American literature -- Periodicals; Literature -- Periodicals
It is clearly indicated, therefore, what labor leaders, under the
Sherman Act, can do. They have the right to organize, to combine--that
is, to form unions; they have the right to refuse to work for wages or
terms of employment unsatisfactory to themselves--that is, to strike.
Under the Sherman Act, indeed, mere organizations of laboring men are
regarded as no more outlawed than ordinary social clubs or college
fraternities.
_How the Chicago Strike of 1894 Restrained Trade_
On the other hand, labor leaders know what, under the Sherman Act,
they can not do. They cannot enter into combinations that restrain
trade. This vital point has been settled in several important
proceedings--those involving the Chicago disturbances in 1894, and,
more recently the decision just handed down in the matter of the
Danbury Hatters. These cases so clearly show the bearing of the Sherman
Act upon illegal labor practices, that they may profitably be reviewed
here.
[Illustration: _Copyrighted by C. R. Buck_
CONGRESSMAN CHARLES E. LITTLEFIELD OF MAINE, WHOSE KEEN ANALYSIS OF
LAST WINTER'S CIVIC FEDERATION TRUST BILL WAS LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR
ITS DEFEAT]
In 1894 the employees of the Pullman Palace Car Company of Chicago
struck for higher wages. These employees were not railway men; they
were workmen engaged in the manufacture of railway cars. In spite
of this, about four thousand had been admitted to membership in the
American Railway Union, an organization of railroad operatives,
which, under the vigorous management of Eugene V. Debs, had acquired
a membership of 250,000, and a correspondingly great power in the
field of railroad labor. In order to help the Pullman workmen in their
struggle with the Pullman Company, the American Railway Union declared
what was in effect a boycott upon all railroads using Pullman cars.
Nearly all the larger American railroads had entered into contracts
with the Pullman Company, by which parlor and sleeping cars were to be
used on their trains. Debs now demanded that these railroads should
break their contracts, and thereby, of course, become responsible for
heavy damages to the Pullman Company. In other words, he demanded that
all American railroads cease patronizing the Pullman Company because of
its "unfair" attitude toward union labor; that is, he started a boycott
against the Pullman Company. When the railroad companies refused to
meet his demand, he ordered out all American Railway Union men employed
on these lines. He even declared war upon several of the Vanderbilt
roads, which had no Pullman sleepers, operating instead the Wagner
cars. In effect, in order that several thousand workmen in Chicago
might profitably settle their private grievances with their employers,
Debs proposed, practically to end railroad communication in the larger
part of the United States.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account