Twin city review. [volume] (Champaign, Ill.) 19??-1929, 1921-12-23
PRESIDENTS LABOR
POLICY WOULD
ESTABLISH SLAVERY
"a. f. of l.. News service)

Washington.-"I wonder if the
president remembers the thirteenth
amendment to the constitution?
81 wonder if he knows that slavery
is forbidden in America?
81 wonder if he realizes for what
principle all the blood was shed in
the civil war?
as he trying to turn back the
stream of time and bring back into
this country the day Of the manacle,
when serfs will be made to work at
the dictates of their master?
Are we to establish in this profess
sedly democratic country an autocracy
of employers Of labor?"
The above questions were asked by
Congressman Huddleston of Alabama
in spirited attack on that portion OF
President Harding's message to con-
gress in which he expressed sympathy
for "can't-strike" legislation.
"And what does the president
mean-analyze the language in which
it is framed" continued the law
maker. ut needs no emphasis from
me. 1t is as clear as words can make
it that the policy of the adminlstra-
ton does not contemplate mediation
nor mere arbitration courts, such as
the railroad labor board, but has in
view labor tribunals such as the Kan
sas industrial court.
at means courts with power to
stand over the men who toll and say
to them, You will not quit your job.
Your occupation is charged with a
public interest and you shall continue
IL. f..
decide are fair and just. You shall
not strike before having your disputes
decided by u.s. 1t means a policy on
the part of this administration which
will take away the right that working
men in this country have had to de-
eide their own affairs for themselves.
at means that men will be thrown
into jails who dare to strike without
asking the permission of some court
created by congress and composed of
the appointees of the present admin
istration.
at has remained for the chief ex-
ecutive of this nation to recommend
a policy toward men who labor be-
yond comparison with any govern
ment in the world.
"As between workers and employ
ers, fights can never be altogether
fair fights. Each side in a labor
fight has different things at stake.
With an employer it is matter, per-
haps, or some more bank shares or
finer home; perhaps a marble palace
instead of one of brick. 1t is merely
matter of another limousine or an
other cluster of jewels for his wife
and another aigrette in her bonnet.
1t is merely matter of profits from
his point. Oh, it is not such an aw-
fully important matter with the en-
ployer. But with the man who otils
his bread is at stake.
1.-THE struggle between the employ
err and employee can never be fair
fight. One has in the scale only a
question of profits. The other has
the means of existence for his wife
and children at stake.
"Such a fight can never be a fair
fight, yet when conditions are even
fairly equal, when there is meas
ure of prosperity, then you may have
a certain admiration for the hard
handed employer who goes down into
fight with his employe.
"Oh, we all love fair fight. But
what about hitting a man when he
is down? What about hitting the
worker when his hands are tied,
What about hitting the workers when
they are walking the streets, ragged
and starving? And how about the
working mans wife and children, for
whom he is responsible and who are
dependent upon him 7"