Goldman Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
From Socialist Appeal, Vol. II No. 34, 20 August 1938, p. 4.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for ETOL.
It would indeed have been surprising had the Federal government obtained a conviction in the case against the coal bosses of Harlan and their thugs charged with conspiracy to violate the rights of the miners under the Wagner Act. To those who fail to see the clever demagogy of the Roosevelt regime, the case In itself is surprising. Starting from the correct premise that the Roosevelt government is a capitalist government, it seems peculiar that capitalists should be dragged into court for violating labor’s rights.
If capitalist democracy would at all times function openly in the interests of every individual capitalist, it would not be half so difficult to convince the workers that it is in reality capitalist dictatorship. Even fascism must at times try to create the impression that it protects the workers against the employers. Much more so does capitalist democracy function in a manner so as to confuse and deceive the masses. And it is hot necessary to attribute to all the acts of a liberal capitalist government, like the Roosevelt regime, an intention to deceive. It can simply be said that the sincerity of a liberal officer will, in the long run, be ineffective and will serve merely to create greater illusions.
Don’t Convict Bosses At any rate the Harlan trial serves the purpose of proving that capitalist courts are not designed for convicting employers charged with violating the rights of employees. While under certain circumstances a conviction in such case is not impossible, it is certainly highly improbable. It is generally recognized that defendants have less chance of obtaining an acquittal in the Federal courts than in state courts. That is true not only because judges in a Federal court have much more extensive powers to comment on the evidence and let the jury know how they feel about the case, but also because there is, to certain extent, less politics and more preparation on the part of the prosecution.
But the case in Harlan was not one against ordinary criminals nor against workers prosecuted for their activities on behalf of labor. The prisoners at the bar were respected and leading members of the community, and those who were not so respected did the dirty work for those who were.
It frequently happens that important figures of the capitalist world, when caught red-handed, will be prosecuted and convicted for swindling thousands of gullible people. To ward off the wrath of the small business people, a swindling banker or a crooked politician will at times be offered as a sacrifice.
In the Harlan case, however, the defendants were not only leading lights of the community, but the charge against them, was a mere trifle – merely violating some rights of their wage-slaves. These two factors combined made the odds all in favor of an acquittal. And that, in spite of the tremendous resources of the government, and in spite of the fact that the government, from all reports, prepared the case well and conducted it with skill. That five of the jurors held out for a conviction is proof certain that the evidence against the defendants was overwhelming, and the case clear as daylight.
One can get an idea of the difficulty involved in obtaining a conviction against the coal barons by imagining a trial, in the same court, against workers attempting to organize the miners. (One really does not have to imagine such a thing; it has actually happened about six years ago.) Instead of the sleek-looking, well-dressed, important people coming from their homes or clubs (since they were out on bail) there would probably appear unshaven, ill-fed, badly-clothed workers guarded by deputies. The judge and prosecutor would look with contempt and hatred upon the defendants and not with the respect that successful business men and fellow club members deserve.
The jury composed of average mortals, subjected to all the propaganda supporting the social system, would be tremendously affected by the attitude of the prosecutor and the judge, and this would be worth a thousand times more than the nature of the evidence and the pleas of attorneys.
It isn’t any particular form of judicial procedure that makes it easy to get a conviction against workers and well-nigh impossible to convict employers. The capitalist courts are integral parts of the social system and the prevailing relationships and attitudes are transferred to the courts, concealed by the hypocritical cloak of impartiality and “equality before the law.”
The capitalist judicial system cannot readily be perverted, so that capitalists are convicted for insisting on their inalienable right to exploit labor. The function of capitalist courts is altogether different. It must protect private property and in that is included the prosecution of workers for violating the rights of employers.
Naive people reading the laws and not observing their actual application come to the conclusion that there is no discrimination between classes and individuals. But it should not be difficult to see that even where there is a formal conviction of capitalists, their actual punishment is nothing in comparison to the punishment meted out to workers who are convicted.
In a recent anti-monopoly case prosecuted by the Federal government in Madison, Wis., the judge found the defendants, oil corporations and their officers, guilty of violating the anti-trust act. Fines of five to ten thousand dollars were imposed.
Not far from Madison, in Waukegan, Illinois, workers who were on strike were sentenced to as high as six months in jail and were fined up to a thousand dollars for violating an injunction against picketing.
How easy for the oil companies and their officers to pay the small fines. For the average worker a $500.00 fine means a jail sentence for the simple reason that it is impossible for him to raise such a sum of money.
We shall assume (a violent assumption, I admit) that in both the case in Wisconsin and the case in Waukegan the judges were scrupulously honest and followed the law. But what a difference in the actual punishment of the two sets of defendants!
For a worker to recognize that the courts are not intended to aid him in his struggle for better conditions is part of wisdom. Does that mean that the courts should never be used by workers against capitalists or against racketeers in the union? Not at all. There is no principle involved in using or not using the capitalist courts. But if, under exceptional circumstances, it is found necessary for workers, in their struggle against the bosses, to use the capitalist courts, their limitations should be clearly recognized and at all times should be considered as auxiliary to the chief method of struggle, which must always be the unity and militancy of the workers.
Main NI Index | Main Newspaper Index
Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Marxists’ Internet Archive
Last updated on 13 September 2015