Page:Historical Catechism of American Unionism.pdf/9

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.

'Perhaps he would not . . . have undertaken to report it, but for the pressing solicitations of many respectable Mechanics and Manufacturers . . . The verdict of that jury is most important to the manufacturing interests of the community; it puts an end to those associations which have been so prejudicial to the successful enterprize of the capitalists of the western country. But this case is not important to this country alone; it proves beyond possibility of doubt that, notwithstanding the adjudications in New York and Philadelphia, there still exists in those cities combinations which extend their deleterious influence to every part of the union. The inhabitants of those cities, the manufacturers particularly, are bound by their interests, as well as the duties they owe (the) community, to watch those combinations with a jealous eye, and to prosecute to conviction, and subject to the penalties of the law conspiracies so subversive to the best interests of the country.'"

28. Were these the first cases where aid of the courts was invoked by the employers?
The Commons' history states that "These prosecutions were the first in this country in which the employers invoked the aid of the courts in their struggle with labor"; and it adds: "It was brought out in the testimony that the masters financed, in part at least, the New York and Pittsburgh prosecutions."
29. Does not this look as though the bosses were early alive to their class interests?
Indeed, it does. It shows, moreover, that the courts showed their class character at an early date.
30. How did the workers take these decisions?
That we have organizations today proves that they regarded them as unjust. In the later cases the right to organize was conceded, but the means by which organizations sought to achieve their aims were declared illegal because they injured the employers, and interfered with the rights of others who would take jobs against the rules laid down by the unions. Pretty much the same arguments as are used by the open-shoppers today.