Evening Star Newspaper, January 13, 1924, Page 33

. . EDITORIAL PAGE NATION AL - PROBLEMS SPECIAL ARTICLES Part 2—14 Pages COURT DECISION GIVES U. S. TIGHTER REIN ON CARRIERS Constitutionality of Recapture Clause of Transportation Act One More Step in Government Control. BY BEN McKELWAY. HENEVER government own- ership of tne railroads Is mentioned there are either three rousing cheers and widespread applause or deep moans of anguish and the usual weeping, walling and gnashing of teeth, de- vending entirely upon the group, cir- cle, clique or hloc in which the sub- Jeet is introduced. To say that the United States Su- preme Court has just put its august &tamp of approval upon government ownership of the rallroads would no doubt call for jeers, catcalls, hisses and perhaps profanc denlals. But it is nevertheless interesting, and equal- 1y harmless, to study the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dayton- Goose Creek railroad case last week, and then count on the fingers of one hand the powers which are now held by the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion through the transportation act and on the fingers of the other hand the rights which are left to the rail- roads. On the one hand is the Tnterstate Commerce Cémmission, representing the government, which controls the railroads in their issue of securitles, their car supply and distribution, their joint of terminals, their construction of new lines and their abandoument of old ones! the proper atvision of their joint rates as well as the fixing of adequate rates to se- cure a fair return upon their Invest- ment, the value or extent of their in- | vestment and their consolidation in i groups or systems. In addition the Railroad Labor Board has more or less to siy s what they shall pay | their employes. On the othe fouds and the use hand are the rail- trains they run. Provisions Upheld by Court. The Supreme Court decision men- |+ tioned above upheld the constitu- | tionality of the so-called “recapture provisions of the transportation act. These provisions, stated briefly, are that earnings of the carriers in ex- ss of a return of 6 per cent on| he value of their props shall be | divided equally between a fund to be ' beld in trust by the railroads and | one to be held by the government.| The carrier may use its fund for the payment of interest on bonds and other securities, rent for leased lUnes and the payment of dividends— In case the operating income for the year 1s less than 6 per cent. When the fund accumulated equals 5 per cent of the value of the rallroad property and as long as it continues to o so the carrier may use its! one-half of the excess income in any way It chooses. The government's fund is administered by the Inter-| state Commerce Commission in mak- | ing loans to carriers for certain specified purposes and for buying cquipment and facilitics to sell or lease to the carriers. | Cnunes of Litigation. The case originated when the Goose | Creek rullroad Teceived an -order) from the Inderstate Commerce Com- mission to submit returns showing the value of its property employed in commerce and the net revenue therefrom. The railroad reported a revenue of several thousand dollar in excess of 6 per cent on its valua- tion. Perhaps it did so in the spurit of asking, “There it is, now what| \are you going to do ubout it?” Kor| when the Interstate Commerce Com- mission gently inquired as to what steps wers being taken to come across with one-half of those excess earnings the Goose Creek railroad sought an injunction to restrain the 1. C. C. trom prosécuting its orders. In its sult the Goose Creek railway mentioned’ such things as “irrepara- ble wrong” and “unconstitutional,” and by the time the case reached the | United States Supreme Court a whole | flock of railroads had hastily jolned themselves with the Goose Creek In- stitution as amicl curiae. Chlef Justice Taft, rendering the decision of the court, referred to two previous definitions of the transpor- tatlon act by the Supreme Court and gave an adequate description and left no doubt of the power that it confers ~upon the government in operating the railroads. Seeks to Bulld Raflways. “In both cases it was pointed out that the transportation act adds a new and important object to Dpre- vious interstate commerce legislation which was designed primarily to pre- vent.unreasonable or discriminatory raves against persons and localities. ‘The new act seeks affirmatively to bulld up a system of railways pre- vared to handle promptly all the in- terstate commerce of the country. It aims to give the owners of the rall- ways an opportunity to earn enough to maintain thelr properties and :quipment in such a state of ef- ficiency that they can carry well this burden. To achleve this great pur- pose, it puts the rallways of the country more completely than ever under the fostering guardlanship and control of the Commission * * * “It was insisted in the two cases referred to, and it Is insistéd here, that the power to regulate interstate commerce is limited to the fixing of reasonable rates and the prevention of those which are discriminatory, and that when these objects are. at- talned the power of regulation is exhausted. This is too narrow a view of the commerce clause. To regulate in the sense intended is to foster, protect and control the com- merce with appropriate regard to the welfare of those who are immediate- 1y concerned, as well as the pub- lic at large, and to promote its growth and insure its safety. . . 