The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1922-09-25
.GoMPERs SEES STRIFE.

"The Kansas industrial court is the
backward road to yesterday; it is the
road to strife, distrust and hostility;
there can be no peace, no progress
and no freedom on that road and
American labor will not go that way"
Thus states Samuel GompeFs, pres
ideEt of the American Federation of
Labor, in a discussion NOf the now ia
nous Kansas court OF industrial re-
iations and the law that brought it
into being, in the October issue of
1.-The Rotarian," the organ of the
Rotary clubs, The article by Mr..
Gompers in the current issue of 1.-THE
I.otar.an" is in the nature of a reply
to an article which appeared in a re-
cent issue of the same magazine by
Governor Henry ]. Allen ~ot Kansas
on the results of the operations of
the Kansas experiment IN Industrial
relations during the past two years.
Following are some of the chief
points raised by Mr.. Gompers, in his
attack on the Kansas law and the
Kansas court of Industrial relations:
Labor makes two principal asser-
tions in opposition to the industrial
court which apply to all forms of
state- compuision in the settlement of
Industrial disputes. First, the under
lying principle is undemocratic and
therefore Objectionable; second, in
practice the idea does not work, it
does not achieve its prime purpose.
THE law has failed in that while
it prohibits an employer from estab-
fishing a lockout or IL blacklist-and
in Governor Aliens language denies
to employees the right to enter into d
conspiracy to close the 1actory'-both
sides regularly disregard these COM
mands, In the cases where the court
has settled strikes, it has acted more
in the role of mediator than in that
of a judicial arbiter and mediation is
a policy favored by the unions them
selves.
/"Ih the packing house strike the
court issued no decision at all, Fetir-
ing from the field completely after an
ineffective and totally disregarded
initial gesture. Furthermore a strike
Is not a conspiracy to close the fac
tory If the workers find it impos-
sibletto accept proposals made by the
employer they cease to work. Labor
asserts that in thus oeasing to work,
the workers are exercising a lawful,
constitutional and moral right. Labor
also maintains that the right to quit
work must be retained inViolate if
freedom is to be preserved. The es-
esential difference between free men
and slaves is that free men may quit
work and move from pace to place
in accordance with their own will and
regardless of either the wishes of the
employer or the state. No matter
with what fine phraseology the Kan
SaS lQea may De ciOakeU, the truth Is
that It seeks to establish a condition
of involuntary servitude, a condition
whereinf men may not of their free
will leave their work and so else
Where.'
To certain alleged industrial mall
adjustments to which Governor Allen
refers in connection with restriction
of output, and the latter's statement
that cit was necessary 10 do away
with the pernicieus idea that Labor
prospers most when it works least"
Mr.. Gompers replies as follows:
Upon the signing of the armistice
reactionaTy employers generally re-
solved upon a course OF conduct cal
eulated to reduce wages and to de-
teriorate the conditions of labor. La
Dor proclaimed that it would resist
these efforts to the utmost. The
standards which had been established
we're standards which approached JUS
lice and equity, and lapor was re-
solved to maintain those standards.
10 resist in every proper and lawful
manner the attempts OF these reae-
ionary employers. The American
srade-union movement has never
either tolerated or pFactioed restric-
ion of output. There may be isolated