Milford chronicle., 1920-03-05
CONVINCING ARGUMENT
FOR ANTI-STRIKE CLAUSE

Washington, Jan 27-The Republi-
can Publicity Association, through its
President, Hon. Jonathan Bourne, Jr,
today gave out the following state
ment from its Washington headquar-
ters:
Representative c. N. Macarthur of
Oregon is absolutely right in his as
sertion that in the anti-strike pro-
visions of the Cummins Railroad bill
Congress is face to face with the ques
ton, shall we have government of,
by and for the people or shall we have
government of, by and for special in
terests? He is also right in declaring
that the question cannot be lodged
or evaded, and, as it involves a prin-
ciple, it cannot be compromised
by quotations from Supreme Court
decisions, Mr.. Macarthur demonstrates
that it is within constitutional power
of Congress to enact compulsory ar
bitration law and then to prohibit
strikes on railroads. In the decision
which upheld the Adamson Act, over
which the Brotherhoods eXulted, there
was agreement, even in a dissenting
opinion, that Congress has authority
to require compulsory arbitration OF
labor disputes which may seriously
and directly jeopardize the movement
of interstate commerce, and to protect
the free flow of such commerce against
any combination, whether of opera
tors, owners or strangers. Upon that
phase of the question, there is no
room for doubt.
Mr. Macarthur is also sound in his
argument upon the policy of the anti
strike provision. Not only individuals
but the people as whole must go to
the courts for the redress of grieV-
ances and the defense of rights.
There is no such thing as a strike for
the general public; it must submit to
the law of the land and the DEGREES
of the courts. Organized labor, how
ever, wishes to continue its mad orgie
of applying the rule of force for the
settlement of its demands. What is
there so sacred about organized labor
that it cannot submit its grievances to
the legally constituted tribunal for
adjudication% The argument is un-
answerable if we are to pretend to
maintain a government which under
takes to guarantee equal rights for
all and special privileges for none.
"The weakness of the plea that rail-
road employees should not be singled
out for anti-strike legislation is fully
exposed by Mr.. Macarthur when he
says, The answer to that objection is
the lack of jurisdiction of the Federal
Government except in questions affect
ing interstate commerce. Congress
unquestionably has the right to pass
legislation regulating interstate COM
meree and labor connected herewith
but it would not be warranted in en-
tering the field of state of local legis-
lation.' As Justice McKenna said,
When one enters into interstate COM
merce, one enters into a service in
which the public has no interest, and
subjects oneself to its behests. And
this is no limitation of liberty; it is
the consequence of liberty exercised,
the obligation of his undertaking, and
constrains no more than the contract
"The Cummins bill compels no man
TO enter railroad employment, and re-
luires no man to remain in such en-
ployment. All it does is forbid him
10 enter into conspiracy to interfere 4
with interstate commerce.
Mr.. McArthur's presentation of the
subject, thus briefly referred to. is 4
clear convincing, and unanswerable
courageously presented az
/ time when the vengeance of the
abor unions is threatened as a pun
shment for his unequivocal stand. ltH
viii be worth the while of any student
# the subject to read the address in
ull as it appears in the Congressional
record" III