Please cite to the original publication
The identification of arbitration as it is constituted in legal lore is not very difficult. There is a near consensus of judicial utterances and statutory provisions posing it as a process for hearing and deciding controversies of economic consequence between parties. It begins with and depends upon an agreement between the parties to submit their claims to one or more persons chosen by them to serve as their arbitrator. The identification of "compulsory arbitration" is more difficult; it is more elusive. The instances or particulars of "compulsion" as covered by the name "compulsory arbitration" in legal lore, vary substantially. They are to be found in different statutes. The administration of these "compulsions" and the consequences of disregarding them also are variable. Joinder of any of these instances or particulars of "compulsion" with arbitration seems to serve no useful purpose in evaluating their legality. Some of them appear to be an anathema to parties in interest and to politicians. Other and different instances have been cited as praiseworthy. Arbitration does not count for much in resolving these likes and dislikes.
Date of Authorship for this Version