FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249  
250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   >>   >|  
ny and Austria copy the English common law as to enticing from service. There is as yet, however, no evidence in Europe outside of Great Britain of the American tendency to make a special privileged class of skilled or industrial labor. So far as appears, there is no special legislation in any European country which is concerned particularly with the legal or political rights of industrial laborers.[2] There is much more co-operation and sympathy between employers and employees, at least in Continental countries, and possibly for this reason co-operation has proved far more successful.[1] State labor bureaus, state insurance, saving banks, and employment agencies are almost universal throughout the Continent. [Footnote 1: See Oilman's "A Dividend to Labor," Boston, 1899. Jones's "Cooperative Production," Oxford, 1894.] CHAPTER XII COMBINATIONS IN LABOR MATTERS We have now gone over the history of modern legislation in the two great fields of property and personal liberty, and we have generally found that the same principles of jurisprudence govern both. So shall we now find when we come to combinations that there is no difference or distinction in the law between combinations of capital and combinations of individual faculties. In both fields a "combine" is obnoxious, as the untutored mind instinctively feels. Combinations may, of course, be lawful; but the fact that no actually criminal purpose or act can be found against them is not conclusive of their legality. At the risk of wearying the reader I would reiterate my belief that this was one of the greatest juristic achievements of the English common law; and that the question whether it shall be all done away with or retained is the most momentous public question now before us in industrial and social matters.[1] Whether, on the one hand, Standard Oil combinations shall be permitted to the point of universal monopoly of trade and opportunity; or, on the other, close unions built up, even by legislation itself, to an equally impregnable position of monopoly of opportunity, or so as to become a universal privileged guild--are questions to be determined by the same principles; and equally momentous to the future of our republic and of human society as now constituted. And before passing to a review of the legislation itself, I would lay down the principle which I believe to be the one which will ultimately be found to be the controlling test: that of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249  
250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

legislation

 

combinations

 

industrial

 

universal

 

equally

 

fields

 
monopoly
 
English
 

question

 

operation


opportunity

 

special

 

common

 

principles

 

momentous

 

privileged

 

belief

 

reiterate

 

reader

 
greatest

achievements

 

juristic

 

wearying

 

criminal

 

Combinations

 

lawful

 

instinctively

 

obnoxious

 
untutored
 

conclusive


purpose

 

legality

 

future

 

republic

 

society

 
determined
 

questions

 

position

 

constituted

 

ultimately


controlling

 
principle
 

passing

 

review

 

impregnable

 

public

 
social
 

matters

 

Whether

 
retained