1f_ Congress may bulla railroads under the commerce clause, it may certainly exert affirmative con- trol over privately owned railroads, to see that such railroads are equipped 1o perform and do perform, the requi- site public service.” Limitotions Upon Busine Concerning the property rights of the carriers and the interest of the shipping public, Chief Justice Taft thus defines the limitations placed upon a business dedicated to-the pub- lic service: “The carrler owning and operating a raliroad, however strong finan- clally, however economical in its fa- cilities, or favorably situated as to traffic, is not entitled as of constitu- tional right to more than a fair net operating income upon the value of its properties which are being de- ted to transportation. By invest- ment in a business dedicated to the public service the owner must recog- nize that, as compared with invest- ment in private business, he cannot pect either high or speculative dividends, but that his obligations lmits him to only fair or reasonable profit. If the company owned the only rallroad engaged In transporta- tion in a given section and was do- ing all the business, this would be clear. 1f it receives a falr return on {its property, why should it make any difference that other and competing railroads in the same sectlon are per- mitted to receive higher rates for a service which costs them more to render and from which they receive no better net return?” One conclusion can be reached very naturally from the court’s decisfon, and that is that government owner- | ship of the railroads, to all intents | and purposes, is here, without the at- tendant ills usually cited by those oppose complete government ership In the sense of direct oper- ation and maintenance. “Fair Value Undefined.” If the Goose Creek vailroud had put a llgher valuation on fts own rail- road, and thus shown that its rev- enue did not exceed 6 per cent of its investment, and, in addition. if the Goose Creek rallway had waited for the government's valuation of its properties which might have shown 2 much lower value and therefore an excessive met return, and then gone into court to protest this valuation, there might have been a different story to tell. While the courts have defined a “fair return” there has been no definition of a “fair value,” and this is one of the maln stumbling blocks in the way of the transporta- tion act. The Interstate Commerce Commis. slon has set a “tentative valuation”.| in the case of many raflroads which falls far below the valuation put upon | themselves by the railroads. In this| case there is no way to determine what Is and what isn’t revenue in ex- cess of 6 per cent, and so the matter now Tests. There have been. other cases where severely honest rail- roads, such as the Goose Creek affair, frankly placed a valuation on their property which allowed their oper- ating revenues to exceed 6 per cent. Still others have had thelr properties valued by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and there is now an ap- peal on its way to the Supreme Court upon this valuation which may re- sult in a definition of what actually constitutes “fair value.” In the meantime, Senator La Fol- lette makes hay while the sun shines, and introduces a bill to amend the transportation and the valuation acts by providing & “scientific method” of fixing rates. His rates would be based on operating expense plus interest.on bonds and fair dividends for stock that represents money actually in- vested. Lobbyists Would Be in Element In House Committee Discharge The lobby will have a continual feld-day in Washington, it several of the proposed changes in the House rules go through, in the opinion of Representative Frederick W. Dall- inger of Massachusetts, who has made a careful study of the compli- cated rules structure. Representative Dallinger has in mind particularly changes requested by Representative Charles R. Crisp, democrat, of Georgia, a former Hopse parliamentarian, and Representative Hamilton Fish of New York. The first would set aside two days each month on which committees could be discharged from further considera- tion of any measure before them and the bill brought up for immediate action in the House: Crisp’ would require the signatures of 100 mem- bers to obtain Te discharge of a committee. Representative - Fish would set aside two days each week and provide for the discharge of a committee upon petition of 150 mem- bers. “If either one of