Recently a play was produced in New York called "The Right to Strike". It tells of a physician who refuses for a time to go to the aid of a dying woman, because her husband is out on a railroad strike. The doctor claims that he, too, is on a "strike". In the end, of course, he gives in; but not until he has taught the strikers--and the audience--an important lesson; certain men, upon whom depends the immediate welfare of the community, have not the right to strike.

If any body of laborers ought specifically to be included in this category, one would say, it is those whose business. It is to deliver milk. And yet the milk men in New York are on strike. There is no need to dilate upon the hardship which this is working. It is quite obvious that each a strike causes great suffering especially to the innocent by standers in the struggle: the children.

Of course, declares the public, these upon have not the right to strike. No argument can support them in their hold-up of the community. Yet is there not more to the question than this? Will we always be also to end strikes by reasserting this principle! Unfortunately the right to strike is the only legitimate weapon which the unions have: without it under the personal economic system, they are not only helpless they cannot exits. And no matter how much public opinion is in favor of taking away this weapon, doing so can never settle the labor problem. If must be replaced by some other means of making labor and capital equal in strength. Otherwise the unions will be forced to adopt some more terrible measure of defense than the strike.

We cannot go flack to the early days of capitalistic economics and simply prohibit all strikes by law. Theoretically, every workman ought to be free to quit work when he pleases-no matter if he does so alone, or in company with all the workers in his industry. Practically he is not free; the action of one economic group is no longer without immediate and vital effect on the others.

Let us by all means make strikes impossible in those industries in which cessation works hardship on the public. But in the name of common sense, let is have done with the idea that merely making striking illegal and appealing to the public spirit of the workers in any way settles the permanent problem. Our economic structure is becoming more and more complex; more and more industries are becoming public service industries in which the right to strike does not exist. An equivalent for this former right must be found, and found speedily. Unless we can settle the labor problem in a rational way, the problem is more than likely to be answered for us on an entirely irrational basis.