R5Ss5rTtWw -,v r F f7f.F
W
1 , r ,
mmmmaBKmmmsM
than state my conclusions and the rules of law
upon which they rest.
" 'When damage Is sustained by one person
from the wrongful act of another, an action for
compensation Is given to the injured party against
the wrongdoer.' By wrongful act is to be under
stood not an act wrongful in morals only, but an
net wrongful in law. An act is wrongful in law if
it infringes upon the right of another, and not
othorwise. An act which does not infringe upon
any right of a person is not, as to such person,
wrongful. One has a right to decline to enter the
service of another, and several persons, acting
jointly in pursuance of an agreement to that ef
fect, have the right to so decline. So, one has
the right to decline to employ another, and sev
eral persons, acting jointly in pursuance' of an
agreement to that effect, have the right to so de
cline. "The existence of malice, of a malicious intent
to injure a person, will not convert an act which
does not infringe any right of such person into a
wrongful act or a civil wrong. It follows that, in
my opinion, the facts and agreements of the de
fondants set forth in the declaration cannot bo
held to infringo upon any right of the plaintiff,
and therefore are not as to her, in law, wrongful.
The demurrer is sustained."
lion. "W. J. Strong, who has been attorney
in several similar cases, representing the plain
tiffs and the case has attracted much attention.
The political question involved is even
more important than the legal one; that is to
say, whether the Judge is right from a legal
standpoint in sustaining the demurrer is not
nearly so important as the question, "should
the law protect the employe from blacklist
ing?" If the court was in error, relief may be had
by appeal to a higher court; if the law is not
broad enough to protect employes it can bo
amended. The question of greatest importance
is, thereforo, whether a man discharged from
ohc corporation should be prevented from ob
taining employment elsewhere by agreement
among the employers. This question is a po
litical one to be decided by the law-makers.
The democratic national platform adopted
in 1000 contained the following plank:
""We are opposed to government by injunc.
tion; we denounce the black list and favor ar
bitration as a means of settling disputes be
tween corporations and their employes."
Each one will decide the question according
to his sympathies. Those wlio think that an
employe ought to bo thankful for the oppor
tunity to work and should accept without com
plaint whatever the employer gives, will prob
ably feel that the employers have a right to
combine and blacklist any one who is lacking in
gratitude or contentment. Those, on the other
hand, who regard an employe as a man having
the same rights as his fellow-man, and owing a
duty to his family as well as to his employer, will
feel that the employe should not. be shut out
of all remunerative employment because ho and
one employer differ upon wages, terms, or con
ditions.
The position taken by the Democratic plat
form is eminently sound. If a man is skilled
in a particular industry, and blacklisting is
agreed upon by all tho employers in that indus
try, the omployo is to a large extent a slave,
because if he is not satisfied with the terms
fixed by his employer he cannot secure like em-
The Commoner.
ployment elsewhere, and to go outside of tho
business in which he has skill would be to
thro.w away all the benefits arising from exper
ience and training.
A blacklist agreed upon among employers
brings to the employer many 6f tho advantages,
and imposes upon the employe many of tho
hardships, arising from a complete monopoly.
If Judge Baker's decision is sustained in the
higher courts, blacklisting will become an issue
in Illinois politics, and there is little doubt how
it will be settled when the people have a chance
to vote upon it. Lincoln said of the Dred
Scott decision that courts could not settle politi
cal questions; that such questions must be settled
by the people. But courts can center public
attention upon a question and often a court de
cision is made the basis of a political move
ment. The democratic party's platform utterance
on this subject would have been more appre
ciated by laboring men if Judge Baker's decis
ion had been rendered before the late election.
W
A Real Watchman.
The National Watchman, published at
Washington, D. C, is a real Watchman. From
its position at, the national capital it surveys
the entire field and sounds a note of warning
upon the approach of danger. It is one of
the few dempcratio papers having a national
circulation, which steadfastly defends the prin
ciples of the party and resolutely, opposes the
schemes of the reorganjzers. In its last issue
it says:
The money kings are determined to regain
control of the democratic party. Their agents who
either worked openly or secretly for the success
of the republican ticket in 189G and last year are
now screeching loudly for harmony, by which they
mean a surrender of the party machinery to them.