these proposed changes is put into effect, we will see a constant procession’ of lobby- ists running from office to office in the House Office buflding seeking signatures to petitions to discharge committees from further considera- tion of bills in order that the bills may be brought before the House for prompt action,” waid Representa- tive Dallinger. i be a step to be taken only in a very ! strike was prolonged to the extent EDITORIAL SECTION The Sundly STt WASHINGTON BY EDWARD F. ROBERTS. RE we facing another coal strike in the spring? ;A Rumors persist that on April 1, when the existing agreement between the operators and the miners in the bituminous fields expires, the country will be plunged into a disastrous labor war with all its resultant injury to busi- ness and prosperity. 5 | Can this possible catastrophe be averted by government action? For an answer to that question I went to John Hays Hammond, chairman of the Federal Coal Commission and America's greatest mining expert. Mr. Hammond believes that prompt action by Congress in car- rying out at least some of the rec- ommendations of the coal commis- sion would go a long way toward preventing a strike if it did not re- move the possibility entirely. “I don't know whether there will be a strike or not,” said Mr. Ham- mond, “but there is no doubt that both sides are today like two armed camps looking for trouble. A strike may be precipitated by extravagant demands on the part of the miners, but if that calamity does happen the operators cannot escape their share § of the blame. When the Coal Com- | mission intervened last year and succeeded in having an agreement signed the miners were willing to 3 make it for two years, but the oper- ! ators absolutely refused to sign for longer than twelve months. If they i had been more reasonable then we would have no strike talk now.” ‘Admitting the possibility of a strike, what can the government do?" T asked. The first thing to be done and a step which should be taken at once i is the establishment of a permanent iboard of inquiry as a division of the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion as was recommended by our commission. By April 1, when the existing agreement between the miners and operators expires, this board can be in full possession of all the necessary facts up to date, and, if a strike were called, could place the responsibility where it be- longed and the public would do the rest. Congress should also at once authorize the President to take over the mines in an emergency, as was also recommended in the report of the commission. But that would great emergency such as when a that the great industries of the country were threatened with aeri»l ous injury through a coal shortage.” “Should the government take over the mines how would they operate them?” Not by soldiers or by any kind of forced labor,” replied Mr. Ham- mand emphatically. “Our commis- sion reported against government ownership or government operation, and I am personally decidedly op- posed to either. A situation might arise where operation of the mines by the government was of vital con- cern to our industrial life, but in John Hays Hammond says:— “Congress should act at once to- create a permanent coal board, which would then be in another strike next spring. “The operators and miners a position to act in the case of in the bituminous fields are to- day like two armed camps looking for trouble.” “If a strike is called the operators cannot escape their share of the responsibility for their failure to make a two-year agree- ment last year.” “I am decidedly opposed to government ownership or gov- ernment operation. “To attempt to force men to work is repugnant to American principles and has never proved successful in any country. “The government should not take over the mines except in a very great emergency such case I believe that all the gov- tablish a fair wage scale and invite those who wished 'to work to do so, guaranteeing them full protection. To attemipt to force men te work is repugnant to American principles, | and has never proved successful in any country. “Except in the case of such an emergency as you have mentioned you do not believe then in direct action by the government “I don't believe it is necessary in the case of an ordinary strike. Government interierence with busi- ness is always a dangerous thing. ‘What the government could and should do is to sce that the public | gets the facts and that would be { ernment should do would be to es- | one of the most important functions (of the permanent board which we i bave recommended. If the Ameri- can people know where to place the blame for a strike they can bring to | bear on the offending side the most irresistible power in the world—pub- lic opinion. Neither operators nor miners could long resist that pres- Sure. “There another thing which the government could and should do for the protection of the public against the so-called ‘fireproof’ coal which is often dumped on the market