public works a code of disciplinary rules. These must be in harmony with those applied in the service of State railways and must, therefore, provide disciplinary penalties similar to those specified above as being laid down by article 56 of the law of July 7, 1907, for persons who voluntarily leave or neglect to take up their duty or who perform it in such a way as to interrupt or disturb the continuity or regularity of the service."

76

Under article 178 of the Penal Code as amended in 1889, a public official who on any pretext omits or refuses to perform an act pertaining to his office is punishable with a fine of 50 to 500 lire; if such an offense is committed preconcertedly by three or more officials the fine is from 100 to 300 lire.

Article 181 of the same law provides that

State officials who to the number of three or more, by preconcerted action, unlawfully abandon their duties are punished with a fine of 500 to 3,000 lire and temporary exclusion from office.

The same penalty applies to public officials who abandon their duties in order to prevent the carrying out of any business or in order to occasion any other prejudice to the public service.

No machinery has been established by which employees may formally present grievances or requests for adjustments.

TURKEY.

A law of the Ottoman Empire, dated August 9, 1909, provided that in the case of public-utility services no strike could take place until the grounds of the dispute have been communicated to the Government and the parties have failed to reach a settlement by means of conciliation applied in accordance with prescribed rules. If the two parties are unable through the process of conciliation to reach an agreement, the employees are free to leave work, but are absolutely forbidden to perform any act or make any demonstration opposed to freedom of action.

If, when the decision of the conciliation board has been put into effect and registered as concerning both the establishment and the employees and workmen, the administration of the establishment nevertheless avoids carrying out the provisions of the award in good faith, it is thereupon warned by the ministry and requested to apply the terms of the award. In case of failure to comply with such request within eight days, the establishment for every day's delay thereafter is compelled under the law to pay a fine ranging from £25 to £300, according to the amount of its capital.

The sum so collected is allocated to the employees and workmen's pension and savings funds, or where such funds do not exist, is distributed among the employees and workmen in proportion to their salaries and wages. In case of a refusal by the establishment to give this compensation voluntarily it is taken by law. Every workman is entitled to sue for his part of the compensation money.

PORTUGAL.

Before the revolution in Portugal, which took place in October, 1910, strikes were forbidden under article 277 of the Penal Code, but the offense was not always followed by its legal penalty.

In one of its first decrees the Provisional Government affirmed the right of employees to strike. This decree was dated October 31, 1910, and was published in the official gazette, Diario do Governo, on the 3d of November. Its publication was followed by a rapid extension of the strike movement and the Government saw itself obliged within a month to publish a further decree modifying and defining the right which they had recently affirmed.

While guaranteeing in general terms the right to continue, for a simultaneous cessation of work, the new decree (dated December 6, 1910) prohibited practices tending to restrict the freedom of work people or employers to carry on their work or industry. (Arts. 1 and 2.) In cases where the public would be deprived of light, water, or necessary provisions, or the inmates of hospitals or asylums would be left without assistance; also in cases affecting any transport service, whether by land or water, no strike or lockout might be instituted without a specified number of days' notice having been given and a statement having been furnished to the authorities, setting forth the exact reason and precise objects of the strike or lockout.

Under article 2 of the decree of December 6, 1910, persons attempting to form or maintain or prevent associations of employers or employees for the simultaneous cessation of work, by violence, threats, or who in any way use pressure tending to diminish the liberty of the employed of employers in the legal exercise of their work or their industry, are, when such an act does not constitute an offense punishable under the code by a severer penalty, liable to a period of imprisonment not exceeding six months, and to a corresponding fine. Provision was made by the decree of October 31, 1910, for a commission to adjust controversies between employers and employees, the decree reciting that the commission should act in such cases "until the Constituent Assembly shall definitely pronounce on a matter of such importance."

The decree sets forth that the duties of the commission "shall be to receive all claims which may arise out of questions and dissensions between employers and employed, and it shall endeavor to bring into harmony all legitimate interests and propose to the Government any measures or steps which it may be considered expedient to take for the attainment of this object."