They are wasting their time. The democratic
party will remain loyal to democratic principles,
and will entrust its standard to only tried and true
democrats.
The Watchman has sized up the situation
about right. The corporation element in the
party, like tho gold element (they are really
the same element,) works secretly, and having
secured an advantage, becomes a vociferous ad
vocate of "harmony. Harmony is a good thing
but it is a means to an end, not an end itself.
A harmony which would lead the party back
. to the position which it occupied tinder Mr.
Cleveland's administration would be its ruin
rather than its salvation. The Watchman is
rendering the party valuable service and ought
to be heartily supported by those whose inter
ests it is defending.
W
Another Case of Contempt.
The Commoner is pained to notice that the
Philadelphia Press, a paper which for many
years has claimed great respectability, has been
guilty of contempt of court. It has had such
an exalted opinion of the court (when the court
has decided its way) that any suggestion which
might bo tortured into a reflection upon the
court has been denounced as treason, but alas,
the Prgss has, inadvertently of course, become
guilty of a more heinous offense than it has
been able to charge upon any of its opponents.
It says:
Governor Stone has been informed by Judge
Potter, of the supreme court, that a majority of tho
members of the highest judicial tribunal of tho
state are in favor of declaring the Pittsburg "Rip
per" constitutional.
Judge Potter, who was the governor's lav part
ner, and who was appointed to the supreme bench
upon the death of tho late Judge Green, has been
keeping Governor Stone informed regarding tho
standing of the members of the court ever since
the case was argued last week.
On the day after the argument he told Gov
ernor Stone that three of the members of the
court wore in favor of sustaining the act. He
placed Justice Fell in the doubtful list at that
time, but expressed the opinion that there was
good reason to believe that he would be the fourth
to favor the "Ripper."
On the same occasion he informed the gov
ernor that Justice Dean was "dead against it."
Since that time Justice Potter has conveyed to
Rarrisburg the news that a majority of the su
preme court judges have privately declared in
favor of the Pittsburg "Ripper."
From the information given by Justice Potter
to the governor it would appear that Judges Mitch
ell, Fell, Brown and Potter will stand for the con
stitutionality of the bill and Chief Justice McCol
lum and Judges Dean and Mestrezat will oppose
that view of the measure. . ,
Judge Potter has denied that he told Gov
ernor Stone, and Governor Stone has denied
that he received any information on the sub
ject from Judge Potter or anybody else, but
these denials do not affect the matter; in fact,
they rather aggravate the case. It would bo
bad enough if the indictment made by the
Press were true; it is still worse if the charge
is false. If the Press will read some of its ed
itorials written during the campaign of 1896 it
will get some idea of tho moral turpitude in
volved in its act, for no democrat in discuss
ing the income tax ever said auything more of
fensive to the honor and dignity of the. court
than the charge made by tho Press against
Judge Potter.
Emperor of Canada.
It is proposed to add another branch to the
ponderous title of the King of England, and he
is also to be called the "Emperor of Canada."
In some quarters it was suspected that the
United States might object on the plea that
there could be no such thing as kingly title
pertaining to American territory. An English
writer is authority for tho statement that Lord
Pauncefote "sounded the State Department,
the president and leading public men at Wash
ington about the matter with a view to ascer
taining their views, and that the results of tho
inquiries have been entirely successful and sat
isfactory from an English point of view,"
It would perhaps bo diilicult to find any
thing which Great Britain was anxious to ac
complish which would not bo "entirely suc
cessful and satisfactory from an English point
of view" if the success and the satisfaction de
pended upon the consent of republican leaders.
It is not clear, however, that this country
has any concern in any title which the King of
England or any other monarch may choose to
assume.
It is said that our neighbor on tho north