The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1922-07-13
and INDUSTRIAL COURTS
Topeka. Kan. July IS. 1922.

State Journal there appeared an
article signed by ]. H. Howard in
which an attempt was made to dis
cuss the relations of labor to the con-
stituted laws of this country and
charging labor and labor organiza-
tions in particular with being CEN
turtles behind the times.
1t appears to a casual observer that
the author of that article has formed
his oponion not on facts, but from in
formation obtained, not from an un-
biased source. The history of the
labor movement has been one of con-
structive and not obstructive progress,
and has at all times taken into con-
sideration the betterment and uDlift-
ing OF the human race, and I chat
lenge the contradiction of this state
ment.
The courts of this country recognize
the right of the employees to quit work
singly or collectively, and the attempt
of the author to class the railroad
employees as lawbreaKers, or as de-
flying the government in the present
controversy with the railroads is not
logical or consistent with facts. There
is not any class of citizens more loyal
or law-abiding than the men en-
ployed in service of the railroads.
In the first place, the present dis
pute is not a controversy between the
government and the employees of the
railroads, but against the acceptance
of certain overtime rules governing
rates of pay for Sunday and holiday
work performed; rules allowing the
railroads to discriminate between the
union and nonunion man applying for
employment and retroactive and OBJ
structive decisions handed down by
the railroad labor board. Thru some
of these decisions, conditions have
workers that have been enjoyed by
them for the last thirty-five years.
The present cut in wages ordered by
the board was in violation of the prin-
ciples of the Cummings-Esch bill
which created the board, as the evil
-dence presented by tho representa-
tives of the organizations to the board
was indisputable, and was not con-
troverted by the railroad executives,
that a reduction of wages was not JUS
titled under the present living costs,
but instead the employees were en-
titled to an increase. This tribunal is
not an unbiased body; neither are its
decisions mandatory, but are optlonal
upon both the employer and the EN-
ployes. The instigators and creators
of the labor board, the railroad in
terests, were the first ones to disobey
the mandates of this bo0y, when they
did not get just what they were de-
sirous of securing, as numerous de-
cisions OF the board were Haunted
directly and indirectly by the execu-
tives of the railroads, and no one OBJ
served Mr.. Howard getting into print,
telling them they were lawbreakerS
and were in defiance of the United
States government. This would lead
one to assume that there must be
some impressions in the minds of
some people that the railroads are
the government, or there is an ad- |
mission on the part of Mr.. Howard
that he is either biased in his views
or unacquainted with the facts. The
following statement Is made:
"Of course. the present strike is in
defiance of the United States govern |
ment, and if our government is to con- |
tinue to function, it must uphold the |
decision of its courts" Anyone con-
versant with the composition of the ,
labor board. the method of its crea- |
ton and the powers delegated to it
under the law would not be supposed |
to infer that the board was a court |
or that anyone, whether it be either |
the railroad executive or their en-
ployes, were law violatorS in refusing
to obey its findings, as the board has
not the right to interpret law, such as
given to any legal tribunal known as
a court.
The deductions drawn IN his state |
ment lack the qualities of logic and |
are not analogous to the controversy |
that exists at this time; in other words |
1t is beside the facts and in no way
related to the present situation.
The South defied Uncle Sam in !
81, but failed. Others have tried the |
same TOT snort time, but failed"
etc. is along the same line of thought !
expressed in other parts of that letter, |
and tends to prove that the author of |
the article has not made a thOro study |
of the existing conditions, but is bas-
ing his viewpoint on the present state
of his own mind and the saying: THE |
wish expresses the thought" is applica |
BILE to the conclusions drawn in that
article. I again wish to set the mind /,
of Mr.. Howard at rest on the point !
that the railroad employees are not in |
defiance" of the government or any
of its laws; neither did they suspend
work in defiance of any other recog- |
niZed constituted law. but that they
are wholly within their rights guar
anteed them by the constitution of this
great and glorious United States.
The slur intended to be reflected
upon organized labor in the last para
graph of his letter in which he in |
cIudes Mexicans, 1. w. WIS with union !
laborites is a statement not to be con-
sidered lightly by anyone in its max
ing, and, of course, coming from the |
same source as other wild differences
and statements, will not be seriously
considered by anyone capable of
thinking for himself. 1t is highly i'm
probable that the citizens of Topeka |
and the state of K~nsas would be led
to believe. or agree that there is any
Justification for drawing such a con-
clusion.
Yours truly,
= II A