ROUMANIA.

A decree of the Roumanian Government dated January 1, 1910, contains provisions for the prevention of stoppages of work in any kind of public-utility service whether general or local.

Under this law no official, artisan, worker, and, in general, no person who is paid a salary by the State, or by a department, commune, or public establishment having an economic character, whether industrial or commercial, also no person charged with a public service, may, under any pretext, join a trade union without first receiving authority to do so from the competent minister.

The officials, artisans, and workpeople defined above are prohibited from striking.

Persons contravening these provisions are subject to dismissal from employment and to loss of their claim to any bonuses and contributions to pension funds, whether made in virtue of legal dis

positions or by rules, or of dispositions arising out of the contract of service.

Under the decree of January 1, 1910, whoever by violence or threats causes partial or total cessation of work, or prolongs such suspension, with the object of reducing the wages of the workpeople or of securing from the employers an increase in wages or conditions of labor different from existing ones, is liable to imprisonment for a period of one month to two years. Should the offender be a stranger to the establishment in which the strike occurs, the maximum penalty is imposed.

No formal procedure was provided for the adjustment of grievances or for the presentation of requests of workmen.

RUSSIA.

The principle of combining by means of a strike to compel an employer to grant improved conditions of labor has never been formally affirmed in Russia.

Under article 1358 of the Penal Code, combinations of workpeople for the purpose of striking in order to secure an increase in wages entailed imprisonment for terms ranging from three weeks to three months in the case of the ringleaders, and from seven days to three weeks in the case of other participants. The foregoing article of the Penal Code was repealed by an imperial ordinance dated 2d (15th). December, 1905, with the result that peacefully conducted strikes not affecting undertakings of a "social or governmental character" are no longer punishable as formerly.

The imperial ordinance of 2d (15th) December, 1905, relates especially to strikes in the railway and telephone service, but its provisions were extended by an ordinance of 10th (23d) April, 1906, so as to cover all undertakings having a social or governmental character if the suspension of work of the workpeople threatens the security of the State or gives cause for fear of a national calamity. The new ordinance makes special mention of "undertakings engaged in maritime and river transport, having for their object the transport of goods and passengers, and also timber rafting and the harbor and docks services, and the maintenance of navigation."

The earlier of the two ordinances provides that whoever causes unrest among employees on railways or in the telephone service (not belonging to the State), or contributes in any way toward provoking a strike or toward interfering with work, shall be imprisoned from 8 to 16 months if the provocation has been effective. If such agitation is the act of a person not working in the establishment, the penalty is 8 months' imprisonment.

The act further provides that whoever is guilty of deliberately inciting the workmen to interrupt, disturb, or fail to resume work shall, if the purpose of such incitement is achieved, incur the penalty of 8 to 16 months' imprisonment. If such incitement is the act of a person not employed in the establishment, or if it results in no interruption, disturbance, or nonresumption of work, the punishment is imprisonment for from 2 to 8 months.

With respect to striking, the act provides that employees of railroads or in the telephone service (not belonging to the State)

who are guilty of interrupting, disturbing, or not resuming their duties shall be punished by detention for three weeks to three months, or by imprisonment for 4 to 16 months. Employees who arbitrarily and by preconcerted plan have stopped work and who have also been guilty of forcing their comrades to suspend or fail to resume work are liable to imprisonment for a term of 4 to 16 months, unless the act shall be found to assume a graver character. These persons are equally liable to this penalty who, arbitrarily and preconcertedly ceasing to fulfill their duties, are guilty of having forced other employees in the same establishment to discontinue, disturb, or fail to resume work.

No means are provided for giving vent to the grievances of employees.

SPAIN.

Until less than three years ago the existence of a right to institute strikes and lockouts in Spain could only be inferred from the absence of any law withholding or limiting that right. All uncertainty on the subject was, however, removed by a special enactment, dated April 27, 1909, relating to strikes and combinations. Article 1 of that law was as follows:

Employers and workpeople may combine, strike, or declare a lockout in defense of their respective interests without prejudice to the obligations resulting from any contracts into which they may have entered.

