THE LABOR QUESTION AND THE SOCIAL PROBLEM 777
Labor leaders have not overlooked this remarkable circum- stance. They have called attention to the decision of Judge Rogers, of the United States district court at St. Louis, in which it was strongly affirmed (i) that an agreement by any number of persons to do a lawful thing is not a conspiracy; (2) that employers may maintain and circulate a blacklist, provided that its contents be truthful; (3) and that employers may deprive workmen of opportunities to earn a livelihood, and even combine to attack and destroy organizations of employees, by means of blacklisting agreements.
No labor leader has ever gone beyond the position taken in this judicial opinion. Substitute the word "boycotting" or the words "peaceable picketing" for the word "blacklisting," and every contention of organized labor is sustained. We repeat, there is no theoretical issue between organized labor and organ- ized capital, since neither side honestly and earnestly denies what the other side affirms. Both invoke the same individualist principles, and both ignore or depart from the professed doc- trines when self-interest appears to render it convenient, for the moment, to do so. Labor forgets its individualist principles when it demands eight-hour laws; employees drop their "natural law" and "freedom from dictation and interference" when ques- tions of protection, subsidies, bounties, coastwise trade laws, etc., are under discussion. The consumer's "natural right" to buy and sell where he pleases, neither employers nor employed think it necessary to take into account.
What, then, in view of these facts is the labor question? If labor were socialistic and capital individualistic, there would be a great question ; conversely, if labor were consistently individu- alistic and employers bent upon subordinating individual to social claims, upon qualifying the laissez-faire doctrine upon which the industrial order is supposed to be based, there would emerge an issue of the highest importance. As matters actually stand, it is impossible to formulate an issue.
The union movement is simply an expression of dissatisfac- tion with certain results of an accepted system of production and distribution, not with the system itself. This dissatisfaction
