THE MAINTENANCE OF THE OPEN SHOP legal wrong is done by a union in procuring the discharge of a non-union man. Even if their motive is self-interest, to get all the work for their own members, still most courts hold that the union cannot be allowed to use the force of its numbers to crush the non-union man. The law of conspiracy from time immemorial has protected the single man against the attack of the com bination. This is a modern instance for its application. Any discussion which leaves out the fact of conspiracy and defends the union upon the basis of the permission given individuals to compete as they please, misses the real point upon which the decision turns. To maintain free competition in general the courts must prevent suppression of com petition by the action of the combination.
VIII Upon this point the majority of courts insist, the minority urge that what is per mitted individuals should be permitted a combination; and that as one person in com petition is permitted to refuse to deal with those who will not deal with them exclusively, even though the ruin of a rival follows, so a union ought to be allowed the same course
of action. But is it fair to say that con certed action is of the same nature as sepa rate action? Certainly, it is the usual fact that individual competition may be met, while combined action is overwhelming. The truth is that the combination gives to concerted action higher potentiality than separate action by individuals can ever have. Both boycotting and unionizing are conspicuous examples of the resistless force of numbers, and this underlying basis of fact is explanation enough of the sub stantial similarity of the way in which both are treated by the courts. The law is the same for both, holding both wrong what ever their object, because in both instances the courts still stand for the individual against the combination. Until individual ism shall cease to be the predominant theory, the courts will continue to hold unionizing wrong. If in time the arguments for col lectivism, which one hears so frequently in current discussion, shall ever command the adherence of the great majority of men, then the non-union man will be left to his fate by the law, but not until then. BRUCE WYMAN. CAMBRIDGE, MASS., Dec., 1904.