during a strike. One way to stop that practice would be for the Interstate Commerce Commis- , D. C, SUNDAY MORNING, JANUARY 13, 1924 i U. S. Curb, but Not Ownership of Mines, Hammond’s Proposal for Coal Industry|y,, s.,p sion to have inspectors at the mines who would refuse transportation to coal that was not properly graded. The state governments could also have inspectors at their borders if necessary.” I asked Mr. Hamm‘nnd if it was |, tsue, as frequently charged, that the miners were infected by bolshevism. “There are a good many com- munist in the miners’ ranks,” he replied, thoughtfully, “and they are by no means confined to the miners of foreign birth either.. Many of the communist leaders are native Americans, although it is true that their teachings spread easiest among the forgign element.” “Do you include John L. Lewis among the radical leaders,” T asked. “Most certainly not. The radi. cals are trying their best to get rid of Lewis and I believe that he is doing everything possible to drive them out of the ranks of his or- ganization just as Gompers is try- |ing to do in the American Federa- Ition of Labor. In my work with the Civic Federation I was much in contact with a number of the labor leaders, and I have long been satis- fied that labor unions are here to stay. I have no hesitation in say- ing that it is the part of wisdom | for employers to back men of the type of Gompers and Lewis instead of letting union organizations get into the hands of men like Bill Hay- wood and Howarth, the communist leader among the Kansas miners.” T asked Mr. Hammond to sum up for me what he regarded as the ac- complishment of the Federal Coal Commission. “Well,” he said with a smile, “if you are asking me to answer our critics I will have to be excused. Personally I feel satisfied with the President’s statement in his mes- sage to Congress that our report,| was the best ever made on the sub- ject. The trouble with a good many criticisms that have been made is that they are based on ignorance of what our commission was. We were blamed, for instance, for not preventing the strike in the anthra- cite field, but we were absolutely without authority to do anything of the kind. We were strictly a fact- finding body, and I believe that our report contains the greatest amount of data that has ever been collected in the coal industry. That report gives a foundation of solid facts on which the government can now pro- ceed if it so wishes. “As a matter of fact, I do not be- lieve that abuses in the coal indus- try can be ended by outside inter- ference. Reform in the coal indus- try must come and the one way to start that reform is to give the American people the facts. That is what our commission has done. As far as definite action went we did intervene, and successfully, in the bituminous field and brought about an agreement which prevented a market scare and stabilized prices. That action alone saved the gov- ernment in its purchase of coal much more than the $600,000 which was spent by the commission.” National J ealousies Laid Prostrate, And Economic Needs Save Austria BY DREW PEARSON. | IENNA.—“The peace confer- | ence handed Austria a lemon and she made lemonade from it” With this epigram in American slang, Dr. Albert Zimmer- mann, commissioner general in Aus- tria for the league of nations, sum- med up the extraordinary recovery of Austria from bankruptcy and ruin. Tt i{s just one year ago since Dr. Zimmermann gave up his job as bur- gomaster of Rotterdam to become practically dictator of the Austrian republic at a salary of $60,000 yearly. The league of nations gave him $121,- 500,000 for salvage work and a staff of a dozen Dutch, French and Eng- lish advisers. With this equipment the former Dutch mayor has succeed- ed in twelve months in making the Austrian kronen the steadiest of con- tinental European currencies, and has re-established Vienna as the great dfstributing and manufacturing cen- ter of eastern Europe. Incidentally he started by dismissing 50,000 chair- warmers from government offices. In Dr. Zimmermann's opinion the salvation of Austria points the road along which Germany may aiso re- turn to prosperity and stability. The Austrian dictator, for that is virtually the position of Dr. Zimmer- mann, 1s & solld Dutchman of com- fortable proportions, Who speaks English -fluently and shows a rather amasing knowledge of American bus- iness methods and conditions. He answered my Qquestions with great deliberation and appeared to weigh every word very tarefully. Business Boosts Peace. “The reconstruction of Austria,” he said, “has been the triumph of eco- nomic need over selfish nationalism. Business is the best booster of peace and it was the demands of sound business, which have conquered the prejudices ‘and national jealousies which brought Austria to the verge of complete ruin. *The republic has turned its worst liability iInto its best asset. T refer Dr. Albert Zimmmermann says: “The reconstruction of Austria has been the