Courts and Legislatures Upon Labor Questions.
103
THE TRUE ATTITUDE OF COURTS AND LEGISLATURES UPON LABOR QUESTIONS. By Frederic J. Stimson.. HOWEVER much one may have studied the subject, to be asked what is to be the ultimate outcome of the labor " question," and what changes are likely to be effected in our laws, or even to be asked what changes should be made, disposes one to some mod esty in the reply. As, however, the space allowable to an article in this magazine dis poses of the possibility of making more than a mere statement of opinion or a series of random guesses at future facts; and on the legal maxim that is, perhaps, the wisest of all that are practiced by counsellors-at-law, viz., when you give your client an opinion never to give him your reasons, — it is not so im possible to comply with the courteous re quest of the editor of the Green Bag. Perhaps a brief statement of "where we are at" on the subjects of labor legislation and our judicial treatment of the questions there in embodied, with a guess as to the next steps to be taken, would not be wholly uninstructive, to the writer, if not to the reader. There is a certain satisfaction in formulating one's ideas, if only as a working hypothesis. Leaving out always the vexed question of what those who agitate it are usually pleased to term " Government by Injunction " — a phrase in itself a beautiful instance of the petitio principii — I think it would be quite clear to any one who made a thorough study of laws and decisions upon labor matters, that the two next great matters to be decided are the questions which it is hardly too broad a phrase to entitle ( 1 ) the question of liberty to labor, and (2) the question of excellence or due reward. By the latter we mean the question whether the employer is to be allowed to pay his help according to their merit, and to pay for the output of the work according to its value.
The institution of the trades-unions has been finally and completely recognized, both by court decisions and by statute in this country and in England; that may be said to be, in labor matters, the great achieve ment of the Nineteenth Century. The first question of the Twentieth will be, how far the trades-unions are to exercise their en ergies. At first they were benevolent or ganizations; secondly, they became defen sive organizations, acting in the interest of labor. Their scope in this stage already comprises the "collective bargain," and the simple strike, upon the question of reduction of wages alone. Thirdly, they are becom ing offensive organizations. To this stage belongs the development of the boycott, and of the strike directed, not for the partic ular improvement of the individuals strik ing, but for the general improvement of fellow-laborers of their own trade; or, a step further yet, for the special improvement of certain particular laborers, in their own trade or out of it, but not of the persons striking, themselves. These three stages of the labor combination clearly mark a possi ble three different attitudes on the part of the courts or even of statutes, should statutes seek, as they might conceivably do, to dis criminate between legal and illegal strikes and boycotts rather than merely ignore the subject. They now commonly do this; or else, in general terms, baldly provide that all peaceable strikes are lawful, as is the case in some State laws. The carrying of the position that the first kind of strike — that is, a strike for the immediate benefit of the persons striking — is always lawful, was the achievement of the last half of the Nine teenth Century. The carrying of the posi tion that the second kind of strike is lawful
