ruling was inspired
NV hut h nho c+
No doubt Judge Taft gave the matter
thorough and conscientious considera
ton. 1t may be taken for granted
that Judge Taft was absolutely honest
in his opinion that the boycott was
illegal, roprehensible and damnable.
More than this, William Howard
Taft to this moment is probably not
aware of the fact that he now stands
at the head OF a boycott movement.
That Professor Taft today is advo-
eating the sympathetic strike principle
has proba bly, never daWned upon him.
But he is.
AS the leader of the movement for
the formation to enforce peace, Pro-
fessor Taft proposes to combine the
nations of the world in a boycott on
war. Professor Taft further proposes
that the league of nations to enforce
peace by boycotting war shall COM
bine their strength, all their army and
navy power, in 4 gigantic sympathetic
strike against any nation violating the
boycott rules of nations.
But Professor Taft does not stand
alone in his changed attitude towards
the principle of sympathetic strikes
and boycotts.
When Germany backed up Austria
against Servia and Russia, it was q
sympathetic strike. When France
went to the support Of Russia, it was
another sympathetic strike, and one
which "wilfully and deliberately" as
our courts say, was carried out in &C
cordance with treaty obligations.
When England went into the war in
defense of Belgium neutrality, it was
another sympathetic strike, and, In
deed, the sympathetic nature of this
strike has been England's hottest and
most sacred excuse for her war.
And what else than sympathetic
strike is it when the United States
of all neutrals?
ana Wn6n TI0S1ucuI tVAlSOA DIOhO
off relations with Germany on account
of that country's determination to
wage unrestrained submarine warfare
in total disregard of the rights of
neutrals, what else was that than
boycott on "frightfulness"
When President Wilson then went
step further and sent his note to all
neutrals inviting them to join with the
United States in severing relations
with Germany as their protest against
the unrestrained submarine warfare,
what else was this than a call for a
sympathetic strike?
OF course, President Wilson has
never seen either boycott or a SYM
pathetic strike in any Of his actions.
He would probably deny that his &C
ton against German ''frightfulness" Is
any way to be compared with synpa-
thetic strikes or boycotts. We doubt
President Wilson's opinion about these
labor measures has changed in any
way. And what is true about Presi-
dent Wilson Is probably true about
Professor Taft.
But the application of labor's SYM
pathetic strike and boycott principles
to world problems is so plain that
there can be no denial Of the fact.