Evening star., 1937-03-30


sort of education dispensed at Brook
wood and Commonwealth Colleges.
In the first place they admit the
rights of private property. This Is
essential if they are to be consistent
with their oft-repeated protests that
they have no leanings in the direc-
ton Of communism and that their
tactics are within the law as it now
exists But they are TO ced to stretch
to its breaking point the meaning OF
the term private propeltv"--to set
up the contention that mans Job
is his property in about the same sense
as his house, his factory or his auto
mobile.
II any court can be brought to admit
this the whole issue Of legality, Of
course, S placed in an entirely diff
ferent light. The sit-down striker is
protecting his job-his private prop
erty he contention is clearly ex-
pressed by Wyndham Mortimer, vice
president of the U. A. w. A., as fol-
lows: rs it wrong for a worker to
stay at his Job? The laws Of the State
and Nation recognize in hundred
ways that the worker has definite
claim upon his job. More fundamen-
tally, it Is recognized that every work.
man has a moral right to continue on
his job unless some definite mScon-
duct justifes his discharge. These
sit-doWn strikers are staying at their
workplaces Moody has better right
to be there than the men themselves.
No one else, certainly, has any right
to these positions. The sit-down
strikers have performed valuable
services in those factories. General
Motors and the public alike have
profited by these services. To call
them trespassers now, and to deny
their right as human beings to re-
main with their jobs, is logically un-
sound and is manifestly unjust"
Right to Job Held Sacred.
And Homer Martin, the unions ex-
minister president, declares: What
more sacred property right is there in
the world than the right Of a man to
his job? This property right involves
the right to support his family, feed
his children and keep starvation away
from his door. This property right Is
the very foundation stone Of American
homes. L is the -lost sacred. most
fundamental property right in Amer
lea. It means more to the sterilization
of American life, morally, socially and
economically, than any other property
right"
"A pamphlet just issued by the
unions educational department states
the issue as follows: "The sit-down
strike has served notice on society that
mere ownership does not carry with
it all possible rights with reference to
factory. Those who work in 1t, who
make it produce with their labor and
depend upon it for livelihood should
likewise have a voice in its control.
Those who invest their lives in an in
dustry have at least as much at stake
as those who merely invest their
money. 1t is interesting to note that,
in the sit-down strike, workers are
re-establishing control over the tools
of production which the. lost with
the industrial revolution"
But, the pamphlet admits, "this
theory will be rejected by most Judges
today. In time it may be accepted Is
good law. The legal concept Of prop
erty rights has changed and developed
with usage"
This seems to be the heart Of the
whole concept. The law will follow
usage, the strikers claim, rather than
usage follow the dead letter Of the law
into a status of society to deal with
which it was not framed. A cardinal
principle of law, they claim, has been
the undisputable right Of workman
to his tools. His furniture can be
seized, his home taken away from him,
even the clothes taken of his back,
but no sheriff can take possession of
his tools-presumably his sole means
of livelihood. He can sit on his tool
box and defy the world.
Old Rights Now Meaningless.
This was very fine in its day, the
automobile union officials say. It was
a clear recognition by the law itself
Of 4 mans inalienable property right
in his means Of livelihood. But the
specific rights defined to support the
broad basic right vsrs especially NJ