| OCR Text |
Show I tia 'scab' under the law,. when they oppose them-. ' selves to a fundamental right in a great class, are one and all hostile to democratic society. We can secure no organic completeness in society till every partj ministers to. every other part in reciprocal advantages. ad-vantages. It is on this claim that the rights of labor rest" ! . ' . .. - ". Strfcw-Ertikert cad Right to Leber. In the adjustment of labor troubles, the strikebreaker, strike-breaker, or so-called "scab," plays-a necessarily important im-portant part. His position is not an enviable, one. In a discussion of 'the right to labor," Prof. John Bascom o? Williams college,' takes issue with the accepted view that the "scab" represents the' right to labor when and where one pleases, and that the denial of that right finds its expression in the labor union. He asserts that the "entire contention of the union is to secure a social status, the power to form and enforce suitable contracts as safeguards of labor, la-bor, thereby putting the rights of labor beyond the ' caprice of the employer." ' ' Prof. Bascom says: "The 'scab' is the resource of the employer in breaking down workmen, and in this connection he begins to talk of the right to labor. la-bor. Yet the 'scab' has no right to labor conceded him by the manager. The 'scab' is taken on and i dismissed as suits his own convenience, and this solely that his own power in dealing with the laborer la-borer may be unrestrained. The 'scab' makes and enforces no contract. He is present that no contract con-tract may be made and enforced. The 'scab' lends himself to the tyranny of the employer, and secures in return only a brief period of employment.Vhen a new equilibrium and a lower .equilibrium shall have been established, he, having done what mischief mis-chief he was able to do, falls back to his old position of waiting for further trouble.' A comparison employed by Prof. Bascom in his concluding paragraph sheds, light on his point of view: . ; j : "If a contractor, under an agreement to put up a building, should, in the progress of the work, find himself at disagreement with his employer as to the interpretation of certain specifications in the contract, con-tract, it would not be in order for the latter to say: , 'There is a man ready to ta,ke up and complete the work as I wish it to be done ; all yoji have to do is to stand out of the way.' 'Not in the least,' would be the response. 'I have put myself to expense; I have declined other work, and, i moreotr, t fxpect to make something out of the Job. The difference in the rendering' of the contract must be adjusted, and I must proceed.' In the case of the laborer, he is first robbed of the power to make d contract, and then 1 robbed of his opportunities because he has no con- tract. The thing under contention is the power of i contract and the rights, which go with it The law j ,md the administration of the law and the action of v ) |
