Twin city review. [volume] (Champaign, Ill.) 19??-1929, 1923-01-26

Following Is an analysis
OF the Mills bill officially
known as II. K. 1897. lhls
analysis was adopted by the
convention OF the lnterna-
tlonal Seamen's Union held
IN New York City, January
) To 10. 1t is furnished for
the information OF all who
may be interested IN the
Mills bill or in any other
legislation of a similar char
acter.
II. K. 1892. 4 Bin To make valid
and enforceable written provisions or
,, agreements for arbitration Of dis
putes arising oat of contracts. mani
time transactions. or commerce among
the States or Territories OF with for
elgn nations. Introduced in the
house by Mr. Mills OF New York.
Section IL enaets that TINS Act may
De referred To as The United States
Arbitration Act. mus TINS Act is
given It's proper name-Ihe Arhitra-
uon Act fne name is proper be
| cause 10 will put the arbitef IN place
OF the Court. Ii will take away from
All citizens, except those who have
the knowledge and the money TO hire
the best lawyers and VINO can afford
TO walt, the present right to day
In Court.
Let a clause to arbitrate be placed
IN any contract, and any dispute about
the meaning and enforcement Of the
contract must be referred to arbitra-
ton, and the Court with all the Saxon
rules of procedure and constitutional
guarantees ceases to operate. The
clause to arbitrate may be added TO
any contract after it is entered into
either before or after disagreement
has arisen. When so inserted il is
controlling, and the Courts duty is
not to hear and determine, but to or
der arbitration to proceed and TO en-
force the award. For this purpose
all the powers of the court.-legal and
equitable-must be used.
There can be but little doubt about
the power of the Court. The Courts
power will rest upon the fact that a
freeman-one of the American Sow
ereigns-has granted this right 10 the
other party and being a grant from
the Sovereign, it becomes vested
right. As between individuals there
does not seem TO be any question
about the eonstitutionality but If
there be, then the obiter dicta by the
majority of the Supreme Court in
the case of Robertson VS.. Baldwin
would seem 10 cover the case pretty
well. In substance the Court, in con
STRUNG the 18th Amendment, fasten-
ed itself upon the word "Involuntary."
Could service ever become involun-
tary if it was voluntarily entered into,
and then it held that the seamen hav-
ing voluntarily entered into the serv-
ice, he was not in involuntary seryi-
tude. The seaman having made the
contract to serve must serve. The
railroad man having enterea into a
contract to serve with an arbitration
clause inserted must continue to
serve, because such contract becomes
through this law, if enacted, valid,
enforceable, irreyocaDle, save upon
such grounds as exist at law or in
equity for the revocation of any con-
tract" (Section p. Amy existing
controversy arising out OF such con-
tract, transaction, or REFUSAL" tSec-
ton p goes 10 the arbitrator for de-
cision and to the Court for enforce
ment. Thus it seems certain that this
bill provides for reintroducti0n of
forced or involuntary labor, if the
freeman through his necessities shall
be induced to sign. viii such con-
tracts be signed? Esau agreed, be-
cause he was hungry. 1t was the de-
sire to live, that caused slavery to
begin and to continue. With the
growing hunger in modern society,
there will be but few that will be able
to resist. The personal hunger Of
the seaman, and the hunger of the
wife and children of the railroad man
will surely tempt them to sign, and
so with sundry other workers In In
terstate and Foreign Commerce"
With reference to the seaman 1t
will be an easy matter. Place in the
contract to labor-the shipping aru-
cles-any rider not specifically pro-
hibited by law, and the articles are
loaded down with such already, and
then at the end of the articles rider