Articles 5, 6, and 7 of the law deal with strikes and lockouts in public-utility services. Article 5 makes provision as follows:

(1) Strikes and lockouts shall be declared to the authorities eight days beforehand, when they tend to bring about an interruption of the light or water supplies or of the railway service.

(2) When as a consequence of the strike or lockout the sick and persons in institutions of any district are deprived of assistance.

Article 6 requires that strikes and lockouts shall be declared to the authorities five days beforehand when they may tend to bring about the interruption of the street railway service or to cause the inhabitants of a locality to be deprived of an object of general and necessary consumption. In this case, as in that of the preceding article, the declaration to the authorities must make known the cause of the strike. In article 7 is contained the requirement that the principals and leaders of the strikes and lockouts, covered by sections 5 and 6, who shall not have made the prescribed declaration to the authorities with the required notice shall be liable to imprisonment. The effective exercise of the right to strike as well as of freedom to work are guaranteed by articles 2 and 9. Article 2 provides, in substance, that any person who, in order to organize or maintain or prevent combinations of workpeople, strikes or lockouts, shall make use of force, violence, or threats, shall be liable to imprisonment or to a fine of from 5 to 125 pesetas (4 shillings to £5), unless the action should constitute a more serious offense defined by the Penal Code. In article 9 it is stipulated that legally constituted unions may organize or maintain combinations, strikes, or lockouts conformably to the dispositions of the law, but may not force their members to participate in a combination, strike, or lockout by means contrary to the free exercise of rights.

Acts of the kind which come under the head of picketing or intimidation are dealt with under articles 3, 4, and 8. In article 3 it is declared that those who cause public obstruction or assemble with the object of violently compelling anyone to strike, or to declare a lockout, or of obliging them to desist from a strike or lockout, are liable to imprisonment. The maximum penalty is imposed on principals and leaders, if they have taken part in the offensive acts. Article 8 contains the stipulation that meetings and demonstrations organized with a view to declaring, maintaining, or preventing a strike or lockout are covered by the law of public meetings. The offenses punishable under law are assimilated to those covered by the Penal Code as regards the application of the law of public meetings.

SWITZERLAND.

Federal legislation in Switzerland consisting of article 56 of the law of the constitution which was enacted on May 29, 1874, guarantees the general right to strike or concerted action. This article provides that "citizens have the right to form associations, providing there be nothing illicit or dangerous to the State in their object, or in the means which they employ. The Cantonal laws shall prescribe the measures necessary for the repression of abuse."

So far as Federal legislation is concerned, the only enactment which could be considered to involve any limitation (even indirect) of the right to strike is the Federal act of October 15, 1897, "concerning the acquisition and working of the railways on behalf of the Confederation, and the organization of the Federal railways." By article 12 of that act it is stated that

The officials and employees of the Federal railways are subject to the laws which govern officials of the Confederation.

In the regulations issued on the 7th of December, 1899, in pursuance of the foregoing law, it is provided by article 66 that—

When of set purpose, or through negligence, functionaries, employees or workpeople of the Federal railways do not properly fulfill their functions, the authority under which they serve may provisionally suspend them, while withholding their pay, fining them up to 100 francs, or cautioning them.

Anyone so punished may appeal to the authority immediately above that inflicting the penalty.

Should damage result from these failures of service, the culprit may be made to repair all or part of such damage.

There have been no railway strikes in Switzerland since the nationalization of the railways in 1897, nor does there appear to exist a law for the settlement of disputes in the Federal railway service.

Of the 25 Cantons that form the Swiss Confederation only one appears to have enacted legislation involving any limitation of the right to strike, namely, Geneva.

A law enacted by the Canton of Geneva on the 26th of March, 1904, prescribes the methods to be employed for establishing collective agreements regarding conditions of labor in the various trades and for bringing conciliation and arbitration to bear upon disputes incidental to the establishment, modification, and interpretation of such agreements.

Under article 17 of the law, strikes and lockouts are illegal when instituted for the purpose of modifying an agreement actually in