interests by equal luimbers of representatives who agree on an umpire and thus complete the organiza- tion.
Compulsory Arbitration. — Sentiment through- out the powerful industrial nations seems to be unanimous against compulsorj' arbitration, which involves legal enforcement of decision. Labour unions, employers, and representatives of the public generally, in the United States, and in Europe as well, agree in opposing it. The sentiment against it is
C.irticularly strong in the United States, as is shown y the amount of testimony collected by the Industrial Commission. Compulsory investigation and decision with publication of facts and of decision is frequently favoured where great interests are involved, as in interstate commerce, and not a few are found who favour enforcement of decision where both parties invoke arbitration. New Zealand alone has at- tempted full compulsory arbitration. The reasons alleged against compulsory arbitration are numerous. It appears to invade the property rights of the em- ployer, or the personal liberty of the labourer, since the former might be compelled by law to pay wages against his will, and the latter might be forced to labour in .spite of himself. It is difficult to make the action of compulsory arbitration reciprocal, since the employer is more easily held than the labour union, unless the latter be incorporated and be made finan- cially responsible, a condition from which the unions usually recoil. As arbitrators would not be gov- erned by a rule of law, it is feared that sympathy with the weaker party might sway them, and that they would be inclined to "split the difference", thereby ensuring some gain to labour, a prospect which, it is said, might encourage strikes and prompt unreasonable demands. It is claimed that decisions unfavourable to labourers would tend to strengthen an already-growing suspicion of govermnent and of courts. Furthermore, the employer sees in com- pulsory arbitration divided jurisdiction in his busi- ness, interference of outsiders who lack technical knowledge, probable overturning of discipline, and a weakening of his position, points that were made with some feeling against Cardinal Manning in his mediation in the great Dock Strike. Fear is ex- pressed that employers would be driven to organize for self-protection, that they would be inclined to raise prices, or adulterate products, in order to offset losses sustained by adverse decisions of arbitration courts. There are in addition constitutional diffi- culties which in most modern nations might make the operation of compulsory arbitration difficult, even if the public were to accept it. It is urged in favour of compulsory arbitration that the prospect of it would inevitably create a more conciliatory attitude of mind in employer's and labourers, that common fear of undesirable results would develop the practice of trade agreement and conciliation, that society would thereby gain finally legal guar- antee of industrial peace, and would be spared the enormous losses, confusion, and violence that result from strikes. The modified forms of compulsory arbitration — enforcement of decision when both parties agree to submit to arbitration, and compul- sory arbitration where vital public interests are immediately concerned, as in interstate commerce — avoid many of the objections and appear to promise good results.
Voluntary Arbitration. — That opposition to compulsory arbitration is directed against the com- pulsory feature, and not against arbitration as such, IS seen from the practical sympathy, and even en- thusiasm, with which voluntarj- arbitration is re- ceived. In the United States, which may be taken us typical, we find organized labour speaking strongly in favour of voluntary arbitration. It deplores strikes, provides careful scrutiny and a tliorougli test
of feeling before permitting strikes, and generally pro- vides for appeal to conciliation or arbitration. Mr. Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labour, said before the Congress of Industrial Con- ciliation and Arbitration in Chicago, in 1894: "As one who has been intimately and closely connected with the labour movement for more than thirty years from boyhood, I say to you that I have yet to receive a copy of a Constitution of any general organization, or local organization, of labour which had not the provision that, before any strike shall be undertaken, conciliation or arbitration shall be tried; and, with nearly twelve thousand local trade unions in the United States, I think that this goes far to show that the organizations of labour are desirous of encouraging amicable arrangements of such schedules and conditions of labour as shall tend to peace." This is fully corroborated by the Industrial Commission, which said in its report, six years later, that "the rule of local and national trade unions, almost without exception, provides for conciliatory negotiations with employers before a strike may be entered upon ". In nearly all trade agreements a provision is made for conciliation or arbitration whenever minor disputes of any kind arise. As to employers, one should recall that all employers who stand in friendly relations w'ith union labour, either informally, or formally, in trade agreements, are presumptively favourable to arbitration. The em- ployer who refuses to recognize or to deal with the labour union is inclined not to favour arbitration, since it involves recognition of the union. He may be willing to meet a committee of his men and hear complaints, and even grant demands, but his method is not that of arbitration. The following, from the Principles of the National Association of Manu- facturers, adopted in 1904, is typical. The Associa- tion "favours an equitable adjustment of the differ- ences between employers and employees by any amicable method that will preserve the rights of both parties", though at the same time the Associa- tion declares that it will permit no interference by organizations. The Republican National Platform of 1896, as well as the Democratic, declared in favour of arbitration in interstate-commerce controversies. Nothing on the subject appeared in either platform in 1900. The Republican platform of 1904 contained only an endorsement of President Roosevelt's media- tion in the Coal Strike of 1902, while the Democratic platform declared directly for arbitration without qualification. A remarkable expression of public opinion in the L'nited States is seen in the creation of the National Civic Federation which has held a number of national conferences in the interest of industrial peace. Representatives of employers, of labouring men, of political life, of churches, of academic circles, have met in these conventions and their endorsements of attempts to establish industrial peace, through trade agreements, conciliation, and vohmtaiy arbitration, have been unanimous and enthusiastic. The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States has a standing Committee on Labour and Capital whose duty it is "to hold them- selves in readiness to act as arbitrators should their services be desired between the men and their em- ployers with the view to bringing about mutual conciliation and harmony in the spirit of the Prince of Peace". The action of Cardinal Manning in the Dock Strike in London, in 1SS9, together with his great elTorts to establisli boards of conciliation in the London District; the presence and activity of Archbishop Ireland in the National Civic Federation: that of Archbishop Ryan in the Philadelphia strike, in 1S96; the work of' Hisliop tjuigloy in the strike of 1899, in Buffalo; of Hishup Hurke in the Albany strike, in 1902; that of Bishop lloban. of Scranton, in the street-car strike of 190:?. and in 1906; the