University of Wisconsin Superior - Gitche Gumee Yearbook (Superior, WI)

Page 24 text:

No one denies the right of laborers to combine; nor will we find any one who will question their right to take advantage of legal opportunities to get larger and larger shares of the products which they help to make. All will concede that it is GITCHE wise sometimes for employers to consult with their working men. The result of such GUM EE discussion has often been a restraint of trade, but a halt called in prosperous times by a demand of laborers for higher wages, is in obedience to a law of nature—no human law can prevent it. But aggressive limitations upon industrial liberty, beyond those imposed by the law for the purpose of protecting of that liberty, is nothing short of industrial lawlessness and industrial tyranny. Labor unions have attempted to exercise powers of government which belong to the state alone. The union professes to believe that a state of war exists between the employer and the employed, and acting on this, they insist that strikers have the right to break the ordinary laws which prevail in time of peace and to resort to the boycott, the picket, the blacklist, and other forms of violence, in order that they may injure the business of their enemies and prevent the non-union man from working. There is no better illustration of the nature of this lawlessness than the acts performed in the great anthracite coal strike of 1902 and 1903. The Coal Strike Commission adjudged as follows: “Its history is stained with a record of riot and bloodshed. Men who chose to be employed or who remained at work were assailed and threatened and they and their families terrorized and intimidated.” Here w’as war against society and the state, for the union broke the peace and order of the commonwcalh. To those who recognize the sanctity of that fundamental law which restrains savage liberty and establishes ordered liberty, it is evident that the duty not only of employers, but of all good citizens, is to resist such lawless pretensions and refuse to yield to demands, either for higher wages or for shorter hours, when they arc made by rioters and lawbreakers. In the anthracite strike, as in nearly every strike, it is true that the labor union insisted upon the right to exercise control over the property of the employer. The employer is responsible both to society and to the individual, under the law, for the management and use of his property—yet union leaders or delegates demand control, although they have no responsibility for the management of the business; although they insist on operating outside the law, having in nearly every ease no interest in the property beyond the earning of wages in its service. They encroach upon the liberty of the employer by designating the men whom he shall employ—determining the rate of wages he shall pay, regardless of the fact, as has happened often, that the earnings of the business may not warrant such wages. The boycott, the picket, and other forms of violence are resorted to for the purpose of compelling accession to these demands. But you say, “These are the excessive demands and the extravagant actions of only some of the unions.” True, indeed, these efforts to limit industrial liberty are the excesses of unions, but do they not grow out of a claim of right that is universal among the unions and their undiscriminating defenders? Do they not arise from the claim that the wage-earner may demand what is clearly a question of free contract between the employer and his employees? It is often just for laborers to demand shorter hours; it is often just for them to demand higher pay; there isr nothing against a request for a sliding scale of wages; but the law of man and the law of morality forbid any man, whether he be laborer or capitalist, to enforce his demands by violence—by oppression of his fellow beings—by a denial to any man PAGE TW'ENTY-TWO

Page 23 text:

