The New York herald., 1922-09-02
COMPERS CONSIDERS CALL
FOR "A GENERAL STRIKE

, American Federation OF Labor that Mr..
Gompers and the executive committee
were at liberty To make any recommen-
dation they saw M.
Keeps Replies TO Himself.
Asked what counsel or advice he had
given In reply to the demands for a
general strike, Mr.. Gompers replied !:
II would prefer to keep my replies to
myself at this time. Perhaps when the
strike is over in a month or two e might
be we'll to give them out"
Referring to the various acts prohib-
tied under the Injunction. Mr.. Gompers
said that he did not wish TO appear face
tious, but he pointed out that the radio
had not been covered In the Injunction.
He wondered whether the ether OF the
air was to be entoined by the court.
Referring to other railway organiza-
tions In the A. =. of l.. thai might be
involved in a general strike. Mr.. Com
pers remarked: THE Government,
through its AttorneyG General. may have
stirred up q hornets nest rather than
piaca;ed the men and found a solution
to the situation
Mr.. Gompers declared he dfo not know
WHO was guilty Of acts of sabotage on
the railroads. But, he asserted. IL was
UNJUST and unwarranted to accuse the
strikers" He pointed out that the rail-
road companies employed private detec-
tives. gunner and agents provocateur
who might as well. rs The strikers, be
responsible for these acts. Law violators,
I e said. get no aid or comfort from him.
Mr.. Gompers said that he could not
say at this time when future conferences
would be held with the railroad brother
hoods. He said that he mad had no con-
ference with Bert NJ. Jewell. head OF the
Railroad Employees Department OF the
A. F. OF L. to-day. II would not at this
time" he said. when everybody Is
watching"
Calls 1t LAW Violation.
Mr.. Gompers read sections 6. 10 and
20 OF the Clayton antitrust law passed
early in the Wilson administration, and
declared that the Chicago court order
was "in direct violation OF this law"
Section 6, Mr.. Gompers citeu, declared
that human labor Is not :. commodity or
article OF commerce and that nothing
contained In the Antitrust laws shall
forbid existence and operation OF labor,
AGRICULTURAL or horticulture, organiza-
tons. or to forbid or restrain individual
members OF such organizations from
idWluliy CuliS ih5 ous iSoANA''1sS 0SSNS~~
thereof.
Section 10 provides that every order
or Injunction or restraining order shall
set forth the reason for its issuance
shall be specific in terms and shall de-
scribe In reasonable detail the act or
acts sought to be restrained and will
only be binding on those receiving actual
service by the court.
Section 90 provides that no injunction
shall be granted in any case between
employer and employee involving or
growing out OF q dispute concerning
conditions Of employment unless neces-
sary to prevent irreparable injury TO
property. for which injury there Is no
adequate remedy at law 1t further
provides that such property must be de-
scribed in the application and sworn To-.
In connection with Section 20 M.
Gompers was asked Has the Govern
ment OF the United States property
right involvcd?"
He said the word conspiracy as used
In the injunction twas one of those
legalistic terms injected to confuse the
situation"
He asserted there had been no con-
spiracy on the part OF the shopmen. He
declared they merely "counciled' to pre-
vent the invasion OF their rights and
reduction OF their wages He said. III
It were not so tragcal 1t would be
farcical to say that 100000 men entered
into conspiracy