The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1922-04-29
GOVERNMENT NOT NEUTRAL.

Tie power Of government is behind
federal injunctions that now plaster
the mining sections of West Virginia.
Most of these injunctions are in
support of the individual contract,
which anti-union coal owners make
their employees sign before they give
them work.
In this contract the worker agrees
not to join union while so employed.
This contract was upheld by the Unit
ed States supreme court in Decem-
Der, 1917, in the case Of Hitchman VS..
miners. Since then West Virginia coal
owners, especially, have used this
method to enlist the government in
their war on the Miners union under
the guise of maintaining the right
of contract.'
There can be no greater mockery
than to call this forced pledge econ
tract.' Miners contemporary refer
to it as "yellow dog.' 1t violates the
first element Of contract making
that both parties to a contract must
be free agents; that there must be an
absence of force or intimidation, and
that the signing Of a contract must
be voluntary act by both parties.
1t is idle to say that the elements
of contract-making apply to miners
in the mountains of West Virginia
who, with their families, are far re-
moved from industrial centers.
The miner cannot offer his services
as does the worker in populated cen.
tiers. His choice is limited to mining
that is controlled by a small group of
men who act together.
Who will say that under these con-
ditions contract making is equal and
the miner is free agent when he is
told that he will not be given work
unless he signs contract not to join.
a trade union while SO enployedf
Who will say that the coal owner
is free from intimidation when he
knows that if the miner does not sign
his wife and children will suffer?
Nothing shows the property bias Of
the judiciary more clearly that tho
Hitchman decision, which overturns
former contract decisions.
In the enforcement of contracts
courts have consistently held that
both parties must have free will; that
there must be no element of force,
coercion or undue advantage.
In the Hickman case the United
States supreme court ignored these
fundamentals that it 50 often declared
for. AS result the Hitchman coal
and coke company, and its kind, car
now hold employees in serfdom with
the aid Of the federal judiciary.
There is neither morality, ethics,
justice or elemental law in the "yel-
low dog.' 1t is based on the hunger
Of babies and the needs of women. 1t
bemeans mon by forcing them to
agree not to do a thing that they have
lawful right to do, and which every
impulse calls upon them to do.
It is Jug handled, one sided and un.
fair. 1t can only be sustained by men
stepped in property ideals.
This is the contract that is general
in West Virginia, and which injunc-
ton judges are rushing to support. As
these judges are backed by every pow
er of government how can it be said
that the government is neutral in the
miners struggle for a living wage
and sustaining employment
What can be the thoughts Of these
miners who listened but few years
ago to ship agents tale Of land
across the ocean where all men are
free?
Now these miners see the govern
ment Of that free land upholding q
greedy coal owner who took advant-
age of the needs Of babes and forced
their father to sign a pledge that he
would not join the Miners union.
They see that government warning
trade unionists that they will be fined
and jailed if they talk organization
to miners who surrendered their law
full right and accepted "yellow
aog'' because they were forced to
do so.
Courts may talk about the "sacred'
ness'' of these contracts" Law.
makers may remain silent before the
injustice Of the "yellow dog" and
the inequity of injunction judges, but
the men who risk their lives, whi1e
held in this serfdom, will ask each
other if the ship agent told all hi
knew.
What progress can genuine Ameri
canism make among these worker
AZ -.-',n" +hnv n..h tH:' .:,,t'~.;a
{ Y u. = 81 ,lg p . = r. ID