Evening star., 1946-07-21

oIlCS upon tlIllc IL WdS iC6oiaC oo
a matter of absolute right for man or
a group of men owning business to
close it down, throw all employees out OF
work and keep the plant doors locked
until the owner or owners in their own
sound Judgment felt impelled to reopen
on their own terms.
Once upon time it was regarded as
a matter of absolute right for two or
more owners Of certain properties to
combine resources, corner markets and
fix their own price and profit for the
goods sold. If they wished to squeeze
out" the little fellow nobody stopped
them. They could under-cut. prices until
a market price far below cost would
eventually send the little man to the
wall.
Such activities continued until pres
sure from the public prodded public rep
resentatives into regulating practices
that threatened the public interest. The
corrective was law. Law against trusts
and monopolies. Law against restraint
of trade. Law against unfair conbina-
tions. Law requiring collective bargain
ing
The concept of government by law
as distinguished from a government
by men has been our greatest national
treasure If citizen is defrauded to-
day, or injured by any one, his recourse
under a government by law is the courts.
We have to resort to courts and law,
regardless of the fact that quicker and
more satisfying means Of redress, such
as brute force, are sometimes available.
Enforced Work Questioned.
Only short weeks ago We were faced
with the shutdown of one of our basic
fuels, with resultant stoppages of the
plants that give us light and power, of
transporta ton that brings us our food
and supplies, all of the necessities of
life Again from another source We were
faced with the paralysis of transporta-
ton.
On the heels of the threat came stri-
dent clamor for relief. Panic-bred frenzy
produced proposals directly akin to to-
talitarian methods. A few cool, calm,
courageous figures argued for diSpaS-
sionate, far-seeing planning. The Pres
ident suggested drastic stop-gap and
then followed up by more reasonable
suggestions of long-range policy PLAN
ming.
The problem is delicate one. 1t in
wolves freedom. Can men be free if
they are forced to work by government
edict? Do not the, people who contend
that the government is theirs become
mere pawns of their government if that
government can force them to work at
the point of a bayonet?
On the other hand, can minority in
a democratic nation rule, starve, freeze
or dictate to majority, even if the
minority has been subjected to unfair
ness, indecency, inequity and eXploita-
ton? Is the government supreme or
must it .cede its sovereignty to stra-
logically powerful minority of the
people? Is 'the right to strike" really
sacred right?
Two Propositions Cited.
proceed analytically and dispassionately,
Proposition One: No group of citi-
zens has a right under any circum-
stances to starve its fellow citizens.
This is automatic.
Proposition Two: Any group of citi-
zens making substantial contributions
to the daily life of all the citizens Is
certainly entitled to a return for such
contribution in some fair ratio to its
value.
For the sake of argument with respect
to this proposition, let us suppose that
the coal miner, who is essential in pro-
viding commodity that moves our in
dustry, gives us warmth and brings us
our food and supplies, feels that he is
being rewarded for that contribution
with pig-sty for a home and trash
dump for lawn. He certainly cannot
be criticized, then, if that be the case,
for fixing his mind on procuring more
decent conditions.
Still for the sake of argument, let it
be admitted that decent living condi-
tions comprise the end he seeks. Then
we come to the first step in the analysis.
We must now distinguish between a
proper end, on the one hand, and on the
other, the means employed to attain it.
Admitting the propriety of the end let
us evaluate the propriety of the means
Right to Strike Limited.
Is strike which deprives lovers of
eurhythmic dancing of the enjoyment OF
that art, OF devotee of fine gems from
getting a beautiful diamond in the
same category with strike that keeps
food from all urban tables. lights from
all our cities and warmth from homes
in zero winter weather?
Hitherto the right to strike has gen.
orally been regarded as an unassailable
basic right of free worker Recent
events, however, now indicate that nc
matter how closely or inseparably the
right to work or refrain from working
individually or collectively, is bound to
freedom, there may be higher right tG
which even this one is Subservient. The
higher right in a democracy is the pro-
lection of the peoples sovereignty, which
is the maintenance of the welfare Of
the nation.
Recent events have made clear what
hitherto has been vague understand
ing-that the right to strike has it,
limits. Yes, even though voluntarism ane
democracy have for their cornerstone.
the right of workers to work or refuse
to work, nevertheless it has come to bt
realized that cornerstone cannot truly
serve its purpose if it pulls its building
down 1t has become clear that the righ
to strike reaches its limits when it i'm.