The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1921-03-26
LIVE, LET LIVE AND HELP LIVE

"Ihc right to live and let live is a God given right and all
rights will be protected by the court
The foregoing paragraph is quoted from a decision Of Justice
Erangcr OF the New York supreme court. The soundness OF the
principle laid down is so apparent that it vodld seem a waste OF
words for the high court to announce it. ~
The right TO live and let live" Is IT possible that anybody
will question rights so clearly fundamental? Still we must con-
eludc that somebody was attempting to override these rights
otherwise Justice Granger would not have thought it necessary
to restatc a principle which the common-sense OF justice Of man
kind SO generally recognizes as right. Ef
The decision from which we have quoted was handed down in
a case in which the court was asked to enjoin strikers from inter-
fering with other men who desired to work. The right of men to
strike was not denied but reasoning from the principle OF 'livc and
let live, the court could not rule otherwise than that the alleged
interference on the part OF the strikers with those who wished to
work was unlawful.
in line with basic ideas of morality but also in accordance with the
constitutional guarantees to life, liberty and the pursuit OF hap
piness." If the workman or the man engaged in any line Of bust
ness is not to be free to pursue his own purposes in the way he
wishes so long as he does not interfere with the rights OF his
felowmen, there is no such thing as liberty in this country.
We would not consider it worth while to refer to the simple
principle enunciated by the New York court If right here in our
to disregard it. We refer to the letter which was addressed to
the Early Hotel in which the writer declared, you will have to
sign the union contract or get out of business; we will close thai
business if you don't" We do not here discuss the merits of the
controversy between the hotel proprietors and the Union or
chnge the latter with responsibility for the letter but we do as
set that it is wholly within the province of the hotel proprietors to
decide whether they wish to sign this or any other contract and
therefore, the threat of the letter writer to put them out OF bust
ness for their refusal to sign a contract is entirely indefensble
either on moral or legal grounds. The writer of this letter appar-
emily has no conception of the principle involving the right to
pei compliance with the demands of anybody that any business
shall be conducted in a particular manner, there is no such thing as
the right to Give and let live" and the constitutional guarantee of
liberty is of no effect. If one set of men may say, IF you don't
sign a union contract, we will put you out of business another
set may with equal propriety say, "f you do sign a union contract
we will destroy your business" In both cases there would be a
total disregard of "God-given rights and the conduct of those at
tempting to carry out such threats would be utterly immoral and
illegal, contrary to all principles Of justice and righteousness as
recognized by decent men.
As far as the law is concerned, only the rights to Give and
let live" are guaranteed, but when real civilization steps i'll the re-
quirements go still further. What a fine world it would be and
how much better it would be for all if to the principle, Live and
let i've" we would add: Help to live. Live and let live" is mere
ly negative; it is the least that anybody can do to comply with
the law, but Help to live will make positively for the prosperity
and happiness of everybody. Help to live" not only places no OBJ
stacle in the way OF anybody i'll the exercise of his rights, but it
also commands us to aid in removing each others difficulties and
smoothes our misunderstanding which cause friction. Help to
live" is a cornary of the Golden Rule and if it is applied by both
the employer and employee, it will solve the whole problem of
capital and labor.