Show II IIA A HEW KEW LABOR DECISION N Y ENTIRELY UNIQUE labor Jaber de decision deEl A AN El has bas just beta been handed down by a Pennsylvania court Contrary Co to toI I the usual method of procedure the employer did not Invoke the assistance I of the court In a light fight with labor nor did the laboring men yak Pak the court to toh help h lp them in a battle with their em employer It was wu a ca case caN e of union against i olon and the story sory Of of or the trouble i 1 worth tellin The Council of Allied Building Trades of Philadelphia had long lone wanted th the i Plumbers league to affiliate with it Time after alter time overtures overture were made j and as regularly as they were made madel madelI the plumbers plumber turned them down Then Than Thanin I I in HI order to force loree a crisis cr the council C ordered a strike on some work where I members member of the rival organisations vi were ere employed The TIre only way in which the contractors could effect a settlement was by the discharge of the plumbers Encouraged En by this thill successful ful out outcome outcome come orne the council declared it its intention of or ordering strikes wherever the members mem members memI I I bers of the plumbers plumber organisation I were ere employed with its I men Another r was wu made maM but the Ute plumbers plumber 1 took the matter in Into to court A decision just handed down by by the tile supreme court of Pennsylvania tl If ant sustains the plumbers The opinion of the court is isen en to clear and so w I pat that we quote I We do 40 not question that defendant de may mT under then constitutions and ag rule reeks resolve receive that tt they will not Mt work with Wi members member m of OL other organisation organisations or with nonunion men and aad act ac accordingly acc cordingly c r ll that is their right rt ht The Tho right to the free use u of hi his hands hand is III IIII I the tile workmans property a as much mach machI a athe as the rich mans right richt to the undisturbed I income from his factory facto houses house and I lands land This right of oC acquiring prop property property erty to is I an in inherent I indefeasible right of oC the workman to exercise It he must have bave the unrestricted privilege of ai o working for fer such employer as 1 he hed d at suck cIr wave wages M as he lie chooses choose to fo accept TIll This i is III a right which the fhe law Jaw of no no trade union can take from rom him It is argued that the defendants defendant either individually or by organisation have the right t now to peaceably per persuade persuade suade plaintiffs and aad others other not to work and aDd their employer not nol to hire them so they have haye It is fa further argued that they can eaI quit work when WReA they choose chooM so they can But neither manlier o of these the e sug stag suggested p ted case ca ea Is the one before us UtI The Themen Themen men mea lost 10 their work the employer employees were intimidated because Hea they feared tred further loss lass I How absurd It i Sa Is to call this into peaceable persuasion and d hew ab absurd absurd surd stud to argue that if It the law Jaw attempts to prevent preveat it the right of oC the ue workmen to organise for their common benefit i is frustrated tru There i S is nothing that can be added to the words wards of ot the court con except the opinion that the judgment is a thor thoroughly thoroughly righteous one It should teath the Ie warring factions in Philadelphia that they must maintain toward each other the friendly tolerant tol spirit they expect from others outside of or labor Ja or or organization organisations Otherwise trades trade union Inn torn cannot survive |