triumph of economic need over selfish nationalism. “Business is the best booster for peace.” “Business, if you give politics.” it time, will triumph over “Lack of confidence is what is ruining Germany today and she will never recover confidence wuntil she is given some kind of international help.” “The salvation of Austria ppint§ the road along which Germany may return to prosperity.” to the city of Vienna, which, with a population of nearly two milllons, seemed an impossible burden for a country with a total population of only six millions. Austria has recov- ered, not in spite of Vienna, but be- cause of Vienna. The city has come back as the middleman for southeast Europe. Character of Vienna. “It is estimated that one-third of her population is engaged in service for foreigners—banking transactions, wholesaling, retailing and transpor- tation. Vienna is a great entrepot.a— what do you Americans call it?" “A jobbing center,” I suggested. “Yes, a jobbing center. For in- stance when a London merchant wantd to buy Rumanian wheat, he works through Vienna because agents here have the trade channels to‘get that wheat at the best price in the best time. 'Or when a Philadelphia spice dealer wants Hungarian pap- rika, it Is more convenient for him to purchase through Vienna. It has been a long time since I studied geography, but I imagine that Vienna handles the goods for southeast Eu- rope much as St. Louis serves the southwestern. part of the United Statea” “But bhave not the new surround- Ing states set up their own commer- cial machthery?” I interrupted. “Yes, and for a time the national- ism in these new countries tried hard to kill Vienna. The Jugoslavs boomed Belgrade, the Czechs boosted Prague and the Hungarians wanted to do all their business through Buda- pest. I suppose, you might compare these cities with some of St. Louis’ rivals, like Kansas City, Little Rock or Tulsa. I don't know whether the comparison follows or not, but these new capitals of south Europe found they could not compete with the long- established prestige of Vienna. They lacked the training, the technique and the machinery for doing business. Today you find Czech merchants com- ing down to Vienna to do business with other Czechs, simply because it is easier to trade here. Viennese Work Hard. “The Viennese have worked hard to win back this trade. Twice a year they have held commercial fairs, at which merchants from all Europe, but especially from the new countries of south Europe, display their com- modities and establish new connec- tions. These have been so successtul that the floor space for the next fair five months hence is already ex- hausted, and I understand that at the last fair, every exhibitor established an average of twenty new comnec- tions and secured orders from an av- erage of nine of these immediately. | So you see, Vienna has done her share toward business reconstruction. “There was a time just after the armistice when natlonal jealousies were so fierce that the Serbs would not sell corn, of which they had a great surplus, to the starving Vien- nese, and the Hungarlans would not sell milk to feed Vienna's children. It looked as if President Wilson's doctrine of the self-determination of the people was u curse that would ruin Europe. But business, if you glve it time, will triumph over poli- tics. Despite tariff dams and politi- cal barriers, trade flows into the eas- fest channels, like water into the val- leys. Remember, this is all changing very slowly, but I consider the recon- struction of Austria a triumph of economic need over national jeal- ousy.” “What was the most important fac- tor in the reconstruction of Austria?" was my final question. Confidence All Important. “The establishment of confidence, Dr. Zimmermann answered quickly. “The minute the league of natlons de- cided to grant Austria a loan, the kronen became stable. That was in September. Actually I did not arrive until December, but the currency had become stable three months before my arrival. With stable currency, the stock market recovered confi- dence. Savings deposits increased. People were not afrald to bring out their hoarded wealth. Consequently there was more working capital and more taxes paid, “This lack.of confidence, in my opinion, is what is ruining Germany today. Germany will never®recover confidence until she is given some kind of international help. What form this must take I do not know. ‘The situation {s different from. that of Austria, because Germany has en- emies who fear that she will use the loan for the aggrandizement of her effensivy, forces.