"THE RIGHT TO WORK."

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1114, 29 April 1911, Page 3

"THE RIGHT TO WORK."

Sir,—ln a recent issue of The Dominion there appeared a leading article under Die above heading. 1 quite agree with many of tho conclusions arrived at l»v the writer. Thero is, however, one point upon which I feel some doubt; that is, (lie principle endeavoured to be laid down under such an inappropriate title—who, for instance, over laid down or attempted to lay down tho principle of denying "the right to work'' to anyone desirous of undertaking to perform any honest labour which an employer wishes to havo done, always providing that the work wus alike necessary and profitable to lie person who paid for it, and that the workman was also qualified and willing to perform it? Surely Urn interpretation of this claim does not mean that any person supposed to be in affluent circumstances should ho compelled to engage anv number., of T>ersons, nt any \vorh tney might choose, at any price they might demand, at"anv pace most agreeable, to the worker's..-for any hours they migut choose to dictate. Or, put in its personal form, does it mean this (as in case of strikes)-"], won't work, and you shan't"? Clearly that kind of action, one which is brought into use too frequently, is altogether imcompatablo with the claim, "the right to work." Strange to say, this claim is made by the very people who absolutely refuse to work, and-who, moreover, exert themselves considerably to prevent other people from working. Tho claim to work and the. action respecting work _ seem to the writer to be quite irreconcilable.

If the claim had home its proper title, ami been iu strict accordance with facts, it would have Ix-cn in this wise: "The right to work just as long as it suits lliu right to knock ulf just when it docs not suit; tho right to ascertain the prorife moment when tho greatest possible less would be caused by discontinuing to work; the right to prevent others from taking their places; however willing and capable; the right to distrain them if they persist; tho right to slander them if they choose to endure provocation, suffer threats or maltreatment; the light to starve innocent and unoffending people j the right to paralyse trade; the right to ruin their employers,* the right to cripple any or every industry; the right to dictate to Parliament to pass legislation for some further extension of rights already existing; tho right to impugn any judge of the Courts who, on le?al' or conscientious grounds refuses to accede and assent to their every demand; the right to sow dissension broadcast; tho right to be paid at their own fixed price, quite irrespective of all other circumstances whatever; the right to compel compliance with all and singular existing rights, and any others which in the future may be invented and deemed to bo desirable; the right to compel any employer to atcept Hie services of any person, however objectionable that person may bo to his master, and who lias been discharged in consequence; the right to enforce any number of unacceptable persons being so employed and paid; the right to inipo-o the incst disagreeable and unprofitable conditions upon any employer, together with the further right to hail alt such as may resent those conditions before a Court; the right to dictate to the Court the amount of tho fine'to be impesed; in short, the right to supersede, absorb, or despise and trample upon all other men's right." . ' -.

-All tin's, under tho amplified claim, "the right to work." All this for (he payment of, say Is. per week, and signing some union book; never were so many advantages procured tor so small a sum; never were men's rights treated so lightly; never were the principles of liberty and freedom so flagranilv violated; never were the laws "and principles of tho Constitution so much set at naught. .And by whom is this done? By those who would wish to be regarded as free men—well yes, they aro apparently .the only ones who aro free! By whom is this state of affairs encouraged and legislated for, by those who stylo themselves as Liberals, and who desire that all men should regard them as such? But since there can be no Liberalism where there is no liberty, the assumed title like "The Right to Work" is n downright imposition and a fraud.—l am, etc., AG EI COLA. '