and enlarged Ins skill, he has been benefited by the past, and today we find him living in a comfort unequaled in mediaeval times, even by the luxury of princes. We arc apt to become blinded by our apparent “good times” and think that our high position in the industrial world is impregnable. Indeed, it is a pet hallucination of ours that “No harm can come to America.” The American public has always shown itself too ready to accept conditions as they are. In the course of our nation’s history we find our people marked by an easy good nature which has on many occasions shown itself to be exceedingly dangerous. It was this tendency, this good naturedness, that allowed slavery to grow and fasten its hold upon us until its eradication culminated in one of the greatest wars of history. It is this same weakness today that leaves us facing a problem which is constantly and with greater and greater vehemence forcing itself upon us. Appearing as but a cloud upon the horizon of industry, Trades-unionism has gathered and gathered until many times it has threatened in its cyclonic fury to demolish the peace and prosperity of our nation. The history of Trades-unionism up to a few years ago is not one of very great interest. It is enough to know that the purpose of its founders was a noble one. Their only thought was the bettering of the condition of the working man. We can not help admitting the theory of labor unions is an admirable one. History has proven conclusively that no matter what the institution may be, no matter how admirably it may be planned, no matter how worthy the purpose of its founders, if it is left to act as it chooses, without restraint, unregulated by law, it will sooner or later become arrogant, arbitrary, and a menace to the public. One of the greatest difficulties which lie in the way of the discussion of any labor problem is an age-old mistake of the humane and sympathetic mind. Many of our most eminent social philosophers, men of heart and impulsive speech, forget the law which orders and defends liberty; the law by means of which civilization with its diffusion of comfort has advanced; the law which promotes the general welfare, in their sentimentalism awakened by what they regard the wrongs of a class—meaning often the weakness of a class. In their feverish sentiment they would resort to the fallacious theory that justice itself can be superseded. Tbc only authority which may limit industrial or civil liberty is the state. Our law has placed upon the conduct of every citizen certain limitations which guard his liberty. This it docs both for the welfare of society and for the happiness of the individual. It gives to society peace and order, the security of respected precedents, the wisdom of long accepted tradition. It allows the individual the freest development of his powers and expects him in return to promote the interests of society. The law gives to all citizens engaged in industry the right to work. It protects the fruits of a man’s labor from the plundering intrusion of society. It grants to no one the right to interfere with his fellows when they are doing what to them seems best, so long as they keep within the law. To the working man it gives the right of free contract. He may choose his employment and his employer, and has the right to work for any wage he agrees to receive. The law docs not give to the working man the right to compel an employer to use or manage his property in accordance with the will of some one else, nor does it give him the right to deprive a fellow workman of the right to labor. In a word, the law gives us an ordered industrial liberty, in the same way that it gives us an ordered civil liberty, and whoever violates the liberty guarded by the state becomes an enemy both of the state and of society. GITCHE GUM EE PACE TWENTY-ONE

Page 25 text:

of the right to work for whom he will nnd for what he will, or the denial of the right of an employer to hire any man for what he is willing to accept. These arc the actions of labor unions that are forcing them upon our attention. We can not stand idly by and say, These are not of mine, they do not concern me.” Every citizen who cares for the welfare of his country ought to be concerned, and every citizen who wishes to live in lawful peace with an unburned roof over his head and with life sustaining food on his table, must be concerned. If the conditions of war which have existed in Colorado, New York, Pennsylvania, and other states, on account of labor troubles, were spread throughout every state in the Union, living in this country would not only be unsafe but intolerable. These, then, arc the conditions that confront us today as a result of the disregard of the 'rights and liberties of man as given him by the law. Such is the problem presented by a system which has tried to establish class lines. Any institution which tries to establish caste in this country is attempting to check the current of our industrial progress. But No!” says the labor agitator, we will arise and by sheer force of numbers control the government in the interest of the proletariat 1” What does this mean? Class rule! The end of equality 1 The end of justice! The worst of all despotism, the despotism of an unrestrained and irresponsible majority. The beginning of rule by class greed and class hatred. The destruction of property rights and the end of social order. History can tell us what will follow. The rule of the strong hand. After the Revolution—Napoleon. The time will come when the relations between employers and the employed will be better, more humane, more Christian, than they are today. The coming of that time will not be hastened by legislation nor by whimsical administrative spasms. It is only through the great public that we can hope to obtain the solution. No institution can withstand the just condemnation of mankind. A wave of reform which has recently spread through the political world is most encouraging. Let us extend this reform to the industrial world. When the new spirit has changed the heart of the wage-earner; when workingmen resort to argument instead of clubs; when they learn to know the law and respect it—then will our prosperity increase; then will the rights of man under the law be respected; then will our wage-earners get their rightful share of the privileges and the opportunities of American life. G Il'C HE GUM EE PACE TWENTY-THREE