™ |WAR STOCK SALES AID GOVERNMENT FINANCING ies Disposed of, With Hun- dred Million Dollars’ Worth Remaining. BY G. GOCLD LINCOLN, HEN the armistice was signed, a little more than five years ago, putting an end to the world war, the United States government had a huge amount of surplus war material on its hands. It became a tremendous tagk to dispose of this surplus mate- rial, obtaining for it as good prices 28 possible, and at the same time making an effort not to glut the mar- ket with material in a way that would do finjury to the industrial business of the country. Thé ‘sale of this surplus material has been a oonsiderable factor in helping mect some of the expendi- tures for the war debt and in meet- ing current expenditures for the gov- ernment. Well over a billion dollars has been realized in these sales, and there is still more than a hundred million dollars’ worth of material left to be sold. President Coolidge, in his recent budget message to the Congress, pointed out that the fiscal vear end- ing June 30 last had closed with a surplus in the United States Treasury of ‘more than $300,000,000. He esti- mated that at the close of the present fiscal year, June 30, 1924, the ordinary receipts would exceed expenditures chargeable thereto by 3329.000,000, and added that the surplus for the next flscal year, ending June 30, 1925, if the present revenue laws were un- changed, would total $395,000,000. Should Share Surplus. Under such conditions, the Presi- dent sald, it was only just to the peo- ple of the United States, who are the stockholders in the government, to Dpermit ‘them to share in this surplus through a reduction in taxes. He strongly urged, therefore, the adop- tion of the tax revision plan submit- ted by his Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Mellon. While the people of the United States have been paying heavy taxes, and great efforts have been made by the government to economize all along the line, in order to bring about &n adjustment of the budget, there s another important factor which has helped to make it possible to reduce taxes. That is the sale of surplus war material. Figures recently have been com- piled in the office of the chief co-or- dinator showing that since the date of the armistice, November 11, 1918, up to November 1923, surplus war materfal has been sold by the gov- ernment valued at $3,333,387,912. These figures have been furnished o the chief co-ordinator by the vari- ous departments. For this material the government received a total of $1,282,492,909. All of this money, ex- cept for a certain part of the re- ceipts for material sold by the United States Shipping Board, has been cov- ered into the federal Treasury, Of the receipts for Shipping Board sup- plus material, a certain proportion has been used to meet current appro- priations for the board. Sales Meant Surplus. It is easy to understgnd that had it not been for the sales of this sur- plus war material, the surplus in the Treasury at the close of the last fis- cal year would not have existed— providing, of course, the expenditures for the government had been contin- ued on the same scale as they were. The surplus war materfal has been 801 by four divisions of the executive branch of the governnfent—the War Department, the Navy Department, the Shipping Board and the Panama canal. The value of the surplus ma- terial sold by the War Department— figured on the cost of purchase to the government—was For this material the government recelved a total of $1,063.783¢8: making the percentage of recovery 36.2 per cent. The Navy Department has sold sur- plus material valued at $222,383,621. The Navy Department has had a dif- ferent system of valuing this prop- erty, by an appraisal board according to market prices. For this property the government actually received $131,658,737, making the percentage of recovery 59.2 per cent. This larger percentege of recovery, it is explained. s due to the different method of valuing the property sold The Shipping Board has disposed of materfal valued at $167,893,672, for which it received $86,390,927, or & re- covery percentage of 51.5 per cent. The Panama canal has sold surplus materfal valued at $1,978,878, for which 1t recefved $760,564, Heaviest Sales of Materlals. The heaviest sales of surplus war materials were made during the period from the signing of the armi- stice up to June 20, 1921. In that time, the total amount of property sold was valued at $1,904,535,026, and the amount received for it was $1,- 068,653,896 In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, the surplus material sold was valued at $665,456,936 and it brought $76,348,576; in the fisca year ending June 20, 1923, the ma- terial s0ld was valued at $569,742,613 and brought $85,509,174, and from July 1, 1923, to November 1, 1923, the materfal sold was valued at $109,253,- 365 and it brought $19,681,263. In addition, there was sold property of the Shipping Board valued at $84.- 400,000 for which $32,300,000 was re- celved, which has not been allocate:! to any particular year, it is sald Still Much to Dispese Of. It is of much Interest to the tax- payer also to note that the govern- ment still has considerable surplus war material to gell, totallng In value These values are esti- mates, as of November 1, 1923. This material is divided as follows: War Department, $81,072,681; Navy De- partment, $33,505,750; Shipping Board $10,899.088, and Panama canal, $260.