The Constitution of the United States was made for an undefined and expanding future, and for a people gathered and to be gathered from many nations and of many tongues. . . . We shall expect that the new and various experiences of our own situation and system will mold and shape it into new and not less useful forms. JUDGE PARKER. It must be remembered that even the constitutions we call rigid must take their choice between being bent and being broken. The Americans have more than once bent their Constitution in order that they might not be forced to break it. . . . And it has stood because it has submitted to a process of constant though sometimes scarcely perceptible change which has adapted it to the conditions of the new age. JAMES BRYCE. The true grounds of decision are considerations of policy and of social advantage, and it is vain to suppose that solutions can be attained merely by logic and general propositions of law which nobody disputes. Propositions as to public policy rarely are unanimously accepted, and still more rarely, if ever, are capable of unanswerable proof. They require a special training to enable any one even to form an intelligent opinion about them. JUSTICE HOLMES. PREFACE THE purpose of this volume is to present the various views expressed by judges in their decisions in labor cases. They are stated as nearly as possible in the words of the judges themselves by means of liberal quotations from opinions. Intended for the student of social questions who is interested in the relations of capital and labor, it aims to show the political, economic and social principles that guide the courts in the solution of the problems that come before them. While it is true that courts always deal with particular cases and decide only specific questions, yet principles of necessity enter into their opinions and guide them to their conclusions. These principles this volume seeks to reveal by presenting in compact form the several lines of argument which support the decisions. It is believed that only by reading the views of the courts as expressed in their own words can they be clearly understood. The discussion has been purposely restricted to those principles and problems that are still unsettled. The wide field in which principles are well established and where questions only of technical or minor significance are raised has not been entered. Since the purpose is to set forth the various conflicting views that obtain, the reader must be warned not to consult these pages for information as to the exact status of the law in any particular jurisdiction. Further it should be said that while in the discussion views may be expressed that are contrary to those advanced by judges in determining the law, it must be understood that no effort is made to urge that the law is not what it is. What the law is, it is; and as such it must be obeyed. In the discussions of opinions it is only the views expressed and the reasoning adopted that is dealt with. The extracts have been selected from more than five hundred opinions in cases dealing with various phases of the labor problem. The selections have been made with a view: (1) to giving the varied opinions held by different judges; (2) to bringing out both sides of the controversy; and (3) to emphasizing by the larger number of selections the extent of the acceptance of particular views. The length of the extract quoted should not, in every case, be taken as an index of its relative importance. The material here presented has been limited to the opinions of the federal supreme and circuit courts and the state courts of last resort. A large number of intensely interesting and very significant opinions are undoubtedly found in the decisions of the lower state courts. To enter this vast field, however, would have extended the work beyond reasonable limits. 1 In Chapters IX, X and XVII the author has quoted freely and without special citation from his articles, "Precedent Versus Conditions in Court Interpretation of Labor Legislation," "Unionism and the Courts,"2 and “Judicial Views of the Restriction of Women's Hours of Labor." Exact references for all opinions cited are given in the alphabetically-arranged List of Cases (pp. 3-6). It is hoped that the book may be found a useful supplement to text-books and lectures in courses on labor problems, as well as of service to those who are interested in 1 Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the American Association for Labor Legislation, Publication no. 9, p. 88. Dec., 1909. 2 Yale Review, 19: 144, Aug., 1910. Political Science Quarterly, 25: 420, Sept., 1910. |