- 581. Right here it may be sald tha: the Shipping Board does not consider its vessels “surplus war material.’ Its vessels the board holds to be as- sets to be used or disposed of to Americans des!ring to enter the ship- ping business, at prices fair to the government and in consideration of the continuance of the vessels under the American flag. How much the government will realize from the sale of the surplus war materfal which it still holds remalns to be seen. In addition to selling this hug quantity of surplus war materlal th- War and Navy departments have he on to such material as could advan- tageously be used by those services figuring on an army and navy ap- proximately the size now provided for by law. Further, these various departmeunt: of the government have transferrcc part of their surplus war material to other departments and to the goverr:- ments of the states, under acts o Congress. The War Department has turned over vast quantities of sur- plus materials to the Department of Agriculture to be used in the cou- struction of good roads, and this turn has been passed along to the states for work on their roads. The value of surplus property thus trans- ferred to other departments and the states totaled $357,614,803, divided a= follows: War Department, $344,170,- : Navy Department, $7. ; Shipping Board, $5,643,766, and the ama canal, $27,13 $2,941,131,761 As a Union Leader Sees It, Courts of U. BY JAMES M. LYNCH. (Former President of the International Typographical Unlon; Former New York State Industrial Commissioner.) (13 HE modern and extensive use of the writ of injunc- tion, especially as used in labor disputes, is revolu- ‘tionary and destructive,” sald the executive council of the American Federation of Labor, In its report to the convention held in Portland, Ore., last October. It may be added that in the opinion of thousands of wage earners the writ of injunction fs not only revo- lutionary and destructive, but as ap- plied to them in their disputes with their employers is discriminatory and utterly oppressive. The use of the injunction in these disputes has made more materfal for the radicals and they have used it more effectively than any of the other arguments in thelr quiver. It is fact, and with that fact a multitude of grievances are exploited, and for a time at least some of the organized wage earners in some locality see red. Hew Injunction Works. is the way the injunction works as the workmen see it in action. A dispute over wages and conditions results in a cessation ‘of work, In a strike. It is an effectlv: strike in that all or the greater num. ber of the employes in the. industry participate, or it may be that key men are concerned and an industry is tied up. The employer, unable to se- cure competent men, applies for an injundtion, supporting the application with affidavits alleging all kinds of acts by former employes, the men and women on strike. Intimidation is alleged usually, for then the in- terests of other employes or of strike breakers are concerned. Violence ‘makes up & good part of the afdavit allegations. In all cases crime or contemplated crime, committed or imminent, buttresses the injunction Here S. Aid Capital application. The court grants a tem porary writ and sets a day for & hearing. The writ prohibits all ac- tivities on the part of the people on strike. They may do nothing that will promote their cause. The least of their acts may be tortured into a charge of vioiation of the injunc- tion, of contempt of court. Arrests for alleged violation of the law or of the injunction follow. The em- ployer {s constructing his defenses. completing his arrangements to break the strike, and to him the essence of victory {s time. The temporary writ is the medlum. Starting with that anything is possible. The law's proverblal delay is now in full effect Time 1is also the essence of victory for the strikers, but they may not take advantage of it. The fnjunc- tion is fighting for the other side of the controversy. The strike 1s event- ually broken or made abortive, a poor and weakened thing dragging out its feeble life to defeat and death The wage earners know that they were getting along nicely until the issuance of the injunction, until in their opinfon the court stepped in and did what the employer could not do, ‘make a- successful issue of the strike impossible. Defeated by Injunctt: Injunctions in labor disputes have no limit as to the jurlsdiction assert- od by the court. Employes have been enjolned from striking, unions have been enjoined from paying strike benefits, non-unionists have been en- joined from organizing. In short. practically every aspiration of the organized wage earners when sought to be made effective by the exercise of. their economic power has been defeated by an injunctlon. The statement of the case by the council briefly but allequately defines the state of mind of organized labor. It is not a healthy condition, and it ued on T8